They said that the pictures were deleted last time, and we found out later that they weren't. Why would we trust them a second time when they violated our trust the first time?
aurelar
joined 1 year ago
TBH this is the most rational take I've seen. If I had 10 upvotes, I'd give them to you
Don't give them ideas.
Thanks for this post. Saving it in case I ever need it.
So apparently tops aren't gay?
It's already the case that banks don't allow their apps to be used on rooted phones. I can imagine a similar possibility for desktop computers. A dreadful possibility, but a possibility nonetheless.
Practically speaking, people already have cell phones that are impossible to own, because in many cases, users are not allowed to unlock the bootloaders of their phones.
They look grey to me tbh.
Me, using 8 bit adders to make my own CPU because everything else is now locked down to all hell
What about distros that don't use automated account creation (or have optional automation), like Arch for example or Gentoo? The law isn't made to accommodate those people:
"Provide an accessible interface at account setup that requires an account holder to indicate the birth date, age, or both, of the user of that device for the purpose of providing a signal regarding the user’s age bracket to applications available in a covered application store."
The odd thing is the wording that it "requires" an account holder to indicate age or DOB. As with anything *nix, there is always a workaround. There is no way to require anything of the user. There's also no definition for "accessible interface."
view more: next ›
Read the federal complaint against Peter Stokes. Microsoft has a record of the URLs.