prosody-Gabe Vereable Context

I understand, like an office. Had to learn, not Yahoo/AIM/IRC. I am normally quiet, is okay. StackExchange and Matrix seem to be first completely open/archivable/public chats, mainly impressed by that, as a reader. (For the record, if that's what you were curious, prosody is partly becase of LibPurple/Pidgin, but the poetry and linguistic meanings sometimes work. I replaced my birthname "Gabriel" (religious) with "Prosody" (computigious) which both have sound/language meanings. I prefer P>G.)

@tripleee I always register for fancy web tools (even if I do not know what I will do w/ code, I just want to log-in. Just a curious fan, I'm not API-ready. :), i did not realize the robot would identify me by name in the chat room after. (Beforehand, I muted said robot, so I did not notice, then I happened to read your mention.) Maybe I should go back to being quiet. O:) Was the robot talking to me or am I being homoglyphed? Then again, you could be talking about "prosody.im/libpurple/pidgin".

Hmm.

What also is difficult to make sense of, is why do we drive cars and always carry ID/insurance information, but not for computer vehicles?

@bertieb That does not make sense, I thought the point of "911" versus "999" is that you need to use your brain to hit the keys, you can not accidentally call by hitting keys from across the keypad?

Ack, I mean Google Fi. Which feels like a fiberoptic line. Count on me to call Fi as Fiber. :/ I guess the humor is that when I tried to pay for Verizon FIOS, I got DSL.

partial serious as well. :∫ I am paying way too much for Google Fiber for a hotspot I do not require often (but helps greatly in a crunch, worth going bankrupt for a month sometimes), which beats any WIFI connection signal quality I can afford.

@Michael Arg, hm. I thought th whole time about how the previous line "depends on arch[i]tecture, the weather, the phase of the moon...." was referring to the FAA airport clearance safety standards for 5G. I mean not penetrating aircraft radar, has very similar language. I swear I know the frequencies for Wifi might sound the same but are not equivalent, but I swear someone else would read what I read too. =) Too much tangent for a tech chat, or not enough tangent to scatter the radio signal? :)

7G will do what 3/4/5G does and what 6G does, but at the same time, coming in 2027.

@JourneymanGeek Castle on a Computer would be good. (Talking to themself, typing, making their smiley facial expressions, squinting. Changing the angle of their head. Squinting at another angle. Opening and cloing their eyes to show they're thinking, then squinting, again. I am willing to bet they're above-average for squint usage, excellent for a computer show. Wonder what facial recognition software would think.? Already part of their lexicon, if I might say from watching, really good squinting.)

chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/151 is better integration (profiles, search, individual message permalinks) than view.matrix.org/room/!OGEhHVWSdvArJzumhm:matrix.org currently. <3 Good problem to be bothered by, but small team (@matthew:matrix.org wrote "E_NEED_MORE_PEOPLE" in the pub room, good variable usage :), takes time. Starting a specification from scratch (where is gov funding, I want Presidents on secure PUBLIC chat too), that must annoy the CEO-Dev Matthew deeply.

I mean I do not count weird Discord and FB Group Chats (and we all know Quora mod chat logs are a pandoras box), which, good luck proving that... citing a chat is special to specify. Only Matrix and StackExchange give public archivable transcripts with timestamps for proof, that is newsworthy?

Speaking of "People at SE don't use SE" being memeworthy, and probably nearly part of C... am I correct that Matrix.org's crew is the only major (YCombinator level) attempt at the primary employees/programmers writing by _chat_ openly/publicly nearly from their beginning in ~2014? I mean you can tell Stacks staff are not here and neither is @zuck in a public chat room 24/7/365, is Matrix.org the first 24/7/365 public chat office room, with the CEO who writes the blog in main room active?:∫

Well I think "combating-abuse-in-matrix-without-backdoors" talks about politcs/law better than security...

matrix.org/blog/2020/10/19/…, and it adds a conversation about the deep politics of Data Law too.

@nobody Most people/officers. Except for if addressing ppl online 24/7/365, if that's the only way of operating on "us". What can Law do, if "we" are not going to offline groups. Then logic would follow that having an app for that type of law enforcement could be justified as easy. And that's just "hacking", if it's not "official hacking law/policy". Now Hacking = Interrupters 2.0 (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Interrupters), far from rare.

Well, throwing (WIFI packets), for the human analogy.

Shooting (packet stuffing), from a physics perspective. :P

Human body is a weapon, so is your WIFI router.

Wow, Marriot was "hacking". Figures, it's free.

@JourneymanGeek Well, agreed, persay "hacking" is a fine line where zero-day exploits are accomplished by an ISP (Internet Service Provider) agreement that does the same "hack".

@nobody "Rare"? Law is too quiet about Official Hacking Weapons. If society asks for better surveillance, when will law enforcement standardize/open that job? Before we know it, now we have superempowered officers, hacking with tools that they're barely aware of their actual function, now able to slow your internet connection with an easy button, like a gun trigger, but not showing blood spatter or fingerprints for tracing. What do we do when the tools come before the laws to enforce them?

@nobody Sometimes manpower is not the issue, time is not the issue, and some people have all day long. If only we had logs for voyeur law enforcement. Call E_BORED_INFORMANT / E_BORED_NEIGHBORHOOD_WATCH` a determined attacker too?

@ChocolateOverflow Same "vanilla"/"white hat" question would be (to your "black hat" question), canna intertransnational (British-American Tobacco too?) corp give poisonous/expired products (like VUSE Vapor, an opaque box, which does not give expiration dates), and be liable? If the FDA is busy blaming adverts, in terms of regulatory priorities, laws not legislating the "USP Grade" food ingredients in nicotine products. Are the individual company employees liable, or is just the entity to blame?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hash_function / en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hex, following the manners of multiple lines, with links as separate line, which is noisy but, netiquette. I guess it formalizes face-to-face gestures with typing gestures.

chat user id page FOR "hash"/"hex", I mean. [Why diff id, should be same id?]

Google+ died on 2018.10.08, and I'd argue for a legal autopsy for the data.

The deep irony is Quora still shows almost all my data publicly even if moderated, while StackExchange hides from "View" and gets S.E., I bet, better Google PageRank SEO than Quora.

If time was spent analyzing the full question inputs publicly, instead of deleting posts for grammar reasons and just not getting "Views" for Google SEO Legal Reasons... like not being profit potential, as if a legal reason. We could have a meta-nofollow ref on profiles, so officially Google would not judge the rest of the site for your moms' questions...

I mean I think you would have to be drunk to delete Google+, for a legal example. As a legal example. With many legal examples on Google+. (My theory is the issue was Google did not want to moderate, would have required Values. Google employees were just as suspect.)

Legal Drunk History, would be a nice addition to the series imdb.com/title/tt1503278 /en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drunk_History which has a part or two about who wrote the Law, while thinking very, um, clearly. How many stories (legal stories... and legal writing) are not being told in that way. :∫ The influence of StackExchange of law is not exactly easy for the NYT to write about either, would sound pathetic now 20 years late like "Who was thinking...?".

Influence under Law, and Law Enforcement under the influence, of SEO Laws, for example. Otherwise my questions fly enough, just here there seem to be problems.I mean the degree of attention would be codable into a Legal Framework, as special attention not at any other questions. In the Law section it could be a unique conversation, because here people know the Law too, how is that applied, are we going to code for Law?

Essentially I wonder now, if you know, the Legal section has appropriated rules not written, about how a StackExchange question forms and gets votes. That's a question that can get votes, but puts Stack in the bullseye of Google, and SE relies on Google, and lives (and breathes...) for Google SEO "Laws". We all know SE does not make money, it makes influence.

That lawyer/moderator quippled (pardon my British) the words "Nice try." I do not rem their name, and it does not show in searches. A wiretap would not even find this data. It requires thinking about the data available completely, in terminology even some lawyers do not even understand. To put it lightly.

Is it Law or a ProbofConsc, that I can not find "google+" law is:deleted, my question about Google+ being deleted or recoverable data. I can not read my own profile. I am not banned, I am not in trouble, but only the superadmins can read my profile. myactivity.google.com/myactivity?&q=stackexchange%20google does not have it, because My Activity from GOogle does not rememember.

@FaheemMitha Definitely. I am definitely. MS Office vs. OpenOffice, well OO is $Free.

US law requiring ID checks for (required global variables? Same technology as a keyfog would enable proving who sent that sh.... I do not mind testifying, who exactly is fighting ID checks according to he Law?) general encounters = LAW_C_ID_CHECK?

*Whiff of, well, solving every problem with legal-based OS Operating System requirements would break a lot of profit models. Somehow we got to making fun of Temple OS in tones, and electric cars with DUI checks, before C_ID_CHECK.

Temple OS ID adds LAW at the byte code level.

LAW_C_ID_CHECK breaks many other functions, I am aware the base LAW function would need to be changed.

We could in 100 days require every EMT emitting electronic device to have an ID check by law, and I would approve, but that would mean profit issues.

My prototype for Temple OS ID (I added ID, like "Iidentification, please"), my prototype operating system (OS) distribution, includes an ID check.

Lord if YCombinator had to talk about Windows and Mac like Temple OS with the same cryptological (and backed by C references) hint vectors.

Lord YCombinator ie excellent at talking about Temple OS with a whiff or, well,...

I mean hearings are fun, C is boring, but C works.