Alternative implication is you simply shat down for assertive dominance but with you pants fully removed like some maniac and then accidentally dropped those pants in a semi-ironic twists.

I can even hear you silently say “oh-no” as it happend.

This guy markets.

How do i somehow fit all three of these?

I recognize this may be a very autistic answer (i am)

The function of a button is to be pressed, to put functionality on the bottom of a stationary device feels incredibly wrong. Thats really all there is to it.

I can forgive a reset button being on the bottom because ideally they aren’t ever pressed and you definitely don’t want them accidentally pressed. I recognize that for macos a restart is usually a reset troubleshooting step and i would be probably be fine with it the button was renamed with an explanation on its actual usecase scenario.

In any regards i feel like it makes much more sense on the back where the cables go in.

I have nothing against apple besides the general capitalist/consumerism stuff. I hate google and meta much more.

You can accurately preach best usecases all you want it falls flat before peopled experience.

I always shutdown my desktop. So did i with all my previous desktops.

Ive always shut down every windows/linux laptop i ever had.

I shut down my android tablet after use.

I owned and mainly used a MacBook pro for 5 years, i never shut it down, i never shutdown my iPhone. It was also ironically the best windows laptop i had owned at that point (in dual boot) and i always shut down when i worked in Windows, just never in macos

Apple did not tell me to do this, it is not difficult to shutdown a mac, no one told me to change what i am used to. It just somehow made the most sense so thats how i used it. And i reverted naturally when i ent back to non apple desktops. I cant explain it better then that.

This does not excuse having a power button on the bottom, thats just ridiculous. Just a hint that what your saying about downsides is irrelevant to how people realistically use it.

You do sound like a person knowledge enough to solve their own issues and you have been trying linux so I wouldn’t lump you in with the majority of users that believe that all of linux requires terminal knowledge.

I let you in on a secret. I still have my windows drive in dual boot. I was very scared of linux, i just saw a hyprland gif and fell in love. As a windows poweruser i could not fully commit on that whim.

I have not booted into it in months and i use the same drive to install proton games. (So i can theoretically launch them from both sides) but i do plan to keep it there, just in case. At least for as long as i use that machine.

So by all means you are pretty much as much a limux user as i am, the only difference is with what os we dedicate time.

Recently i got into a powershell course from work and i know you can use 7 on unix, but i am actually thinking of spinning up some windows vm. My work is all windows so i do need to keep up. And there are good things i could say about it.

But i have a personal drive to learn linux, rooted in the philosophy of technological freedom, unrestricted by corporate whims. One day i hope to truly leave windows for a foss new world (does not need to be linux) and i hope sincere that on your own time, you will also join me there.

Honestly the only people worried about learning a new OS are people that have not even tried another OS for longer then 15 minuts in the last few years.

The desktop is still a desktop so is the taskbar.

The mouse works like a mouse, browser works like a browser and the majority of apps these days are browser apps.

The single actual difference i can think off is that rather then downloading an exe you use something similar to an appstore if your non technical or the command line if you don’t.

And if you are just a little technical you can acutely download that exe and install/run it just fine. (Wine)

Sure i’ll have a look at decentralized certificate authorities options.

Very possibles to adapt my idea to whatever technology provides those function honestly.

The only actual connection i have with blockchain is that reading about it when it was new directly inspired in me a possible way to combat fake news.

That hardware inputs can be faked is part of my reasoning here because there would be transparency of the source of footage.

If a reputable journalists fake their own footage and it would be found out their credibility would be gone.

If they often rely on borrowing footage and don’t fact check it. Credibility will degrade as well.

Journalist media that does their work and only uses credible sources will thrive.

My solution isn’t about who or how signature gets created but how ordinary people can check for themselves where a clip within footage originates from.

I am fine with inventing a new system that does this and call it something else than blockchain. But my understanding is that it does pretty much provide this functionality in a robust manner.

Also typing these comments on the go caused me to lose something dear to me on public transport. I am very sad now and probably wont engage further.

I am not sure what you think blockchain actually is but in essence its a decentralized ledger of signatures.

Not coins, no sellable goods. Just that. Computers connected in a network to verify the correctness of a cloud ledger.

So if you say signing footage is one thing how do you propose a laymen can verify that signature without centralized databank.

I understand some people may not mind centralized authority but i prefer against it.

I am willing to hear peoples thoughts on this. I am not pro or against blockchain or any form of technology. With the information i have this just seems like a reasonable and practical solution.

For the longest time now, from before AI, before NFT was a thing i had an idea to incorporating blockchain tech into real life media footage to combat the rise of misinformation.

The metadata, original author would be stored on this chain the moment footage is recorded. The biggest challenge is that this means the devices themselves need to be connected.

Adoption would be slow but i imagined news and official channels make use of this tech first. Eventually all footage outside of this will be seen as not trustworthy

Then NFTBros came along and people have shit on this idea ever since. Some days i feel that was a conspiracy to ruim out perception of potential but more likely humans where just greedy.

I still believe this could work. Detailed example below:

The system works with a fair amount of transparency, verifiable digital signatures for recording devices and their owners. Professional cameras and organizations would have publicly known IDs, while individuals could choose to remain pseudonymous authors but would need to build credibility over time.

Let’s say BBC records an interview. When viewers watch this content on any platform, they can access blockchain verification through an embedded interface (perhaps a small icon in the corner). This shows the complete chain of custody from recording to broadcast.

The system verifies content through computational comparisons. When a raw interview is edited into a final piece:

• Each original clip has a unique blockchain signature
• The final edited version’s signature can be compared against source material
• Automated analysis shows what percentage of original footage matches
• Modifications like color correction or audio adjustments are detected through signature differences
• Additional elements like station logos or intro sequences have their own verified identifiers

I am less concerned with stopping young people from accessing the web then with general awareness of people about the damaging mental side effects of technology.

Those side effects are usually long term, an account and a few online interactions wont harm much. But a habit will.

If my kids hacks trough my infrastructure i will shine with IT pride… and then update my infrastructure explaining them why it is i am so concerned.

I know they will find ways outside my walled garden but keeping them in was never the point, providing a safe space to live to develop healthy habits is.

Its not like i am naive to economy but i cant help but see this:

Ape spends time and energy to convinces other apes to spend time, energy and resources, potentially sacrifice some of the environment and cause hinder to the local population. To dig for a metallic object discarded a decade ago so they can with some hope extract a codestring of information which will unlock some other strings of 0 and 1 that we then collectively agree on means this person has x many digital object which we all agree on has x economic value.

And if they succeed they will al smile because this is winning.

Here is sm either more radical/normal, depending on your perspective. Take the drive that has the wallet/or make it a physical one. Place it in a museum and name it “x Bitcoins”. Value recovered and nothing was lost.

Humans are weird.

“Inspired by the stanley parable”

Yeah that will do it. I am clicking that wishlist/buy button like i never had a choice in the matter.

Quiet!!

If the tech brows wanna dump money into developing renewable energy systems, detaching themselves from our main power grid they currently destabilize. Let them!

So its like those foreign language tatoos?

I agree i should have used different words, scam-ableism is counter productive to educate about traps.

I am pretty sure my dad fell for one of these because an ad popt up trying to pay a digital parking meter.

Though he wasn’t trying to get access to illegal content what people behind this campaign are alluding towards.

Scams come in so many shapes and forms, there is accidental click and there is “looked like an official Netflix page”. How many people will knowingly pay for something they know is available for free?

I went to their website just to have a laugh. This is some real shizo propaganda.

You could replace all of it with: Only watch self sourced pirated media! Paying and relying on any service has inherent risks

“1 in 3 (32%) people who illegally stream in the UK say they, or someone they know, have been a victim of fraud, scams, or identity theft as a result.”

320/1000 people know someone unlucky enough to fall for a scam.

This risk increases significantly when users exchange credit or debit card information to view content on unregulated and illicit websites.

If you pay for your pirated content you are doing it wrong.

Watching content via an illicit source can expose younger viewers to age-inappropriate content. These unauthorised websites, devices, apps, add-ons, and the content they can access have no parental controls.

My kids get a tablet exclusively pointing to a private media server in order to obtain the parental controls for-profit services just don’t provide. I banned YouTube kids, it was a shitfest.

Using 2 different versions of a technology for different usecase?

A text, no

Texts, maybe

Phone calls/voicemails OMG LIBERATE ME PLEASE