Anyone would be an improvement over Trump. Even Vance, probably. I’d gladly see Newsom win. But even more than that, I’d like to see Bernie, Warren or AOC win.

Let’s ban those hit pieces too. In fact, let’s split the internet into one for bots and one without bots.

They’re not the party of law and order, and haven’t been for a long time. They’re the party of crime and chaos.

Trump is certainly deranged, but the people who really have TDS are the ones who believe a corrupt business man will “drain the swamp”, a crook will restore law and order, a guy with 6 bankruptcies will somehow fix the economy, and a guy who spreads hate, blasphemes, cheats on his third wife with a porn star, brags about grabbing pussies, and is clearly too deeply involved with a major pedophile network, is somehow a christian and a leader sent by God.

There is so much contradiction and cognitive dissonance involved there, it must be some sort of mental disorder.

I’m still talking about the same thing, but I understand the nature of our misunderstanding now. You see eID as something you download and can share (but what kind of security would that provide?). I mean an online ID service, similar to the Dutch DigiD. I assume the EU eID is also something similar, although I have no personal experience with that.

The first paragraph on Wikipedia contains a good description of what I’m talking about: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_identification

An electronic identification (“eID”) is a digital solution for proof of identity of citizens or organizations. They can be used to view to access benefits or services provided by government authorities, banks or other companies, for mobile payments, etc. Apart from online authentication and login, many electronic identity services also give users the option to sign electronic documents with a digital signature.

The online authentication is the important part. The article also talks about physical cards with a chip, but I honestly don’t quite understand how that’s different from a regular chip in a passport.

When I have to access any government service, I get redirected to digID to log in, then redirected to the site I want to visit. This is very similar to other online authorisation schemes, except it’s tied to me official legal identity.

My proposal is to use this not just to log in to government sites, but to use it to provide any legally required online identification, tailored to the highest amount of privacy possible in that situation. So if a site needs to confirm you’re 18+, let that site ask the eID service for just your age, or even just whether you’re 18+ or not, log into the eID system, and the eID system sends confirmation of your age back to the site.

They will investigate anything but the Epstein files.

That’s significantly worse. Assembling a PC without knowing what a cooler is for is bad enough, but to actually cut pieces off complex electronic components, I don’t know what kind of state of mind you have to be in for that.

We’re looking at a hardware issue. What would a programmer care?

But getting that information from the USP or the site would require a warrant. Not to mention that the site doesn’t have to know your real identity either.

And the whole point of this exercise is to ensure that you don’t have to provide any document to the site.

What I mean by the site that’s requesting this, is exactly that: you need to prove to a site that you’re above a certain age. For that, the site redirects you to the proxy that redirects you to the eID site, with a request to confirm that you’re above a certain age.

The site has fulfilled its legal obligation to check your age, but doesn’t have to know your identity, and the government doesn’t have to know what site you’re visiting.

I feel like you’re misunderstanding the scenario we’re discussing.

Obviously the government knows it’s you. That’s the whole purpose. But they don’t know the site that’s requesting this, if the proxy hides that from them.

If the proxy is independent, I don’t see how the government can know what the requesting site is. They can only see the proxy. I don’t mean a standard network proxy of course, but a proxy for the entire request. That’s probably the source of our misunderstanding.

Our smart TV doesn’t allow an ad blocker on YouTube, but my kids have developed a way to skip ads anyway. They don’t tolerate ads more than I do, and I couldn’t be prouder.

Of course, a government has many ways they can legislate your rights, freedom and privacy away. But if you want to do this in a way that preserves privacy, this is how you do it.

Of course the government knows who you are; they have to. They issue your ID, and that makes them the only organisation that can issue your eID. But a government that serves its people would provide this an a service, with the proxy, to ensure privacy is respected.

And of course with a warrant they can and should be able to demand access to the proxy’s or the website’s logs. But only with a warrant. That is the bar that the government should always have to clear before they can get access to any citizen’s privacy.

More than a standing army, it needs to act united and decisively. More power for the Euro parliament and leadership that can take charge of crisis situations without having to negotiate with every single member state.

So they commit fraud to deport innocent people.

I’m not against age restrictions, but letting every site brew their own method is a really bad idea. I’m not going to upload my legal ID to every random site; that’s a recipe for identity theft, and it’s a really bad idea to teach people that that’s normal or acceptable.

And age guessing through facial recognition is incredibly unreliable. My 16 year old son has already been accepted as 18+ somewhere. I had a full moustache at 14. Others are blessed with a babyface well into their 30s.

The only right way to do this, is if governments provide their citizens with an eID that any site can ask “is this person 18+?” and get an accurate answer without any other identifiable info. And if you don’t want the government to know what sites you visit, have sites route the request through a proxy.

But instead everybody’s got to cobble together their own improvised system that we just have to trust blindly is not going to sell our data.

While I wouldn’t miss them, monarchies are a lot more resilient than that. Most monarchies have survived worse. And it’s not even Charles himself who’s implicated. Even if he was, he could simply abdicate. Constitutional monarchies can be very pragmatic about this sort of thing.

Aren’t some uncooked vegetables still kinda alive when you eat them? Or yeasts?

women gyrating provocatively, and Bad Bunny shamelessly grabbing his crotch while dry-humping the air”

Oh no! Did Bad Bunny steal one of Michael Jackson’s signature moves? Did his dancers dance like Shakira or Jennifer Lopez? Has this guy ever seen a Superbowl halftime show?

Why is he still called “Kid” Rock anyway? Isn’t he 55, looking like he’s 75? He’s Old Man Rock now.

The only kid thing about him is his dress sense, but I recently saw a photo of him in a hat that actually fit, and yes, he’s an old man now.