it’s possible, but that would seem… odd… for such a large and tech-savvy instance. there’s a lot of reasons why this isn’t a good idea, and very few technical reasons why it is
my guess is that it’s less about obscuring server location for privacy reasons as is the implications in this thread, and more about handling changes cleanly or something like that - in which case, sure it obscures the server location but more that it makes the server “location” (or hardware, etc) irrelevant and fungible
a reverse proxy these days is pretty much just a requirement of any dynamic service. they often run on the same host as the software
they tied meat to themselves and ran at the bear screaming
i understand that of course, but the EU can, for example, force products that are sold in the EU to have no developer restrictions that are not compliant with EU law
… just like it can (try) to regulate the sale of of things like conflict diamonds
trade agreements likely don’t cover this though
and sure there might be diplomatic pushback, but… is that really going to happen?
the EU already forces companies to make products to certain specifications if they want to be sold in the EU… as does the US and most other countries, and California in the US tends to set the standard that everyone else lives by
countries “invade” the autonomy of other countries’ markets all the time. the US is the worst offender. this is kinda the reason the EU exists: to have the power to force things to happen that is “outside” their jurisdiction
apple doesn’t have to comply. they don’t have to sell iphones in the EU. they’re making a choice
they can make whatever laws they like really - the EU punishes corporate infringement with percentage of global revenue for example
whether they can enforce them or not is questionable in most cases, but unless apple wants to pull out of europe, the EU can kinda do whatever it likes
for australia i think most people would assume kangaroos, and sure people are excited to see them but they’re not quite as common - youre probably only going to see them if it’s intentional
i think common AND excited is probably rosellas - they’re a bright red and blue/green parrot that are kinda eeeeeverywhere
i’m from australia and i’m always excited to see squirrels… they don’t exist here at all
and in the same way, perhaps stop saying “westerners”
many us had the same thought that it’s xenophobic bullshit… perhaps we all should stop arbitrarily grouping people into geographic groups and making sweeping generalisations
and saying that the USA is dumber than a donkey and implying that china is not is just fucking laughable… i’m aussie, so i have no horse in either race: our economy is almost entirely reliant on china and we rely on the USA for basically everything else, including protection from china… and yknow what? all cultures are fucking weird… stop being so god damn condescending. the only thing it proves is that you’ve never travelled enough, or that “different” makes you uncomfortable which makes you an incurable bigot
the australian government (i know, slightly different level of security and requirement) does an interesting thing where when you take a photo in their identity app it flashes a bunch of different colours very quickly. i assume it takes several photos with different colours to help ensure that shadows are behaving correctly (perhaps it also helps with adding detail for facial recognition and rejection?)
… kinda unrelated, but i’ve always found it fascinating
remember that your searches for yourself feed them data too
really appreciate you taking the effort! i see where you’re coming from with the “enemies of the state” part, and think that id agree there
would you be able to link to a page that helps describe fascism as you say: that relies on severity of consequence?
asking because whilst i agree that fascism is specific - and this doesn’t cover it - im not sure that degree of severity is part of the definition and that could be a dangerous precedent to set because the other parts of fascism about control and quashing dissent enable the severe consequences once they are present
sure, but usually when used in this way for a single word or a couple they’re implying someone else said this; we don’t believe it so we aren’t saying it
anyone who enables a company whose “values” lead to prompts like this doesn’t get to use the (invalid) “just following orders” defence
it’s possible it was generated by multiple people. when i craft my prompts i have a big list of things that mean certain things and i essentially concatenate the 5 ways to say “present all dates in ISO8601” (a standard for presenting machine-readable date times)… it’s possible that it’s simply something like
prompt = allow_bias_prompts + allow_free_thinking_prompts + allow_topics_prompts
or something like that
but you’re right it’s more likely that whoever wrote this is a dim as a pile of bricks and has no self awareness or ability for internal reflection
deleted by creator
you’re saying a buzz word without understanding the trade offs in designs… POW doesn’t have to imply higher energy cost for more transactions: shove more transactions in a block and POW cost is the same… that’s a trade off sure because then a block becomes a more valuable thing to 51%
POW is also only 1 of a lot of different consensus algorithms, all with their own trade-offs… POS benefits those with money for example (although you can still form mining pools - TBH i’d argue it’s exactly the same in this respect to POW in practice - good luck mining anything of value in POW without investing $ millions)
some blockchains aren’t built to be entirely trustless and uncoordinated, merely semi trusted and loosely coordinated (think a consortium of banks - they don’t trust each other entirely but a blockchain means no individual member working alone can cheat. in this case because it’s semi-organised they can use POS with a special token and delegate those “mining tokens” 1 per member of the consortium or something… you can even set this kind of chain up as an ethereum side chain!)
aren’t needed for regular transactions
but that kinda defeats the point of a central authority having control: the value of any currency is entirely based on what you can use it for… unless you tied their value in a way that the government regulates - eg to have a banking license you must swap USD for eUSD and visa versa on a 1:1 basis without fees (perhaps they burn eUSD to get new USD; IDK - you can’t oversupply. it gets tricky)… anyway, beside the point: regular transactions is exactly what the government needs some control over
deleted by creator