rottingleaf

Well, US laws are all bullshit anyway, so makes sense

I think some people do, but not in such a situation and not posting it like this.

Most likely yes, it's a troll to confirm a certain point of view, and not that of Trump supporters.

It's an instrument, not a solution. In general I'd advise everyone to think of security thus:

If someone wants to find your ass, they'll find your ass.

But if you follow all the best practices, they won't find your ass accidentally or just for fun. They'll have to work.

Started reading this as "stacking up animation" and thought you are going for inner escapism with your anime collection when there'll be problems with interwebs, interpipes and intergunshots on the streets.

Yeah, see, you are already dreaming of that other American thing.

Trump is literally America’s spirit animal, he represents everything that America stands for: greed, ignorance, hate, racism, bigotry, misogyny, corruption, and deceit. Trump is not an outlier, he is America’s mirror.

Probably because that demented walking corpse was picked intentionally as an avatar. He represents a group of people in power. Without Trump they'd probably find some other one. But he's too convenient.

I've recently had a thought that direct democracy is possible.

I'll elaborate:

Sometimes we (humans or even societies) don't update our ideas for the new information.

Say, when I was in kindergarten, I was once sitting behind a table waiting for my mom to get me. A kindergarten teacher put a box with a puzzle in front of me. When I was leaving, I took it. It was apparently intended for another kid who had a birthday.

(I'm autistic, so I have rather early memories.)

So - I was ashamed of this for many years until I realized this was bog standard entrapment and the only thing that teacher wanted, probably, was to feel how forgiving they are and probably better than my parents.

That realization was when I revised the old idea for additional information I had as an adult.

The elaboration itself:

This can be applied to direct democracy.

It's considered impractical to have a national vote on every issue, because big countries have more stuff to deal with using laws, and because it's technically challenging, and because the crowd is unwise.

But! The general populace's ideas of what is practical and what isn't for democracies are from the times when living people would switch telephone calls.

We live in a world where you can have a national vote every day and all the facilities have been created many times, with cryptographic signatures, with highly loaded systems like those of Facebook and other social media. We can have direct non-anonymous democracy, it's not impractical.

And also the so-called Soviet democracy (not the USSR, or rather it existed purely on paper in the USSR, except its first few years and last few years) is often considered impractical, because it can be disrupted by recalling higher council members from the lower ones, putting pressure on the lower layer councils' electors, but I beg your pardon, in today's world that wouldn't be a disruption.

One could make an argument in favor of not relying upon the Internet and computers for such important institutes, but unfortunately the inverted way of using these opportunities is already embraced to effectively kill democracies.

So it's better to think of some thoroughly resilient global system of discussion and voting over the Internet, other than discard the idea.

Can you stop trying to find a silver lining in the sexual exploitation of teenage girls?

Can you please use words by their meaning?

Also I'll have to be blunt, but - every human has their own sexuality, with their own level of "drive", so to say, and their dreams.

And it's absolutely normal to dream of other people. Including sexually. Including those who don't like you. Not only men do that, too. There are no thought crimes.

So talking about that being easier or harder you are not making any argument at all.

However. As I said elsewhere, the actions that really harm people should be classified legally and addressed. Like sharing such stuff. But not as making child pornography because it's not, and not like sexual exploitation because it's not.

It's just that your few posts I've seen in this thread seem to say that certain kinds of thought should be illegal, and that's absolute bullshit. And laws shouldn't be made based on such emotions.

This definitely will not add in any way to the way women and girls are made to feel entirely disgustingly dehumanized by every man or boy in their lives. Groups of men and boys reducing them and their bodies down to vivid sexual fantasies that they can quickly generate photo realistic images of.

Sexual attraction doesn't necessarily involve dehumanization. Unlike most other kinds of interest in a human being, it doesn't require interest in their personality, but these are logically not the same.

In general you are using emotional arguments for things that work not through emotion, but through literal interpretation. That's like using metric calculations for a system that expects imperial. Utterly useless.

If the person in the image is underaged then it should be classified as child pornography.

No, it's not. It's literally a photorealistic drawing based on a photo (and a dataset to make the generative model). No children have been abused to produce it. Laws work literally.

If the woman who’s photo is being used hasnt consented to this then it should be classified as sexual exploitation.

No, because the woman is not being literally sexually exploited. Her photo being used without consent is, I think, subject of some laws. There are no new fundamental legal entities involved.

Women and girls have faced degrees of this kind of sexual exploitation by men and boys since the latter half of the 20th century. But this is a severe escalation in that behavior. It should be illegal to do this and it should be prosecuted when and where it is found to occur.

I think I agree. But it's neither child pornography nor sexual exploitation and can't be equated to them.

There are already existing laws for such actions, similar to using a photo of the victim and a pornographic photo, paper, scissors, pencils and glue. Or, if you think the situation is radically different, there should be new punishable crimes introduced.

Otherwise it's like punishing everyone caught driving while drunk for non-premeditated murder. One is not the other.

You can make an installer like the one Freenet has. Maybe even a wrapper with a tray icon in Tcl/Tk or something like that.

I mean, 44net is a rather early thing, a subspace for packet radio part of it.

Unless general-purpose Internet services will be banned.

Have you noticed that laws about providing data on bad-bad criminals yadda-yadda implicitly ban everything not allowing to get that data?

And have you noticed that Russian bans of things that can't be filtered not only implicitly allow whitelist ban of protocols and services, but are also not very far from what EU and US lawmakers want?

In any situation, if what powerful guys are doing seems to promise good things for you, first consider the possibility that you don't understand what they are doing.