trobertson's recent activity

  1. Comment on A guarded generation: How millennials view money and investing in ~life

    trobertson
    Link Parent
    Don't forget trust in governments and governing institutions. That's supposed to be the path to fixing those problems, but the recent decades demonstrate that we can't really trust the government...

    Compared to past generations, our wages are down, employment is down, home ownership is down, marriage is down, and birth rates are down. It is no wonder that we believe the American dream is a lost cause.

    Don't forget trust in governments and governing institutions. That's supposed to be the path to fixing those problems, but the recent decades demonstrate that we can't really trust the government to have society's back.

    10 votes
  2. Comment on Openish-world, Mystery, Walking Simulator recommendations? in ~games

    trobertson
    Link Parent
    I want to second the Danganronpa recommendation. I've moved very far away from anime in the past decade or so, but the 3 main Danganronpa games (1, 2, V3) really shine in spite of the anime-ness....

    I want to second the Danganronpa recommendation. I've moved very far away from anime in the past decade or so, but the 3 main Danganronpa games (1, 2, V3) really shine in spite of the anime-ness. And if you like anime, well, you just found a near-perfect set of games.

    3 votes
  3. Comment on What are your unpopular game opinions? in ~games

    trobertson
    Link Parent
    If it helps, this thread's OP conflated dying with punishment. Any good Soulsbourne player will rebut that, saying instead that dying is a learning experience. An opportunity to try a different...

    If it helps, this thread's OP conflated dying with punishment. Any good Soulsbourne player will rebut that, saying instead that dying is a learning experience. An opportunity to try a different approach.

    You will die a lot, but in Soulsbourne it is always worth asking "why?" you died.

    2 votes
  4. Comment on What's the community's opinion on "The Right to be Forgotten?" in ~tildes

    trobertson
    Link Parent
    From your OP: From the Wikipedia article, in the "Current Legal Frameworks" section: I want to draw attention to the "to have certain data deleted" part of that. That is the part that will...

    No offense but it sounds like you're running with a lot of assumptions based on the semantics of the term without actually reading up on what it's about.

    From your OP:

    It's kind of a corollary to the "right to privacy" and focuses on putting some guardrails around the downsides of having all information about you being archived, searchable, and publicly available forever and ever. It's usually phrased as a sense that people shouldn't be tied down indefinitely by stigmatizing actions they've done in "the past" (which is usually interpreted as long enough ago that you're not the same person anymore).

    From the Wikipedia article, in the "Current Legal Frameworks" section:

    The right to be forgotten "reflects the claim of an individual to have certain data deleted so that third persons can no longer trace them."

    I want to draw attention to the "to have certain data deleted" part of that. That is the part that will absolutely be abused to hell and back. It is also the part that is completely and absolutely unenforceable.

    All 3 of my points are based on the immediate ramifications of the above text.

    Nobody is talking about some MiB flashy thing to wipe people's memories away

    Please stop putting ridiculous assertions into my mouth.

    I said memory would be preserved, even when news articles were erased. The memory would no longer have evidence to support it. (And do you think that no news would be erased? Not even celebrity rumor news? Not gossip about political candidates? Not accusations about public figures? If you believe that those are safe from this "right", then I have an Eiffel Tower to sell you.)

    or erasing court records

    Please stop putting ridiculous assertions into my mouth.

    I did not say this. I said that people would make claims in court, based on their memory of factual events, and become unable to cite sources that the events in their memory occurred. The erasure of information that could become evidence will be extremely problematic.

    No offense but it sounds like you're running with a lot of assumptions based on the semantics of the term without actually reading up on what it's about.

    It is not about reading whatever gets written by supporters or detractors. It is about taking the base assertion (that information can be deleted at request (hopefully with restrictions, like a court order)) and following the ramifications of that assertion.

    This "right" provides the power to remove data from the public record. It will be abused by every asshole who can afford the legal fees. Even if most judges are sensible, it only takes one judge to cause tangible damage to the public record.

    I am opposed to a clear danger to the public record.

    3 votes
  5. Comment on What's the community's opinion on "The Right to be Forgotten?" in ~tildes

    trobertson
    Link
    I am opposed for two reasons: It conflicts with having memories, and History is worth recording. I can't get over the idea that the "right to be forgotten" is a weapon of revisionists who want to...

    I am opposed for two reasons:

    1. It conflicts with having memories, and

    2. History is worth recording.

    I can't get over the idea that the "right to be forgotten" is a weapon of revisionists who want to selectively erase portions of history. Once someone's action gets "forgotten", there is now almost no evidence that they have performed that action. Not only does this have legal ramifications (if that action is referenced in a court of law, for example), but it conflicts with peoples memories of the action. Now that the action has been officially "forgotten", memories are fake news.

    Suppose that Saudi Arabia wants their involvement in 9/11 to be "forgotten". If "we" have the right to be forgotten, then Saudi Arabia could make a valid claim that because the public does not have definitive proof that they were involved, all mentions of "Saudi Arabia" occurring within the context of "9/11" should be removed.

    There is also a third point in opposition to this "right":

    1. The right has no mechanism to be enforced or protected

    As an example, this comment could be copy/pasted to literally any digital storage device in the world. If I decide that I don't want this comment remembered, do I have the means to erase it from all of those storage devices? No. Do governments have the means? No, do to storage existing in a plethora of jurisdictions.

    Not to mention non-digital physical storage.

    All in all, this "right" comes down to people "wanting" their actions to be forgotten. There is no basis for this want transforming into a "right". It is all just rhetoric designed to pull people in with the thought of "rights are good. I haven't heard of this right, but all rights are good".

    12 votes
  6. Comment on <deleted topic> in ~tech

    trobertson
    Link Parent
    The internet is public by default. You would expect people using the fediverse to understand that if they don't want their data out there, then they shouldn't put it out there in the first place....

    The internet is public by default. You would expect people using the fediverse to understand that if they don't want their data out there, then they shouldn't put it out there in the first place. It is them who put their data into the public domain, not the Archive team.

    6 votes
  7. Comment on The MacBook keyboard fiasco is way worse than Apple thinks in ~tech

    trobertson
    Link Parent
    More like they can't afford to replace them, having spent thousands on the things.

    More like they can't afford to replace them, having spent thousands on the things.

    15 votes
  8. Comment on Fortnite's Appropriation Issue Isn't About Copyright Law, It's About Ethics in ~games

    trobertson
    Link Parent
    In this case, Epic is selling the dance moves. Epic made this about money, not the plaintiffs. Nobody cares if people do the dance moves in real life with their friends, but making them a...

    Why does everything have to be owned by someone?

    In this case, Epic is selling the dance moves. Epic made this about money, not the plaintiffs. Nobody cares if people do the dance moves in real life with their friends, but making them a commercial product lands this firmly in the realm of copyright. It seems fairly clear to me that Epic does not have copyright over these dances, as Epic had no hand in creating and popularizing them.

    5 votes