This has become a concern for the Arch Linux wiki which now makes you pass a proof-of-work challenge to read it. Which my anti-fingerprinting browser fails at every time. Putting a burden on human readers that will be only a minor temporary annoyance for the bots. Think about it, the T in CAPTCHA stands for "Turing". What is the design goal of AI? To create machines that can pass a Turing test.
I fear the end state of this game is the death of the anonymous internet.
The point of (correctly done) proof-of-work is not to require Turing-level impersonation. It is to create a cost to a trawler that is going to hit thousands or more of your pages, and almost no cost to a human user.
Problem is, as you've discovered, it can have the cost that anti-fingerprinting browsers can't do the required work.
These are AI bots. Computational capacity is not a limiting factor. I'd argue that my desktop consumer PC is less capable of efficiently solving a PoW than a multi-GPU cluster in a data center.
Even if, as you say, crawlers will hit the PoW thousands of times more, the only way to make it a barrier is if the cost is higher than the profit to be gained. Otherwise it's merely an expense to be passed on to the customer.
Untested hypothesis, but I would expect the wider spacing between tracks in CMR makes it more resilient against random bit flips. I'm not aware of any experiments to prove this and it may be worth doing. If the HD manufacture can convince us that SMR is just as reliable for archival storage it would help them sell those drives since right now lots of people are avoiding SMR due to poor performance and the infamy of the bait-and-switch that happened a few years back.
Social media has bred a generation who believe that value comes from being the loudest voice in the room. One-upmanship is one of the sure ways to make your voice stand out.
Ah yes that drives me crazy too. Everything is a micro battle to win.
I had this issue with some junior colleagues. I had to point out that it's disrupting and actually quite tiring being interrupted all the time with minor corrections, often wrong or so unbelievably minor. One thought he could demand sources for everything I said no matter the stakes. They ignored context, nuance, caveats etc and just listened to the part they could attempt to easily refute. God I'm exhausted just recounting it
> But then it says people continued to eat pork in the area. Why?
Because it was cheaper. The article mentions how much easier it is to raise pigs than sheep or cattle. It also touches on the Isrealites being primarily sheep farmers and the Philistines raised pigs. Which is why I think the prohibition was a form of protectionism. It forces people to buy from Hebrew farms instead of the foreign pork.
The whole point of their foray into adtech was to figure out a privacy-preserving way to do it that doesn't involve wholesale selling people's browsing history.
How is that fundamentally different than what Google's done with chrome and the topics API? If you don't trust Google's solution, why would you trust Mozilla's?
Send picture to multiple accounts, perhaps on different services, the links that are cached at the same data center can be more confidently believed to be related.
Back then, Netflix was using the threat of net neutrality regulation as a bargaining chip in their fight with Comcast/Cox. Once they reached an agreement on transit fees the astroturfing stopped. Since then it's only arisen as an wedge issue for politicians to fundraise over. We won't hear about it again until the midterm elections.
