That’s the obvious political side effect of the european stance in this, I still think there’s no magical difference between the US and Europe and the more blatant evident differentiator is that they are not tanking their own economies by regulating Meta’s data gathering.

You can also spin the other way around: America doesn’t do the obvious right thing because of the pressure the corporations can put on the legislators.

For the same reason the EU is doing anything at all: those companies are american.

You can bet your ass if those were europeans you would see the opposite happening. See: tiktok.

Linux has never been the hard part of linux. The biggest hurdle of linux

Is storage, especially when migrating / dual booting from Windows.

There’s absolutely exoteric stuff in there that you will need to run once and then never again, so this knowledge will be lost for years, until you need it back.

Especially if you want to keep your old data.

Oh I see what you mean now. That would be seed-and-run.

That’s unethical as far as pirating goes…

I’m not sure I understand.

The users go to a streaming site, they look for a movie, they click the clicks, they watch the movie, they close the browser, the temporary files are deleted.

What downloads? What stored files?

That’s what steaming is (temporarily downloading), but if I’m not seeding, and neither are my fellow consumers, there’s no “peer-to-peer” to speak of.

I’ll mention it here, since nobody did for some reason, but torrenting is sustainable so long as people keep the files and reseed. So keeping a copy is not the end-goal of people using torrenting technology, but a necessary part of the process.

The goal, functionally, is still streaming. (So much so I used to set the torrent to download the file progressively and run the incomplete file in VLC, watching it while it was getting completed).

What keeps me away from streaming site is that I’m confused about how they sustain themselves. Aren’t the costs giganormous to constantly be streaming stuff around?

Let me stop you at “I’m no security expert”.

How would a newborn recognize anything at all?

I was half expecting a post by a 2 years old and half one from a very committed indian guy.

Good on you!

I watch way too much YouTube, but it sounds like you are describing a microblogging platform…

I just follow people that provides me quality, I’ve never experienced any upload war.

Our equivalent is nuclear radiations.

Not what I meant: https://github.com/arkenfox/user.js/wiki/3.3-Overrides-[To-RFP-or-Not]#-fingerprinting

"If you do nothing on desktop, you are already uniquely identifiable - screen, window and font metrics alone are probably enough - add timezone name, preferred languages, and several dozen other metrics and it is game over. Here is a link to the results of a study done in 2016 showing a 99.24% unique hit rate (and that is excluding IP addresses).

Changing a few prefs from default is not going to make you “more unique” - there is no such thing."

Basically making yourself less unique is impossible so there’s no sensible tradeoff to be made (other than in the context of Tor and Mullvad Browser).

You see, as a nuclear physicist…

Am I wrong to assume trying to blend in is a worse and contradictory strategy than trying to actively protect yourself from tracking?

If you want to not be unique, use default setting chrome without adblock. Your browser will look just like anybody else’s, but they will literally know who you are.

On the opposite side of the spectrum, you lock everything down and spike as a very special browser and… that’s all they know.

This is all irrelevant to my point, at the same time it kinda makes my point about the limit of your positions so…

My job here is done.

Have a day!

Any attempt to discuss earlier than that is wild conjecture so the only responsible way to deal with it is to accept that it is currently unknowable.

Holy fuckity fuck.

Stop using those words. Stop saying “ANY ATTEMPT” or “THE ONLY RESPONSIBLE”. Stop laying out matter of factly that when you ask scientists they answer in a certain way.

Are you a scientist? Did you ask a theoretical astrophysicist? Are you quoting a paper on the subject?

This is your respectable clearly limited opinion. Portay it as such.

I never said consensus settles a matter, I’m just saying that pulling stuff out your ass and pretending they come from a position of consensus is harmful.

Also you clearly read “The Theory of Everything” or something to that extent by Hawkings and he quite literally mention that he’s going to study what happens before the Big Bang…

Look up Phenomenology.

There’s a fourth option: every reference to the mystical properties of black holes on lemmy creates new universes through some as yet undiscovered process. Then your existence just becomes a statistical eventuality, as do every other life that you could ever live.

It’s like arguing absolute zero doesn’t have consensus as if I was part of the specialists that push forward our collective knowledge on the matter while at best knowing 0 is a small number.

The salient point is that Something HAS to exist because the opposite is literal meaninglessness and that has scientific consensus.

That’s literally opposite to the scientific consensus. People are in fact looking for models that justify why there is something rather than nothing, and it’s not because “the opposite is literal meaninglessness”.

Please, please, please think of all the people that infer knowledge from an autoritatve language heard online.