That would be a good way to do it, if the goal was to be able to restrict/protect kids. Unfortunately, this have very little to do with that.

but I don’t see an alternative

An alternative to what? This will not prevent children from accessing content. The weak point is the humans that willingly allows it in the first place. Having an extra step won’t stop them if it can help them not be bothered by actually having to look after their kid.

This is not sacrificing freedom to gain security; it’s sacrificing freedom to not gain anything.

The obsession of republicans with other people’s penis is legendary at this point.

And there’s never been any kind of international cooperation between law enforcement ever, anywhere.

You sure about that? They have a legal obligation to keep this trace, and it sounds like it would easily qualify as a legitimate interest. We’re not talking about some third party logging a visitor’s IP, but an ISP, that have a requirement to keep this information.

The GDPR isn’t making all personal identification data inaccessible, they restrict how they can be stored and accessed. If there’s a legal requirement and/or a legitimate interest, they can be stored, and if the data exists and is requested by law enforcement, it’s likely that higher agreements will hold.

do they think people will keep expressing these kinds of opinions publicly? Oh course not

People are already pushing all kind of extreme and suspicious opinions on multiple websites under their “official” name that can be found on their ID. This won’t change. And the risk isn’t people stopping saying thing at one point; it’s the list of “allowed” topics changing over time, then going back to older content.

When looking at an IP for an investigation, they don’t use GeoIP. They use “ask the ISP who had this IP at this time, oh, thanks for the full name, address, bank info, phone number”.

They also could be fixed, sometimes trivially.

Now if the plastic over a button isn’t the right one, things stop working.

Because in the end, you, the person that is forced to use various AI chatbot/agent/model/whatever, will be held responsible for anything that happens after one of the 3000 decisions they imposed you to make with no way to check everything turns out to cause the slightest problem. When that happens, YOU were supposed to know that NOTHING the AI tells/says/do is to be expected correct, so it’s your responsibility if something’s gone wrong.

Yeah, I stopped trusting service provider with promises the moment they came into existence. “We’re compliant with XYZ” have as much value as “We promise to not snoop, see?”. And that’s not even considering security vulnerabilities. Certifications are merely the promise that at some point, someone maybe did something right (or maybe not), and paid to be able to say so (sometimes they don’t). Not very reassuring.

Data remains on controlled systems, and if it has to get out, it’s encrypted properly, either for cold storage, or for specific recipients. Anything below that is believing random people saying random shit, and ignoring that every time there’s a data leak somewhere people go “oops, our mistake, it won’t happen again, pinky swear”.

And I know there’s already an incredible amount of sensitive, personal data on the loose. That’s no excuse to let this trend keep going.

It depends on many things. The hard line for me would be is this running locally, on a server with the same IT management as my actual data, or on a third party servers. If the doctor either don’t know this, or can’t give adequate proof that it isn’t running on some third party servers, then all the “prioritize your privacy” aren’t worth shit.

But that’s only the point where I give a hard no. The way it is used would also matter a lot. Is it used as a clutch for reference searching, or a full self driving decision making process that will write me a prescription in the end? This part is the same whether it’s for medical advice or for anything else: if the user is skilled enough to be able to evaluate/validate the output of the process faster than it would have taken them to do it manually, then there might be some value. Some usages fits into this. Some don’t. Summarizing large documents you did not read does not work as a safe thing, because, you’d have to read the document to check the summary. Getting the summary of a drug/sickness/whatever that you know about but need a reminder of, could be ok.

tl;dr: it have to run in a privacy-enabled context (no third parties), it have to be used as a clutch (no skipping work), and the user have to keep is brain en mental activity alive enough to steer the system instead of being dragged by it. As things stands right now, I doubt there’s a lot of doctors that would fit all three points, but in the future, maybe.

Bluesky leadership: slightly worse than JD Vance. It must not have been easy for them to reach that, but what an achievement.

There’s an easy workaround : install W10 with a local account, then upgrade. No need for any kind of workaround. Disclaimer : this might have worked because I’m in Europe.

Otherwise, there are workarounds for a vanilla install with only local accounts that still works to this day, I did that in a VM. But that’s flimsy.

Of course, this leaves you to the whim of “fucking microsoft, we’ll screw you forever, bork your data when we want, force you to change computer every other year, and you’ll love it”, but the option exists.

I have no experience in this, and I wasn’t there, but it sure does not looks like the kind of bleeding a bullet would do by grazing an ear. It’s probably nothing but it’s worth mentioning, you know. Just mentioning. Not implying anything.