I think that may be a literary reference.

“How Much Land Does a Man Need?” is an 1886 short story by Leo Tolstoy about a greedy man.

None of these detectors can work. It’s just snake oil for technophobes.

Understand what “positive predictive value” means to see that. Though, in this case, I doubt that even the true rates can be known or that they remain constant over time.

1. The chart shows weeks, not months.
2. It shows scheduled arrivals of vessels in LA. It may not be safe to equate that to freight arriving in the US.

I had a look into the Temu and Aliexpress subreddits: Funeral mood.

DHL suspends high value US deliveries over tariffs

The negative number means that far fewer ships are arriving in LA than at the same time last year.

Yes, and then, or rather now, incoming shipping collapses.

Yes. It goes from much higher than last year to much lower.

You seem to be misreading that.

How you figure? Trump will just fold?

Huh. Haven’t actually seen panic on Lemmy. I only see it on social media accounts of economists and logistics people.

Maybe. I have no 6-year-olds around to ask. I have noticed that people often have misconceptions that I can’t even fathom because I have grown up in a completely different tech environment. For me, it has not worked to make assumptions.

The average person probably only knows the functioning of the DNS and one or two email apps. And quartz, of course.

Whenever anything is “federated” the easiest comparison is email.

Yes, but how many people know how email works? More to the point, how many people, who aren’t looking for the answer on GitHub, know?

How do you prevent people from selling access to children by calling the age verification service for them?

The high volume of requests would be detected pretty quickly. The verification service would not know what sites you visit, but it would know that you are making requests.

To succeed, that would need a fairly large number of stolen or fake identities. There’s really no point when you can just sell adult products, including pirated media, directly.

• You connect to an age-gated site.

• Your browser receives an age verification request that does not contain information about the site.

It would contain the time, a random number, and the query: Is user over 18/16/14/whatever?

• Your browser sends the request to a government-licensed service.

You identify yourself to that service in some way. The service could also be a program on your own device that uses a chip on your ID-card. If the service confirms the age, it digitally signs the request.

• Your browser returns the signed request to the age-gated site.

The site checks if the signature is valid and done. There’s never any connection between the age verification service and the site. If the request is more than a few seconds old, then it will be rejected to prevent sharing.

Of course, this assumes that sites will cooperate and implement such schemes at their own expense. Obviously(?) that will only be done by the larger sites, so it will be quite pointless. I don’t know why that is not a consideration. Understanding that doesn’t actually require any deep technical knowledge. But that’s typical for EU tech regulation.

Having to proof adultness cannot be done without creating a link between the identify of the adult and the account at the service.

It can be done.

Do you really have no other complaints?

The point of an age verification system is to make sure that certain classes of people cannot access certain categories of information.

Is there really no problem there?

a prefrontal cortex, the administrative center of the brain and generally host to human consciousness.

That’s an interesting take. The prefrontal cortex in humans is proportionately larger than in other mammals. Is it implied that animals are not conscious on account of this difference?

If so, what about people who never develop an identifiable prefrontal cortex? I guess, we could assume that a sufficient cortex is still there, though not identifiable. But what about people who suffer extensive damage to that part of the brain. Can one lose consciousness without, as it were, losing consciousness (ie becoming comatose in some way)?

a dedicated module for consciousness would bridge the gap

What functions would such a module need to perform? What tests would verify that the module works correctly and actually provides consciousness to the system?

In fairness, the word “conscious” has a range of meanings. For some, it is synonymous with certain religious ideas. They would be alarmed by the “heresy”. For others, it is synonymous to claiming that some entity is entitled to the same fundamental rights as a human being. Those would be quite alarmed by the social implications. Few people use the term in a strictly empiricist sense.