I imagine a solution could be the same one from Web 1.0: webrings. Find one site on one and you’ve found a lot more interesting, curated ones as well.

Someone is very mad all their posts kept getting naughty notes!

That was simply because he was a pervert! He would never spy on behalf of the state.

That’s crazy!

My stupid is 100% organic. Can’t have the AI make you dumber if you don’t use it.

People will say it doesn’t make a difference, but it apparently made enough of a difference that they still can’t find the guy that was putting pipe bombs around the US capitol. I think at least a portion of the “they can still identify you under your mask with computers” claims are based on very niche situations (high quality footage of someone wearing a thin, fabric mask) and exaggeration or allowing people to incorrectly draw their own conclusions.

Yeah, I would expect a printer I paid 6k for to not have malware!

That’s possible, but they aren’t really typical office printers either, it’s for specialized art printing. Again it’s definitely bad, this just isn’t typical office equipment.

Also it’s for a UV printer, not an inkjet or laser printer, with the cheapest option on their website being $1900 and the average being around $6000. So, not a regular printer you would buy off the shelf. It’s still bad of course, but only so many people even could be impacted by it.

It comes across like you feel we can’t protect gay/minority children from being exploited by huge corporations online because it would be homophobic to protect gay kids from psychological manipulation.

This is some weird ass fanfic you are writing about me for asking how the researchers came to their conclusions about LGBT ads, specifically, being judged to be inappropriate. I’m not engaging with this anymore.

You’re classifying all of these as malicious by virtue of being ads, which the researchers obviously didn’t. Take that up with them.

I question the idea that the reason these were classified as inappropriate was because of sexual pop ups. If that was the case than many innocuous sites with crappy ad practices would have also made it onto the list.

Knowing that queer people exist and that you could be queer isn’t “sexual advertisement,” by the way. Which is why I wanted to know more about how the researchers came to the conclusion that these particular ads were inappropriate.

Absolutely true! If the quiz contents were inappropriate in some way beyond like… acknowledging LGBT people and depression exists, I would like to hear about that part.

Adding an “are you gay?” quiz to the list of inappropriate ads shown to children immediately makes me question the researcher biases and methodology. Unless those have gotten WAY spicier since I was a kid, I remember passing so many quizzes like that around with my friends at that age.

How many ads related to heterosexuality were classified as appropriate? How does that compare to their classification of LGBT ads?

I was talking about the historical presence in sci fi and pop culture of fear of mind reading machines in general, as opposed to this specific one. But I mean, do you think cities are spending tens of thousands of dollars because they don’t think it works like that? They at least believe they can convince people that it reads minds.

It doesn’t read your mind. It gives output, that’s not the same thing as mind reading any more than the polygraph was lie detection. The real threat was and always has been cops and the state.

The nonsense system they’re talking about in the OP article that’s supposed to read your mind and tell whether or not you’ve experienced taking part in the crime they’re describing when they question you.

What’s a polygraph? They hook up a bunch of sensors to you to check your breathing rate, pulse, how much you’re sweating, etc and claim to be able to read from the output whether or not you’re lying. They can’t, and it’s been inadmissible as evidence in court in the US (and AFAIK most other places) for decades.

We were afraid of mind reading tech when we should have been afraid of polygraph 2.0: pseudoscience garbage used to manufacture evidence for the state.

Get a cane and you can really have fun. People will do the “I’m not moving anywhere” routine down the sidewalk right up until you get close enough for it to click that they’re about to body slam a disabled person. 10% still smack into you, but the 90% that dance out of the way are amusing.

I just want to tell you both good luck. We’re all counting on you.