FreeloadingSponger

joined 2 years ago
MODERATOR OF
[–] FreeloadingSponger 27 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I firmly believe shit like this annoys him more than anything else.

[–] FreeloadingSponger 11 points 1 year ago (2 children)

This is isn't conservationism though. They're not trying to maintain the status quo. They're trying to go backwards.

[–] FreeloadingSponger 5 points 1 year ago

Their ideology is to not want free and fair elections.

[–] FreeloadingSponger 5 points 1 year ago
[–] FreeloadingSponger 1 points 1 year ago

There's similarities, but it's a little more empty, and it's a little too reposty from other sites still. reddit then felt a bit more like the place, this isn't that yet.

[–] FreeloadingSponger 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Present. My oldest account just had it's 13th cake day.

[–] FreeloadingSponger -1 points 1 year ago

Silly me, not trying to sound dumb. Guess you got me.

[–] FreeloadingSponger 1 points 1 year ago
[–] FreeloadingSponger -2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I've never killed anyone, and I almost certainly never will. Should we make it law to say I can, just because we're sure I won't?

You're shitting on the very concept of a thought experiment and of a hypothetical. What you're doing is like saying "The law should say you should be able to murder whoever you like so long as the sky is green, because the sky is never green". This is a tactic to avoid addressing the issue. Namely, even if you don't think something is going to happen, why would you allow it, if it absolutely musn't?

They say it is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it, but if you absolutely refuse to entertain it for strategic reasons, change the date. A healthy fetus, a few days passed due date, maybe no more than week from labour, could easily be induced, mother decides "Actually nah", takes a bunch of pills to kill it - you good with that?

[–] FreeloadingSponger 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

To make it harder, even if not impossible, for the average user to ad block them.

Are you asking because you're not sure of the answer, or because you are, and you know that web integrity will require a pre-compiled closed source binary to browse the web?

[–] FreeloadingSponger 1 points 1 year ago (4 children)

I still don't see why my open source browser can't just lie when it's sending a description of itself to the third party. The only way I could see it working is if that description needs to be encrypted by a key that's compiled in to a closed source browser, and then websites only accept requests from a few closed source browsers.

Is that what you're saying? That unless I have one of a couple accepted clients which are proprietary and closed source, websites just won't work?

[–] FreeloadingSponger 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Come on, they're the World Series champions.

view more: next ›