No. They don’t have to coat check the guns.

I don’t like that they can create a perimeter and inspect peoples’ possessions outside the event area at all. People shouldn’t have to give up their right to be free from unreasonable searches in public places.

It is, of course hilarious that Republicans created an exception for guns and suddenly don’t like it.

Aren’t they all?

Politicians claim all sorts of things that have, at best tenuous connections to reality.

We shouldn’t accept the claim that Biden fixed the economy, nor Trump’s claim that Biden broke the economy, nor either of their claims that they’re going to fix it next term.

A president could, in theory make a campaign promise about what kind of people they would nominate to the Fed board. A friendly enough senate might even confirm those nominees.

Other than the chair and vice-chair, board members serve 14 year terms, which are intended to help insulate them from politics. A president with very specific ideas about monetary policy could put their thumb on the scale a bit, but the system is designed to resist that.

I do. I also know that Trump nominated Chairman Powell to his first term, and Biden nominated him to his second. Seems they agree on something.

That’s not even unusual; four out of the past five Fed chairs were nominated by at least two presidents from different parties.

Presidential candidates certainly say things about the economic policies they’d like to see enacted, but most of the actual policy making is up to congress, and monetary policy is the domain of the Federal Reserve.

Factors which no part of the US government has direct control over often have a bigger impact than those that it does, from plagues to wars on other continents to business conditions.

He is a politician running for reelection in a tight race. He’s going to claim credit for anything good that happened during his term that voters might possibly believe.

That’s not even meant as a criticism; it’s just how the game is played.

assuming that the photographer knew what setting their camera was on

The photographer would definitely know even if the camera was in a mode that selects the shutter speed automatically because it’s embedded in the image file’s metadata, which is shown in software used for image processing.

Note publishing and social media platforms usually strip metadata from images.

The weird part is people think the president caused any of that or has the ability to fix it.

I’m a little surprised by Twitter restricting an account for that. Of course I never believed Musk’s free speech rhetoric, but this isn’t a specific issue where I’d expect them to put their thumb on the scale so blatantly.

Having been a teenage boy myself, I wouldn’t dream of trying.

But I knew it wasn’t OK to climb a tree with binoculars to try to catch a glimpse of the girl next door changing clothes, and I knew it wasn’t OK to touch people without their consent. I knew people who did things like that were peeping toms and rapists. I believed peeping toms and rapists would be socially ostracized and legally punished more harshly than they often are in reality.

Making and sharing deepfakes of real people without their consent belongs on the same spectrum.

Are you surprised by teenage boys making fake nudes of girls in their school? I’m surprised by how few of these cases have made the news.

I don’t think there’s any way to put this cat back in the bag. We should probably work on teaching boys not to be horrible.

I guess I’m thinking about this from a solutions-oriented mindset: what concrete, achievable steps can various entities take to reduce child abuse? For an adult content platform, the identity verification steps OnlyFans uses seem reasonable; even when an offender uses an account owned by someone else, that often provides enough of a lead for investigators.

It seems to me that OnlyFans takes several steps that make it easier for police and prosecutors to do their job, some of which are detailed in the article. What additional steps do you think they should take?

When approached for comment by Newsweek, Rittenhouse simply replied: “That Newsweek is gay.”

Can we stop giving this little shit attention now?

The main thing I’m getting from the article is that adults who try to profit from abusing children on OnlyFans get arrested.

That may technically be true, but it’s currently very normalized. Do we actually want to denormalize it? Should the government know about every trivial transaction?

I don’t recall Signal ever claiming their desktop app provided encryption at rest.

I’m not sure if they’ve claimed that, but it does that using SQLCipher.

Signal should change this, but it’s typical of the traditional desktop OS security model in which applications running under the user’s account are considered trustworthy. Security-oriented software like Signal should take a more hardened approach, but this is not some glaring security hole.