This whole article/blog post reads as “How dare this person follow the law. ;(”

I really don’t understand the pushback on this one person for submitting the change request. When it is the lawmaker that put this law into place that we should be criticizing. The post repeatedly uses how the contributer said that the change was “hilariously pointless and ineffective.” As some sort of gotcha as to why the merge should not have been accepted but does not explain why the maintainers should not follow the law other than “law bad”.

It also consistently calls out the various peoples’ places of work and experience as some sort of boogeyman for why they should not be allowed to contribute to open source. If these people were universally accepted to be bad actors in the community then they would not be accepted as reviewers for these projects. This just attacks their character to try to prove a point.

I am not sure on what interval they do but from what I have read online and from talking with someone I know who has one. They constantly phone home. Even when parked and turned off. This means that it will drain your battery and if you don’t drive for long enough (from what they said a week or two) then you can end up with a dead battery. Additionally, when driving, the device requires the driver to re-blow every 45-60 minutes. So the driver needs to pull over and test again otherwise their alarm will go off.

As far as what tampering prevention mechanisms they have I have no idea. I would assume they keep that as secret as possible.

The device doesn’t just phone home while driving. It does it constantly. It’s likely that any tampering would alert the vendor and by proxy the court.

Not sure that I would really agree that these are backdoor. Since disabling the vehicle remotely is kinda the express intention of this device. Just a consequence of how they designed them to not be circumvented by the operator.

Fuck Verizon for this exact reason. Never buy from them direct if you can help it.

You are more talking about how this debate came to be. My central argument is more about how the debate cannot end.

I am not sure how abstinence only being the only acceptable option is any better than it being the best option. If anything it just strengthens my argument by showing that the Pro-life side will not accept any other form of education. And the Pro-choice side will also not accept any other form of education. This topic is a nonsequiter for both sides.

Again being Pro-life does not necessarily mean that they will vote for dismantling social services.

I simply don’t understand why you insist on assuming that they are lying.

Demonize: to portray (someone or something) as evil or as worthy of contempt or blame.

Is that not what you are doing? You are blaming them for voting how they do.

Ultimately I think we have reached that 3rd situation. I have decided that nothing I say is going to change your mind on this and am choosing to walk away.

I can’t comment on the prenups as I have never even considered marriage.

I am not disagreeing with your opinion on device level age verification. I am interested in what you think we should do to protect kids online. There has been a lot of talk about this being the wrong way to do that but very little discussion on what other methods we could do.

Would you be opposed to a “this computer is used by a child” checkbox and just that true/false would be passed to apps?

Most of them are also owned by a single company. Match Group inc. Some of the more notable ones are:

• Her
• Hinge
• Match.com
• OkCupid
• Plenty of Fish
• Tinder

As well as most of the _ People Meet apps. Ie:

• Black people meet
• Democratic people meet
• Republican people meet
• Latino people meet
• etc

So it is no coincidence that these apps suck.

Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Match_Group

Anyone have a mirror link to the original petition? The official site is not working for me.

I don’t think that will happen given the strongly held beliefs each side has as well as the polarization in this country.

It also does not help that there are politicians and news organizations out there that are happy to throw more fuel on the fire, driving a wedge deeper between two groups.