When you turn off bluetooth from CC, it’s not even turning it off. The radio is still on - it just doesn’t make any new connections. You have to turn it off in preferences for that.
Well, I think in this particular case, the mixed usage of different pronouns is what makes it unclear. There’s usually nothing wrong with using singular “they” - and it’s not a new thing, not by a long shot.
Interesting. I wonder what other factors you might have going against you causing CF to captcha you - I have my Firefox loaded up with almost every ad-blocking, privacy, and anti-fingerprinting extension I could think of, but I rarely get CAPTCHAs.
Yes, and that's my point: it's not action that the user can take to resolve accusations, and it's not because of abusive behavior it's just `response.status(200 if random.randbool() else 403)`
Ah yes, the classic "we care about security and privacy so much that we're going to force you to enable the biggest exploit vectors" move; classic Cloudflare:)
It’s a matter of not disincentivizing victims from cooperating with law enforcement. If there’s the possibility that some information you give the police could be used to prosecute you in the future, that could deter people from going to the police or seeking justice in the first place.
In terms of DNA specifically, it’s kind of a weird power play to say “if you want us to convict the person who raped you, we’ll have to put your DNA into our database to make it easier to convict you in the future”.
I think that's a bit of a bad argument, maybe a strawman. The whole point of the law is to make good citizens so we can all live together. It is in the best interest of both individuals and a community as a whole to not break the law. Breaking the law has consequences. It is the job of the police and justice system to find criminals and punish them. Finding criminals requires the justice system to find evidence and proof.
Let's make another scenario: someone's home was burglarized, and the family who lives in the home submits DNA so the police/investigators can flag finger prints/DNA not left by the family. It turns out the father of the house raped and killed several women 30 years before. The DNA submitted by the family has effectively convicted their father by volunteering his DNA for crimes he committed 30 years ago. Would you be equally upset that this rapist and murderer has been caught?
Yes, you can scale the offense up to the point where most would answer yes to allowing this.
It’s interesting that in the past I wouldn’t have been extremely worried about it. But times have changed. Asking for consent is now considered old-fashioned. Law enforcement has been taking every technological shortcut offered as soon as it is in budget.
It’s a dangerous time we’re heading into. Well, already arrived in. Big brother panopticon is a reality. In this environment I see the precedent in a new light. Reminds me of the movie Gattaca, which is not a feel-good film.
No, I'm saying you have raised the severity with your example perhaps to further your argument in favor of storing this data indefinitely. "What about the children?" Indeed.
I've found that DDG (and by some extension, Bing) seems to do a little bit better at this. But, the only search engine I've found that actually does a good job at this is Kagi. It's really good at filtering out those SEO spam articles, and even separates out stuff like listicles when it's not what you're looking for.
