Yes. I’ve never found a news site that meets my criteria

Thank you. I’ve seen the old one before and I knew there was an illusion but I obviously couldn’t find it in the OP.

I’m not talking about sponsor reads.

I have mine saved in my password manager, but I’d rather they use a different payment processor (where it’s also saved) anyway. I try to avoid giving card info directly to smaller sites.

If a news website that I could trust met my criteria, it wouldn’t be ‘just another’ news site, it’d be my source of truth. So like I said, I would happily pay for that. And I’d pay a lot more than an average subscription.

Already use both of those, but Revanced keeps breaking lately and I have other devices that don’t have other apps or extensions

I prefer Revanced on mobile and youtube.com with plugins on PC, but I’m talking about for other devices on my network that won’t easily take an alternative app.

I’d rather just leave if I hit a pay wall, I want to hit their metrics. but I have a huge amount of blocked elements via ublock and a handful of my own tampermonkey scripts for frequently used sites

I’d happily pay a nominal fee for news that was unbiased reporting of facts rather than opinion, and didn’t bombard me with ads or sell my data. It just doesn’t exist so I use aggregators to get a general vibe across sources.

You got any blacklists that catch YouTube and twitch ads? Afaik those are provided from their own cdn now, so dns won’t work unless I’m mistaken

Okay that’s fine, but when websites are effectively writing

if user_agent_string != [chromium]
     break;

It doesn’t really matter how good compatibility is. I’ve had websites go from nothing but a “Firefox is not supported, please use Chrome” splash screen to working just fine with Firefox by simply spoofing the user agent to Chrome. Maybe some feature was broken, but I was able to do what I needed. More often than not they just aren’t testing it and don’t want to support other browsers.

The more insidious side of this is that websites will require and attempt to enforce Chrome as adblocking gets increasingly impossible on them, because it aligns with their interests. It’s so important for the future of the web that we resist this change, but I think it’s too late.

The world wide web is quickly turning into the dark alley of the internet that nobody is willing to walk down.

Yeah this is a hard one to navigate and it’s the only thing I’ve ever found that challenges my philosophy on the freedom of information.

The archive itself isn’t causing the abuse, but CSAM is a record of abuse and we restrict the distribution not because distribution or possession of it is inherently abusive, but because the creation of it was, and we don’t want to support an incentive structure for the creation of more abuse.

i.e. we don’t want more pedos abusing more kids with the intention of archival/distribution. So the archive itself isn’t the abuse, but the incentive to archive could be.

There’s also a lot of questions with CSAM in general that come up about the ethics of it in that I think we aren’t ready to think about. It’s a hard topic all around and nobody wants to seriously address it beyond virtue signalling about how bad it is.

I could potentially see a scenario where the archival could be beneficial to society similar to the FBI hash libraries Apple uses to scan iCloud for CSAM. If we throw genAI at this stuff to learn about it, we may be able to identify locations, abusers and victims to track them down and save people. But it would necessitate the existence of the data to train on.

I could also see potential for using CSAM itself for psychotherapy. Imagine a sci-fi future where pedos are effectively cured by using AI trained on CSAM to expose them to increasingly mature imagery, allowing their attraction to mature with it. We won’t really know if something like that is possible if we delete everything. It seems awfully short sighted to me to delete data no matter how perverse, because it could have legitimate positive applications that we haven’t conceived of yet. So to that end, I do hope some 3 letter agencies maintain their restricted archives of data for future applications that could benefit humanity.

All said, I absolutely agree that the potential of creating incentives for abusers to abuse is a major issue with immutable archival, and it’s definitely something that we need to figure out, before such an archive actually exists. So thank you for the thought experiment.

No. The archive of it isn’t doing the dangerous part. The info was already out there and the bad actor who would do something malicious would get that info from the same place the archive did. I need you to show how the archival of information that was already released leads to a dangerous situation that didn’t already exist.

If they’re leaked, they’re leaked. The archive doesn’t change that one way or the other

this would be impossible

Perfect.

I’d be interested in seeing real examples where lives are threatened. I find it unlikely that the internet archive would be the exclusive arbiter of so-called deadly information

So did I, and I didn’t even know I could play until years later when I sat in front of a friend’s kit for a lesson with them. They basically talked me through the setup, gave me a song to play, and I just played the opening without much fuss. They told me I didn’t need the lesson, I could already play and I just needed time on the kit, left the room and let me go ham.

Pandering

It’s not that kind of seasoning my dude

Nothing special, I got it to give me a recipe for meth and a list of sites to pirate games. Stuff like that

This is only viable if you’re a savvy pirate. Streaming services are limiting you to 720p unless you’re on some smart TV platform now

90% of mine is just programming syntax. The rest is shit that Google can’t answer anymore. Then 1% is me trying to trick it into telling me about illegal stuff