ulterno

Hehe, a similar thingy happened in one of my previous companies. The CPU was easily spoofed using qemu but in that case the whole OS was almost immutable with hardcoded bus configs for the video card (some old pre ATI card), which I was unable to pass through, causing the project to be taken out of my hands. I feel like it didn't go forward after that.

I'd rather not automate convicting random people.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2022/aug/22/google-csam-account-blocked

Besides, what I said earlier would be more of a concern for preservation of information in case of civilisation level disasters.

Or you can just read it directly. Just need some light.

It's actually better than plain text stored on a Hard Drive/ CD/ Floppy et c., which requires corresponding reading devices, format parsing systems, a display to show it and an appropriate power source, after which you can consider using a human to use the data (or remove the monitor and convert data into other data, in which case, you need another output device/network).

either due to technical or cost effective

Mainly due to proprietary hardware+software solutions which cannot be ported now and remaking them with new hardware will require redoing the same processes as before (probably with additional stuff added by later laws) all over again.

if the customer does not print enough

Meaning all home users are a bad investment for HP.

That explains the ink cartridges malfunctioning before giving enough prints. That's been engineered into them.

1. It's fine to disagree with scientific consensus. Even more so when there is not a real consensus.
   1. Going by a recent example where in some cases, it was being mandated for everyone to be vaccinated when possible; later, it was noted that vaccinations weren't significantly useful for people who had recently had COVID (sorry, too lazy too link. It was just a news anyway and not a res paper). But this pertains to a condition that is currently undergoing change, with new strains coming out every now and then.
   2. An older example. Old enough to get into our school textbooks. "different tastes on different parts of the tongue". The text used a kind of language that made readers think that given specific tastes can only be detected at those places, whereas the results from actual science were much more nuanced. Furthermore, the textbooks encouraged the students to "verify" this by trying different tasting objects on their corresponding taste locations, while not hinting them to try any of those in places other than those, which would have easily disproven the statement in the way it was written in the text.
   • The point here is that you are free to believe what you may, but when your actions significantly and maybe adversely affect others, you have to be careful about what others believe and whether your belief has any concrete proof. e.g. It's fine if you don't want to live in the same room with a vaxxer (just live in some other room, or don't rent a multi-tenant room in the first place), but that doesn't give you the license to harass that person or their family.
2. meh
3. It's stealing both ways. Whether it's legal or moral or not, is another discussion. WB stole from the customer. It was legal (they probably had it somewhere in their EULA) and probably immoral (because they knew most customers would not really read it well and those who did, would still probably give them money because they have no other option if they wanted to watch the exclusive). Pirates then stole from WB (in this case it was illegal), but the moral implications change upon perspective. Neither side of the argument is even close to ideal, but sometimes you can't really condemn yourself for saying "It is what it is" and picking a side.

Lookie here! This thread has 8 parallel lines.

Scientists do not question the concept of science

Questioning the validity of science is precisely how science is done These are 2 different statements, pertaining to 2 different actions.

Both the statements are true.. err... alright, maybe not the first one as much. You can question the concept of science (which, in a way, boils down to "Question everything") and still be a scientist.

Questioning the validity of (other's and your own previous) science is a part of the concept of science.

Questioning the concept of science is more of a philosophical matter and would be valid in a quest for better concepts.

The above two statements are not actually denying each other.

It seems already too late for that movement - at least in places like the more "developed" states in the US.

I use a bicycle for commute btw.

I agree with that. And my point being "Start the movement (of buying older cars instead of new ones) now and change the status quo (of high demand for new cars) while also being able to get older cars that cannot be subscriptionified, because later, even the older cars will be such, that they will have a subsciption, making even 2nd handers to pay the OEM".

Yeah, the point is, do it now and change the status quo, because later, it will be too late.

color or contrast

Then the AI will be called contrastist.

This seems to be one way of them trying to prevent piracy.

The situation here is that the game soundtracks I bought on are not prevented from download and I am able to use it on any device I want. Despite that, it never came to my mind to pirate it. Same for the GoG games. But there still exist enough pirated steam games out there.

It can be simply concluded that the people who don't want to pirate, will buy the stuff and not pirate it no matter how easy you make it, whereas those who want to pirate it will actually be more zealous in pirating stuff that makes it harder to do so.