It’s hard to control which Information other people get in a system where many servers share information like posts and comments. Think of it as throwing your post on a public wall. Everyone that walks by will be able to see it.

It’s (relatively) easy to control what information you want to see. Or at least information from which sources you want to see, or not see.

Something something causality, fate is a spiral, something

Nah, tail recursion optimization can just reuse the same stack frame again and again. It’s going to loop until it wraps around what ever integer width it has and then tells you if the biggest integer is even or odd. Or, if it’s nice, it’s going to complain about the wrap around

Pretty much every messenger is built around a central server. Tracing connections to that server is not without hassle but doable with government resources. Now, a Briar-Style P2P Network could work but that has it’s own problems. Central servers are popular for a reason.

how would they prevent me using a chat app they can’t look into?

I dont think they can, unless they get android and iOS to do this os wide. The bigger problem is: will the public care enough to use such a messenger? Will they do it when it becomes illegal to use such a messenger? If not, mass surveillance is inevitable and those sidestepping it for important privacy reasons are easily detectable making them easy targets.

At least one timetravel nerd just got an aneurysm about how that would break all sorts of things

so a male owl would probably not care about a females wingspan, much like in humans 👀

Wait, you people don’t care about your partners wingspan?

i_guess_meme.png

I mean even in corpo internet lingo where obscenity is censored… Panicked? Is panicked now negative enough of a word to deserve censorship? It’s a crazy web out there

Why the fuck would you censor “panicked”?

I mean it could have impact on the real world, the same as seriously discussing “can we still do algebra with the imaginary result of taking the root of -1”. Apparently that was purely theoretical nonsense until we noticed that that allows us to do some very cool stuff in the real world.

If everyone in the hotel starts rebuilding their room, is it still the same hotel and does it still have the same capacity to hold guests?

Apparently the important question is: how many ships of Theseus did we accidentally create?

Is it pointless to consider and debate the characteristics of “what makes a person to be the same person”? You seem to say, as long as it’s the current lump of biomass has been formed by a past lump of biomass, it’s the same person. Assume I cloned a person, is that the same person? Does a person become a different person when they replace a lot of organs? Or is it only the brain that is important?

Also: don’t diminish people having fun over theoretical debates by calling them insane. Let people have fun.

Lgbtqia+ isn’t any more arbitrary than lgbt if you take the 5 minutes to google what it means.

Honestly, using queer is probably better than lgbt because that includes the Asexuals and Intersex people, which is what the a and i are representing.

The terms are getting more and more complicated because we finally allowed people to not be conformant with the norms. So we are in the process of discovering new identities that shouldn’t be unrepresented over the years, which obviously makes talking about this more complex but also allows us to be more accurate.

I mean you’re basically arguing for parental control, it is just done by google.

Did boss baby raise fears in parents that they might have to explain procreation? If no, then two mothers shouldn’t.

And just telling a kid that every constellation of parents are possible, it’s just that some matchups are more common than others doesn’t seem like daunting task.

Wouldn’t this be reflected in the pyramid I posted above?

Afaict migration helps to stabilize the ratio, but is seemingly not enough improve it. To do that we would need to have more migration than we currently do.

Hm. That doesn’t seem to match this graphic. I heard that on the last “Lage der Nation” Podcast they did. I’ll see if I can find the source the references there

Edit: found a german source here: https://www.bpb.de/themen/soziale-lage/demografischer-wandel/196643/auswirkungen-des-demografischen-wandels-auf-die-sozialsysteme/

Weil die Geburtenquote hierzulande aber gut vier Jahrzehnte bei rund 1,4 Geburten pro Frau stagnierte, ist inzwischen jede Generation ein Drittel kleiner als noch ihre Elterngeneration.

This says every generation is about 33% smaller than the one before it, which would make the ratio stay pretty unbalanced

However the ration will start to improve in a decade or so

I don’t think that’s true. Each generation after the boomers has been smaller by about the same factor meaning the ratio between working age and non-working age will stay mostly the same