> Well, that's just not true. The average person is absolutely terrible with their money. Not only are they buying prepared food, they're paying someone to drive it to their house.
The average person is doing this? Do you have sources/stats or are you just going on vibes, or are you looking at people in your (likely non-average) peer group?
Edit: A source I found cites 130 million US delivery app users in 2026, which is a little over 1/3 of Americans. Given that some non-users will call in orders (pizza, Chinese, etc) then it’s plausible that over 50% of people do order delivery from time to time. That said, it’s hard to find good statistics on how much the median person spends on delivery given the likely inflated numbers promoted by delivery app companies. One source said almost 50% preferred ordering delivery through third party apps like DoorDash; if so then how are only 1/3 of Americans actually users of those apps?
Given the numbers on consumer financial stress it’s likely that there is less food delivery happening right now.
No shot. As a general rule of thumb, most Americans, regardless of income, are also in a small mountain of debt. The rich and the poor alike max out their salaries with debt payments and then pile up living expenses on credit. Since that is "fake money" to so many people already, they overspend and convince themselves that using Klarna for a burrito bowl is a reasonable use of resources.
Inline images are a client implementation/styling detail. Some clients have it, but most don’t as most users don’t seem to want it. I believe Lagrange (the most “visual” browser) has this feature.
I just learned about Bundle Protocol (before I found this article) and was surprised to find that it’s on version 7 already. It sounds very similar to NNCP. If anyone has some real world experience with each, let me know how they compare. Based on what I’ve read I think NNCP would be better for sneakernet, but BP sounds like it’s more mature based on real world use cases.
The difference is one of redressing a concrete dysfunction. Libraries or the local bookstore or whoever aren't trying to sneak into your home, onto your child's school bus, into your child's classroom, while pushing various extremist publications purely for their own profit (ie "engagement"). We do in fact have zoning laws - I can't inadvertently encounter a strip club in a quiet residential area. Meanwhile it's commonplace for children to carry a network terminal around with them with which one can readily access the equivalent of things far worse than that.
What I've described does not restrict one's ability to speak freely. It is most similar to an impressum except it bears no identifying mark thus poses no hazard to anonymous speech.
Impressums cannot be required in the US, once again thanks to that pesky First Amendment. You may be mixing us up with Germany.
Mandates on how speech must be structured are a violation of freedom of speech, Constitutionally speaking.
“Redressing a concrete dysfunction” does not appear in the Constitution as an exemption to guaranteed rights, as far as I am aware. The proper remedy for this kind of problem is an Amendment, assuming you can get enough people to agree with your assessment.
Regulations on speaking to children have ample precident. We rate movies and age-gate admittance, we don't allow children into liquor stores, strip clubs, or adult bookstores. None of those things violate the First Amendment.
“We” (as in the US government) do not do this. There is not, nor can there be, a law requiring such rating.
> we don't allow children into liquor stores, strip clubs, or adult bookstores
These are physical stores/venues, not written speech. “We” do not restrict authors from writing adult books that may or may not be seen by children, nor do we require that the books are labeled as such.
If you want to restrict speech, pass an amendment. That is the allowable path.
You're just vaguely waving towards the first amendment. That's not a cohesive argument in and of itself.
By your own logic would online ID laws not also be a constitutional violation? Ditto for age bracketing laws such as the one under discussion here. After all, they both effectively regulate one half of the exchange necessary for meaningful communication (ie protected speech).
> Impressums cannot be required in the US
Yes but why can't they be required? My (quite possibly flawed) understanding was that SCOTUS previously established that publishing without attribution could not directly be outlawed, recognizing the ability to speak anonymously as an important aspect of political speech. What I have described does not run afoul of that. It neither restricts one's ability to speak nor provides for any form of attribution.
> “Redressing a concrete dysfunction” does not appear in the Constitution as an exemption to guaranteed rights
Regardless of either your or my personal opinion SCOTUS routinely makes exceptions to constitutional rights when a compelling need is presented and the remedy is sufficiently targeted. That said, I don't believe that what I described infringes on the first amendment to begin with so your point is doubly moot.
> By your own logic would online ID laws not also be a constitutional violation? Ditto for age bracketing laws such as the one under discussion here.
Now you’re getting it. Throw them all out along with the idiots who passed the laws.
> Yes but why can't they be required?
The Court has interpreted compelled speech to be almost universally a violation of the First Amendment, outside of the courtroom. I tend to agree. “Shall make no law” is a strong statement.
> SCOTUS routinely makes exceptions to constitutional rights
Prior courts. The present Court seems to be (rightly) rolling back both judicially-granted overexpansion of rights and exceptions to rights, although this is a slow process.
We have to stop relying on the courts to grant new rights and/or exemptions to rights. Passing unconstitutional bills and hoping for a favorable interpretation is clearly not the intended process, yet it’s become increasingly common.
We need to figure out how to pass amendments again or we are going to lose our republic. (It may already be too late due to an out of control executive and corrupt Congress, but that’s another matter.)
I don't think you're giving fair treatment to the complexity of the issue at hand. When SCOTUS came out in favor of anonymous political speech I do not understand it to have been on the basis of forced speech.
We require for example nutrition labels on food products. So clearly metadata of various sorts can be required for an interaction within the marketplace if there's a good enough reason for it. I'm not sure where that leaves personal blogs but it certainly applies to Amazon and PornHub.
The present court is rolling back some things but certainly not all. From the very beginning constitutional rights have never been absolute. One of the basic principles that comes up repeatedly and supersedes almost everything else is that the government must be able to carry out its duties. The contention is generally whether something is truly necessary for that and if so whether the law in question is overly broad.
> So clearly metadata of various sorts can be required for an interaction within the marketplace if there's a good enough reason for it.
Marketplace being the key word here. Interstate commerce may be regulated.
> I'm not sure where that leaves personal blogs but it certainly applies to Amazon and PornHub.
That’s the point. I also care about restrictions on smaller businesses and want to prevent regulatory capture, but personal/nonprofit/community sites must not be burdened above all else. They face enough challenges as it is. If a website or software project is noncommercial, their speech is not subject to regulation, Constitutionally speaking. What’s more, the Constitution has the correct take here—this is as it should be.
> One of the basic principles that comes up repeatedly and supersedes almost everything else is that the government must be able to carry out its duties.
Then you get the question, what are its duties? Enforcing unconstitutional laws is not one of them.
I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you're refering to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.
Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called Linux, and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project.
There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine's resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called Linux distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux!
I know that, most technical people know it, but I refuse to call it "GNU/Linux" because that's a dumb name and Richard Stallman is so over the top pedantic to constantly insist on it.
Yeah, I also have a hard time saying that, but I also think it's kind of important, because what I actually like about my OS is that it's a GNU OS, I hardly ever need to tweak my kernel, and if I do need to change a setting, that would still be the same with another kernel. But I think it's not hard to use the term in writing.
Like, I'm glad for the solid kernel, but it's just not what I interface with on a daily basis. Same that I'm glad the car engine is running fine, but I care about the car, not the engine.
> This has always been a problem of human psychology, but it seems to be getting worse.
It’s been getting worse since the invention of the TV. Each subsequent advance has pushed us further from base reality into a mediated simulacrum. With the dawn of LLMs, people finally seem to be losing their grip on what it means for something to be “real”.
I can’t even count how many times I’ve seen people deny evidence for something, even evidence that’s right in front of them, just because an AI “said so”.
I can’t totally blame AI, though. People were already losing their grip before Covid. I can’t tell you how many adults I knew who suddenly decided they were witches, or otherkin, or superhero vigilantes.
One thing I would add: TV was certainly a major contributor to loss of reality for many people, but the internet was far far worse.
Especially with the advent of the mobile, always networked, hand-held computer.
The interactive nature of the internet vs TV, and especially the constant availability of a hand-held mobile computer vs a fixed location TV.
Data also supports your statement that this phenomenon predates the plague (covid), and measurable educational decline started around 2013.
Due to this I've started saying, and this may be a little extreme, but I think still correct:
Apple caused the collapse of US educational outcomes, with the release of the iPhone.
Goggle, seeing what a giant increase this was yielding in the zombie horde of consumers, jumped on board to participate a few years later.
M$, to prevent the only corporate offering that could empower the user's ability to control the means of computation, bought the only well funded linux phone project, and promptly shut it down.
Now, 1 short decade later, we see the consequences of the prescient foresight of these major market monopolies: generations of children, some in their 30s and 40s, suffering constant neurotic mental health disorders, mostly centered around their "phones".
To come back to my first line above, I'm sure this comment will receive even more downvotes because, mostly people don't want to face reality.
You seem to be in this thread downplaying the seriousness of the problem using the common trope I quoted above. The thing is, even if someone isn’t personally affected, it’s still a bad situation that a football league has this kind of power over internet infrastructure, and it’s ok for them to oppose that situation!
I'm trying to understand the full scope of it, because I keep reading about how many websites don't work, and developer tooling that doesn't work, but then I sit here with a Spanish ISP and can only notice one going offline during games (Docker Hub), everything else I use on a daily basis keeps working. So I'm not downplaying, I'm trying to understand if the difference is truly so large between different ISPs, or if people just rely on completely different tooling, and if so, what are they using exactly?
Yes, I agree that it sucks and is terrible that the football league has so much power of internet infrastructure, especially when we're supposed to have free access to internet, that's in our constitution, and Spain also agreed as such when entering EU too, and many other reasons. That's a larger legal battle, one I'm personally not involved in, but I could take the time to actually understand what happens practically and the full scope, so I can at least note down exactly what went down at what time, so I can keep sending complaints about it.
But to truly understand, gather evidence and having any sort of chance of actually affecting this, you need to understand the full scope of it, outside of the piracy streams, the stuff that is getting blocked that shouldn't. A year ago I noticed a lot of that happening, but today not so much, so clearly it's different today, but still important to gather the full picture before you jump to conclusions.
> only notice one going offline during games (Docker Hub)
Even if it only affected DockerHub, that's sufficient to break many modern developer workflows.
It is however not only DockerHub - as I mentioned upthread, GitHub and AWS are both routinely affected. I've also had npm and crates.io blocked at various times.
You may be getting lucky with how closely your particular ISP is adhering to the block requests, but others are less lucky.
reply