I think the distinction here is a Harris presidency would at least pretend to if not actually put effort toward resolving the conflict with less bloodshed because some of the Democrat base wants that, even if it’s only symbolic and maintains the status quo and of Israel as a “strategic partner/asset”. Blinken was just on NPR explaining where their efforts have been directed (surrounded by non-answers, take it as you will), not taking into account how effective they were. We can fully expect a Trump admin to encourage Bibi’s efforts at rejecting a two-state solution or any kind of Palestinian sovereignty, and make it even harder to end the conflict in the future because Bibi wants to drag out the suffering as long as possible because that’s a key reason he’s in power. This is how I interpret it, and I believe any kind of equivalency between the two is overly cynical, which you can feel free to disagree with. If Trump’s admin somehow has a part in ending the conflict, I’d be surprised if any Palestinians make it out on the other side, and they’ll tout that as a win.

Or just make yourself out to be utterly incompetent; let them think you’re bad at your job/hobby.

“What happens when you google it? If that doesn’t help I don’t know what else to try, sorry /shrug”

sudo is spoken soo-doo in my house. Where I live alone.

I do, especially in VARCHAR as vare-care where everyone else is on the varr-carr train.

If for any reason you don’t quite like the noise video/track, it’s almost trivially easy to create your own white, brown, or pink noise track in an audio editor like Audacity. Then you can adjust the EQ, high/low filters, mix in other sounds, etc and really make it your personalized sleep track for offline listening (good for planes).

Ban me too, please? I’d prefer to not stumble across whatever you’re hosting.

Just like when that “prank” youtuber was shot harassing a delivery driver in a mall food court, it went just like this in my head.

Right – all privacy-positive methods to employ, but not helpful for fingerprinting. In fact, some things can make you more susceptible to fingerprinting because they make you more unique (like using a custom OS). It’s all about your browser and what it chooses to send with HTTP requests, how it responds to queries for you device/browser specs (via Javacript). Your OS, system architecture, hardware details, browser type and plugins, etc combine to make a very unique profile tied to your device. It’s especially nefarious because all those bits are cross-referenced over all accounts and devices to make a global profile on you. Even if you’ve never used Facebook, you probably have a shadow profile. If you’ve ever logged into the same service or website account on your de-Googled GrapheneOS device as another machine that does have Google services tracking, then your new device is likely already tied to your identity.

Try this with different browsers – it tests the uniqueness of your device.

Pretty sure Graphene doesn’t do much about fingerprinting on its own, it’s nearly entirely up to the browser. They mention some of their plans to address that with Vanadium, but make no claims as to how effective it is now (at least on the features page).

I don’t exhale, rather I just close off my airway to stop the big inhale. It sounds super uncomfortable to try exhaling at that point, but with some practice I have been able to stop the inhale and that mutes the sneeze considerably. Also, I can plug my nose when I feel it start to tickle and stop the sneeze entirely.

A fellow opposum!

Uppies for all of you!

Put your foot down everywhere then – it’s a fallacy to think that it’s not worth it to resist data harvesting because it already gets collected “everywhere” anyway, take one step at a time to make it harder and harder. Opting out of this is just one step.

Isn’t reducing the size of the dataset worth it? I’d rather them have a picture from three years ago than a new scan every month or two.

It’s not such a binary thing as winning or losing, it’s a constantly shifting process. The only way to actually lose is by giving up – instead, consider it making it as hard as possible for your privacy to be infringed upon. Sometimes it’s more inconvenient, but what makes us such a farmable populace is our reluctance to be inconvenienced. Be good at being uncomfortable.

I refused, it went fine. I had to repeat myself because it was unexpected and dudebro wasn’t prepared, and they had to turn on the other machine and wait for it to start up, but it only delayed me like 2 minutes. The more people ask, the easier it gets.

I fucking love beans

What would be extremely rock and roll-- punk rock, even – is donating all of the proceeds from that show to pro-union efforts.

#DonateItDave, or something

The mishandling is indeed what I’m concerned about most. I now understand far better where you’re coming from, sincere thanks for taking the time to explain. Cheers

Thanks for the response! It sounds like you had access to a higher quality system than the worst, to be sure. Based on your comments I feel that you’re projecting the confidence in that system onto the broader topic of facial recognition in general; you’re looking at a good example and people here are (perhaps cynically) pointing at the worst ones. Can you offer any perspective from your career experience that might bridge the gap? Why shouldn’t we treat all facial recognition implementations as unacceptable if only the best – and presumably most expensive – ones are?

A rhetorical question aside from that: is determining one’s identity an application where anything below the unachievable success rate of 100% is acceptable?