Should you moderate like a bot? No.
I'm human, your human, the community is made up of humans. Act like a reasonable human, and yes, you get to define what is reasonable.
If bots could mod, we would just have them mod, but that would suck.
In terms of rule bending, if it's in good faith then let it go. If you want to remind someone, that's fine.
We're also a sit outside house. Luckily October is pretty warm nowadays (wait...)
I have no way to put this gently: I cannot conclusively determine which one is more secure.
That's the only conclusion I would have trusted. Otherwise you should have been awarded the tech equivalent of a Nobel Prize.
Security (and privacy) is not a zero sum game. That isn't to say we shouldn't discuss it. That isn't to say we can't point out clear advantages.
In any case, I appreciate the write up.
Link: The Faces of Evil, for the Philips CDi.
Considered one of the worst games ever.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Link:_The_Faces_of_Evil_and_Zelda:_The_Wand_of_Gamelon
The article we're talking about?
Those dropped from the maintainer list
I think it's worth highlighting the other half of the video, wild speculation and misinformation.
It's important to keep in mind, both when posting anything online and reading anything online. It's easy to see something inflammatory online, assume it's true and move on. Obviously there are trolls posting ragebait, but sometimes it's a misunderstanding posted without malice.
As always, kudos to Hank Green for rambling such coherent thoughts.
Assuming I accept your premise, the premise of the article is that the actions are not being done by the company.
The key point is that Musk is at fault, not his company.
You can't just hide behind "the company" and do whatever you want.
At some point, as the EU is discussing, the individual is at fault.
So a company provides infinite protection?
"I didn't murder that man, the company did."
"The company paid individual X to murder them, not me."
No, that's ridiculous.
There is a line you can cross. Musk has crossed that line. Is it exactly written, if your name is Elon Musk and you own companies X, Y, & Z, and you perform actions A, B, C, you I'll be fined in this exact way? No. There is a grey area, and a group within the EU is allowed to make a more specific determination.
And do you know who agreed to these rules? Elon Musk. He chose to do business in the EU. He agreed to their rules.
Actions you don't like aren't corrupt.
Actions Elon doesn't like aren't corrupt.
In fact arguably Elon is the corrupt individual in this case and the EU is simply applying the law to the corrupt individual.
But who determines
How about a governing body with systems of checks and balances? You're pretending that laws are just out there enforcing themselves. The EU isn't just some dude with a vendetta. It's a large collection of people making decisions.
And in fact as a business, in order to do business in the EU, you've agreed that the EU has the ability to make decisions like this.
To clarify the cost of creating an LLC is a hundred bucks more or less depending on the jurisdiction. So Elon should be allowed to create "Musk Corp Oct2024 LLC" and then say or do anything under the guise of Musk Corp Oct2024 LLC, then if he's sued or fined just declare bankruptcy and create "Musk Corp Nov2024 LLC" and do whatever he wants?
At some point you have to recognize the individual is at fault. You can't just hide behind "Oh that wasn't me, that was the company" or " That was Musk of SpaceX having an opinion of Musk of Tesla, they are different entities."
If someone is attempting to be genuine and truthful when it comes to personal statements, fine, we can consider the protections. But if someone is flagrant and malicious then those protections no longer apply.
If Notepad is getting AI text editing then it's as good as dead too.