I really don’t know what to think.

I hope they don’t romanticize the gambling addiction and FX Trading ||(which is a cancer IMHO)||

If this is closer to teaching the risk, danger and so on, looks good. It’s a good first episode.

I agree, on the past […]

This, to some extent, already exists as law in the US. In some jurisdictions, the OS must soon request the age from the user and provide it to some applications. It’s not verification though, or at least it’s not required to be.

Sadly the regime in US is kind of crazy right now. So the trust in the government is degrading, and maybe can be recover in the next decade. But for sure change is needed, on the age verification also.

But I think that age verification should be a device level API, and this follows to the next…

Linux users could simply add a simple form with “I was born 01-01-1900” […]

This started a whole war over systemd even adding a field for it (not a form). If they added a required form, it would probably start WW3.

Linux is a unique case, while they are open, flexible and easy to make your own distro, this also implies that a public distro should implement this API, and since this API is on the OS not on Kernel. Which means people fighting, but they can just ignore this API and make it return false to any and every request.

While distros like Ubuntu and maybe Fedora would follow (providing the baseline for the dependent distros), so they can also add a third-party validation layer, which also can be replaced with the government, or a fake one that always says that you are over 99 years old.

Truth to be told, this is a band-aid on the storage and ownership problem, the focus of the post. With the correct layer the OS can keep your “age” with a lease, and you on your phone can use the app to renew the lease whenever you need.

Again, this isn’t a perfect solution, I would even call it a solution since it have so many holes in it. But it’s the point of the conversation.

But on the MicroSlop, Gargle and iPear worlds, […]

No thanks. I’m not validating, so I’d be picking up the next Motorola phone with GrapheneOS on it instead.

Hell yeah!
Totally, and with fake API’s to make every page guessing my age wrong! This data sucker can suck my…
Jokes aside, I’m with you on this one, let the OS choose, even if this is just a form with “Birth” field and let the government verification as a different problem.

Like I discussed in the post, the moment you have heavy fines for keeping illegal data, and requires the user to take action to lease the information, we will start to notice how much data these big-tech have on us.

Ps.: Thanks for reading the post and following on the conversation.

I agree, on the past I had a proposal that the OS should have a device level API to provide this information, in this case apps and (the browser as an APP) would be able to consume this information from the device. And it’s up to the device manufacturer (or the OS installed) to add a age system.

I not denying that there is holes in this idea. Linux users could simply add a simple form with “I was born 01-01-1900” and everything would continue the same. But on the MicroSlop, Gargle and iPear worlds, they would be able to validate once and keep the information on the device. And each webpage, app and such won’t be able to ingest your personal/private data.

On this post, I do explore little bit this, but I do focus on the idea of storage and access of data.

Did you read the post?
It’s not that. It’s clearly a distrust (which is also part of the post).
But the problem with trust can be solved with “how to access data”.

Edit.
Since you clearly didn’t read here a snippet

[…] if you don’t trust the government, the encrypted data is useless to the government, and we can audit it, including audit by private companies. So even if we don’t trust the government, it can work.[…]

[…] If a company can’t store my personal data, how can they access it? […]

If you don’t trust, that’s fine. This is good. Government should be transparent, and should be auditable. To be honest we have close ideas, and we want the same thing (I guess), privacy and security for our data.

(and keep our data away from datahouses and bigtech)

That was a little bit agressive. I’ll give you the opportunity to learn from your mistake and discuss what bother you in this blog post.

Toradora hits hard.

It’s interesting, but don’t fit my “view” on the topic.

I’m paying more attention to what I’m listening, and focusing on what I consume.
I don’t want the “algorithm” to decide for me, I want to make the decision.

I’ve a tabs manager because I’ve waaaay to many tabs open at any given time.

I did “buy” (attention on the quotes) the anime Ghost in the Shell (1995) on Amazon Videos, this is my favorite animation, and I watch every year. I’ve DVDs, BlueRays and such, when I moved abroad bringing the devices to watch was a hurdle, so a online purchase was the dream. Guess who lost the access to this animation due to “contract reasons with the reseller, not with the customer”…

This was my spark to start a homelab. One step at the time. One day I’ll have everything that I need on my lab.

I already have a view on the point. Either we scrap the copyright law, or scrap the AI (LLM neural nets) completely. Both living under the same hood won’t work. I’m all in for the later scrap the whole LLM, but this wouldn’t be feasible now.

Who doesn’t love a little bit of late stage capitalism.

Sadly if this is the reason, I’m just sad that the tool can’t help more.

I can imagine tools like for tileset, that actually helps to make.

Or similar tool to help the creation of walking cycles and such. Tools that actually helps. Similar on how the Levenshtein distance solves the text correcting problem, but won’t break you writting.

Again, if this is the reason… Just sad.

I think this misses the point of the discussion.

Been there, with a few exceptions, most of the games I’ve published in the itch have my pixel art.

I think you missed the point of the post to be honest. This isn’t a about collaboration, but tooling, and the snake oil sold on pretty much every corner of the online world.

For one, you never see the top games use AI-generated art, just demos of some weirdo’s slop project that doesn’t actually function correctly (no play testing, maintenance, etc.)

This is the point touching point. If this is snake oil, why there isn’t harder pushback?

If this tool is fated to be a lie, why the big corps are embracing so hard?

And the main discussion around this topic is about the ethical (is it right for companies like OpenAI to scrape art without permission from artists?), moral (is it right to use this tool?), and legal (copyright is ignored by scrapers) issues. Everybody knows the things it spits out are of poor quality, but that’s not why most people dislike it.

I’ve a lot to talk on this. And I’ve plenty of posts on the topic. To the point I’ve this in my mind:

[…] either we accept that copyright is gone, or we ban the usage of AI. Both can’t live under the same country’s laws.

Which again is part of the discussion, but I was focused on the asset generation instead of the legal part of it.

There is some tools in kenneys that I wasnt aware. Thanks.

That’s my point. I see people with “vibe-made” platformers, how they got that? This is what is annoying me. There is something that I’m not seeing, something that is bugging me. And reason why I wanted to discuss and talk about it. For me pure garbage, but the AI-Slop-Eater, pure bliss.

I agree, and my point isn’t on this. Is on the fact that the tool fails, and fails hard. But the discourse online isn’t on this direction, and this is what makes me wonder where is the spot.

I’m not sure if I follow the question, let’s me try to understand.

If you are talking about a self-hosting. This isn’t the governance, this is the “deployment” of a software. I know that I talk heavily on this point on the essay, but the focus is regarding that self host is a act on the individual level, while governance is about who use the system and have a say on it.

I’ll grab a example, (I’ll avoid the Uber cliche, but maybe I need to take this one)

Imagine a N-unit building, cooperative software replaces the landlord with a transparent governance dashboard (I’m assuming that all residents own each of the units in this building). Residents propose maintenance tasks (e.g., roof leaks) and collectively vote on fund allocation using a one-unit-one-vote system. The software automatically tracks each unit’s financial contributions, schedules shared laundry slots via a consensus calendar, and logs inspection reports viewable by all. When a major expense arises, the platform facilitates a binding poll, calculates each owner’s share, and executes payment only when the quorum is met, ensuring every resident has equal say over their shared physical assets.

This is the example of governance that I was talking about. The people who use and own the building have a say on it. When something arives everyone have a way to discuss and talk, using the software as a tool to support then. Self-host is just the deployment for this system, but the focus is on the helping then to mitigate and ensure that everyone have a say in it.

I hope I got your point right.

I’ve done the change. Also, this change made me realize that has been more than 10 years since I last properly gave attention to the RSS feed. I think it’s time to add on my homelab an instance of a rss feed so I can play some more on the topic.

Also, the last post is in full. Hopefully my transfer bill won’t bite me :D

And I fully agree with you. ||And I’m the author of the text.||

On the essay I needed a simple way to explain a “baseline”, something that can’t go below that. And I tried to move the reader to get that this isn’t a perfect solution, but a baseline. And I fully agree with you. Without a good definition of the kind of harm, measure of the harm (after all, harm is a simple term, but it does have weight), it’s hard to properly go there.

But my point was, baseline, we can’t go below this one. Even if a community considers “bad taste joke” as “no harm” while other community considers the other way around, it’s still possible for both communities to “exist”, wouldn’t co-exist, but would exist.

And since both don’t want to harm the other they would discuss up to some agreement on the kind and level of harm.

I understand you and to a certain degree I agree with you on the “no single person as ownership”, but when we need to make decision, it’s often a single person. On the federated it’s better, but my dream still runs on the fully cooperative communities. Which is a far dream in the current world stage.

Also,

People within the community have to accept to a certain degree, that people don’t think exactly the same as them on everything.

This is pure poetry. I love it.

Ps.: Thanks for the reading and bringing the topic. And I think I should have done a better job on the definition of the harm too. A lesson learned.