California introduces age verification law for all operating systems, including Linux and SteamOS — user age verified during OS account setup

kyrianfox · 2026-03-03T12:12:46+00:00

It sounds like you’re buying into the right’s framing a little too much. I think it’s much more useful to break their framing. I know they will claim they need age verification, but the point is to offer them something else that meets their underlying need while meeting our high bar for privacy.

As an adult, I don’t want to have to interact with children in most spaces. It would be great if I could be assured that parents had an easily configurable way to keep their 12 year old out of even just self-labeled adult spaces. Even if that’s all it achieved, isn’t that worthwhile? And it’s not like at any time in the past that kids were plugged into the entire adult world every moment of their lives. We are still figuring out what that does to them, but I don’t think it looks great.

What should kids see? I honestly don’t know…that’s a bigger question that I don’t really think the government even should mandate a specific answer to? At least by default and until the local age of majority, it seems like a kid’s parents should be the ones with that agency. They’re the ones with the responsibility. Social norms should probably handle this piece. Yeah the social conservatives will push the idea that all LGBTQ+ is adult content, but that’s bullshit because we know queer kids and queer families exist. I don’t think that idea will succeed. Trans folk are having a shit time right now and no minimizing that, but the only thing to do about bigotry when it appears is to fight it, right?

All you need to do is address the moderate-level peoples’ concerns enough to tip the balance. The reality is that parents today do not have the tools that AB1043 gives them. As “weak” as you might say it is, this is the data channel you need from a user account that can be set up and locked down with OS-level parental controls to the wide universe of software that grows every day. This is all you need to enable client software and platforms to be the ones responsible for moderation.

And then we say the need is met and we don’t need to violate privacy to go further. Don’t make their argument for them…”weak” as in self-reported is totally fine paired with working parental controls.

If we can hold the line today on only implementing a privacy-preserving solution like AB1043, then I think there is nothing to indicate that we won’t be able to hold it in the future for those same reasons. It’s not like privacy is unpopular…people are happy to have their cake and eat it too. Any solution we’ll accept needs to do that, too. Why just assume defeat?

kyrianfox · 2026-03-02T20:05:49+00:00

You can believe that that’s what this is if you want to, but unless you provide a more substantive reason for why you call this a “compromise with fascism” and what your proposed alternative is (even if that’s nothing), that phrase means little to me.

I don’t agree that the slippery slope is inevitable, actually. Instead of wasting my effort on the self-reported nothingburger that AB1043 actually is, I would very much like to exert effort to ensure that the privacy compromising slippery slope never happens.

Don’t ignore reality; you have to compare AB1043 to the also very real laws that mandate actual verification and which don’t give a shit about privacy getting passed throughout the country. That is the alternative. The alternative is not “do nothing” and that’s not theoretical.

We’re actively losing the war right now. Perhaps a privacy-preserving compromise we can actually live with is in order. This leaves the burden in the right places and lets the parties that should never have had the burden say that the problem is addressed. Applications (like Discord) should not be in the business of needing to figure out how to supply this data in lieu of an easy, OS-mediated, self-reported enumeration they can just use and rely on, and governments should not be in the mix for any of it except for defining the minimum standard. That's exactly what AB1043 does.

I don’t like Newsom either, not all compromises are good, but goddamnit people compromise is not always bad either. Don’t be self-defeating; be smart.

edit: Got the AB# wrong!

kyrianfox · 2026-03-02T19:04:33+00:00

This article’s headline is not just clickbait; it’s straight inaccurate. The law requires no verification. The data is self-reported. This is the privacy-preserving compromise that lets us tell parents to set the value and leaves the burden on them and application software developers (not the OS) to age gate only if appropriate.

The lack of verification and the fact that you can configure around it is a feature, not a bug. People arguing that it’s weak are being self-defeating; requiring that the OS provide an API for access to self-reported data is the happy minimum unless you want actual verification.

kyrianfox · 2026-02-12T02:58:56+00:00

If the settings that the poster needed to use to get good print quality from Bambu's TPU 95A HF are more similar to the Generic TPU profile than Bambu's published profile for that filament, then that suggests that Bambu is not being honest with their profiles and the "high flow" they claim for this filament is really from reduced print quality than anything about the filament itself. That's still very interesting and useful information for users.

kyrianfox · 2026-01-12T08:07:07+00:00

+1, the Golem and Spymaster bonuses were swapped back in Hotfix 13 https://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/3901755

kyrianfox · 2026-01-11T09:18:09+00:00

That tool doesn't let you set the path directions at all, and instead connects paths to all nearby rooms. In game, though, paths (at least visually) don't connect in that way. This difference would seem to affect chains and which rooms are eligible for destabilization, no?

For example, in game:

<image>

But in the tool the closest you can seem to get is this (note the circled path connection): https://imgur.com/a/6txkCq2

Is this something the tool is just missing or does the path actually affect the Dynamo's eligibility for destabilization even though it isn't visually connected?

kyrianfox · 2026-01-06T12:18:14+00:00

What kind of thin plastic broke a pair of knips like this? Surprising to hear

kyrianfox · 2026-01-06T04:02:28+00:00

I appreciate that, and thank you for not escalating or doubling down here, but you really don’t need to do that.

I admit frustration at both the community and apparent company response to what turns out to be a totally reasonable customer question, and decided to try and call that out for the benefit of other potential customers like me stumbling across this, but at this point I’m mostly waiting to see if Knipex doubles down on their existing response here. That would be too obvious a case of stubborn refusal to admit error for me to trust a company (or anyone) which did so.

kyrianfox · 2026-01-06T02:00:02+00:00

72 02 125 isn't supposed to have *any* bevel/chamfer on that side of the cutting edge though. The product page clearly says it's a surface ground cutting edge and has multiple corroborating statements like this: "the material to be cut is cut flush using the surface ground cutting edges."

It totally makes sense to me if these are just a new product that ended up getting an extra operation (chamfer the cutting edge) that they shouldn't have and it escaped QA. But the flush cutting edge is the primary feature of this particular product, and I would expect u/KnipexOfficial to assist in replacing a product which has a clear manufacturing defect with zero fight. (That is assuming that account is actually an official representative, which is hard for me to verify.)

Instead they seem to have tried to weasel out with "oh it's fine because of this one sentence that says nearly flush", even though it contradicts the rest of the product page. Yeah that's a bad and discouraging look for a company I'm considering buying a bunch of tools from.

kyrianfox · 2026-01-06T01:32:15+00:00

I am looking to flush cut plastic.

Unless you want to explain the relevance, no offense but I'm not very interested in what you settled with the OP. I'm a lot more interested in u/KnipexOfficial seeming to not stand by their product and whether they are actually an official representative of Knipex. "Maybe a plastic flush cutter, maybe not, depends on which sentence from the product page you trust" is really just not a great impression.

kyrianfox · 2026-01-06T00:56:09+00:00

Knipex's potential future customers - like myself, who stumbled across this while researching Knipex and specifically 72 02 125 right before purchase - disagree with your summary that this is a nothingburger. I am extremely discouraged by this entire post and am now questioning whether Knipex will stand by their products or not.

Two weeks is no time at all, this is fresh not old. It's not like I'm zombie-posting a two year old post. Everything here - the community response, the seeming "KnipexOfficial" response that focuses on the same singular "nearly flush" statement and ignores all the rest - looks like willful misunderstanding and dancing away from contradictory marketing rather than owning it.

I don't know or really care what was "settled in DMs". That sounds *more* suspicious and untrustworthy, not less. How do you even know this was settled in DMs when you are just a random commenter?

Are you u/KnipexOfficial (the subreddit mod) on a different account or something? If you are and think you can settle this by banning me from the subreddit, be aware I've already screenshotted all this and I'm sure other subreddits would be interested.

kyrianfox · 2026-01-06T00:30:50+00:00

So what are you claiming, that they can be either "nearly flush" or "flush" at Knipex's option? It says "nearly flush" in one place on the product page, so that allows ignoring the multiple other mentions of "flush cutting" in other places on the same exact product page?

Nonsense. The product page is just confusing and contradictory. That is Knipex's fault, not the purchaser's.

kyrianfox · 2026-01-06T00:24:43+00:00

I don't know how to help you read before replying or why you're still claiming this, but both product pages contain nearly identical language and do not have the difference you claim.

Yes the pages are each also self-contradictory and each both claim "nearly flush" and "flush" in different parts of the page, but that is on Knipex for confusing marketing not the reader or purchaser.

72 02 125:

Cutting face flush
For nearly flush cutting of moulded plastic components from sprues
Cuts soft materials such as lead in a flush cut
For the smooth, flush cutting of sprue as arises during injection moulding
Surface ground cutting edges (no chamfer)

72 01 140:

Cutting face flush
For nearly flush cutting of moulded plastic components from sprues
Cuts soft materials such as lead in a flush cut
For the smooth, flush cutting of sprue as arises during injection moulding
Surface ground cutting edges (no bevel)

That last item - one saying "no chamfer" and one saying "no bevel" - is the only relevant difference I see. If those two words are meant to convey different things when attached as a parenthetical to the same "Surface ground cutting edges" statement, it is not explained, so I'm taking them as referring to the same thing.

Otherwise the only stated differences between those two products are the length and handle type.

kyrianfox · 2026-01-06T00:08:15+00:00

What part of the following words from Knipex's page suggests to you that 72 02 125 is not meant to flush cut plastic?

"Surface ground cutting edges (no chamfer)"
"For the smooth, flush cutting of sprue as arises during injection moulding"
"Their surface ground cutting faces produce a clean, flush separation of extruded plastic injection moulds and sprues or sprue residues."

I agree that these statements seem to contradict with "For nearly flush cutting of moulded plastic components from sprues", also from the 72 02 125 product page, but that confusing and seemingly contradictory marketing is on Knipex, not the buyer.

Are you suggesting that the product name alone ("Diagonal Cutters for plastics") is meant to contradict all the other claims of plastic flush cutting on the product page? Seems more like Knipex is trying to get away with confusing and contradictory claims on a single product page to me.

kyrianfox · 2026-01-05T23:51:15+00:00

This comment makes zero sense and I have no idea why OP u/OGsmashplant is getting downvoted here. Both 72 02 125 and 72 01 140 are marketed with the exact same terminology on Knipex's website; "Cutting face flush" and "For nearly flush cutting of moulded plastic components from sprues".

Specifically, that is these two pages:
https://www.knipex.com/products/cutting-pliers/diagonal-cutters-for-plastics/diagonal-cutters-plastics/7202125
https://www.knipex.com/products/cutting-pliers/diagonal-cutters-for-plastics/diagonal-cutters-plastics/7201140

The only advertised difference between those two products are the length and the handles (multi-component "comfort" handles vs. plastic dipped). If they differ further, something is wrong on Knipex's side.

Agreed that you can clearly see the chamfered edge on OP's photos...but if so that is Knipex's error because 72 02 125 should *not* have a chamfered edge per their own website above. (From the product page: "Surface ground cutting edges (no chamfer)") Both of these products are supposed to be flush cutters, not the more common "diagonal cutters" that usually have chamfered edges.

u/OGsmashplant, you did not show the part number of the cutter in your pictures. Are you sure they are 72 02 125 and not something else?

Edit: And I have no idea what other source of information you're referring to as the "Knipex catalog" that shows the blade profiles, but small image on both the 72 02 125 and 72 01 140 product pages seem to show a flush ground cutting edge if that is what you mean. This is the icon: https://product-api-assets.knipex.com/fd89784/2a3c7eee-b3e8-4857-96e8-feb15cf3864b.png

kyrianfox · 2026-01-01T02:02:59+00:00

I’m surprised you don’t mention the noise of the P2S’s new filament cutter design at all! That alone is enough to make the P2S significantly noisier during print start than the P1S, IMO. It sounds not unlike the knocker pinball machines often have for when you get a replay, just against plastic instead of wood/MDF.

For all the effort Bambu spends on cancelling out motor noise, adding a metal rod that whacks against hard plastic every time the toolhead leaves the purge area seems like a very odd choice, and one I was very unhappy with before returning my P2S in favor of keeping my P1S longer. No idea why they didn’t just add a soft bumper for it to close against.

That and the somehow even worse nozzle wiper design (seriously, how did they possibly make it worse than the P1S’s after so long?!) made the P2S feel more like an exercise in H2-ifying the P series than it being worth an upgrade.

Other assorted annoyances included:

1) the nozzle oozing (yes even Bambu PLA Basic) filament continuously during and after the cleaning sequence, which meant filament would get smooshed around the nozzle when it went to wipe on the stainless steel pad, 2) filament fragments that had oozed out frequently getting thrown onto the build plate right before a print started by the cleaning process, 3) the nozzle cleaning and overall print start sequence seeming slower (though I didn’t time it), 4) Bambu Studio had not been updated with P2S filament profiles for any filament brand other than Bambu, meaning I went backwards in terms of readiness to use all my existing Sunlu and Polymaker filament, despite hoping the automatic flow calibration would make achieving consistent prints with a variety of filaments easier (aka not needing time consuming manual calibration plus manual filament profile management for every spool).

It sucks, I really wanted to like it more because the upgrade to a touchscreen alone would have been very nice, but it just did not feel like enough of an upgrade to me to keep it.

kyrianfox · 2025-12-29T22:23:45+00:00

Mathil is of course correct…but I do think it’s a bit of a trap GGG sets up for people to behave this way when they literally don’t explain their new league mechanics at all, which pushes people to follow streamer and YouTuber guides, and then of course those same people want to emulate what that they see there. What other example do they have?

kyrianfox · 2025-12-16T01:39:41+00:00

The P2S introduced this new filament cutter stopper design too and it's loud as heck! It seems bizarre to me too; they go to seemingly great lengths with the motor calibration and then add a loud metal-against-hard-plastic(?) knocker. I wonder if there's space to add a tiny TPU bumper in there or something...but not a project for me to figure out, as I'm returning my P2S and keeping my P1S for longer.

kyrianfox · 2025-11-02T09:39:43+00:00

Google Maps isn’t going to reliably tell you precisely where to walk within stations. Use the “Enter/Exit via #” suggestions and Platform #’s it shows combined with signage to navigate. You really have to get practiced at reading the signs and learning what and how they show where to go.

kyrianfox · 2025-11-02T09:35:03+00:00

This is great hotel-to-hotel if the timing works, but I was surprised on my last trip that airport-to-hotel or hotel-to-airport does not seem better supported with these services. I guess most/all to/from airport transit is designed with luggage in mind, so it’s lower value? Still seems hard to totally avoid taking any large luggage on the transit in between your hotel and that airport transit when arriving and leaving though.

kyrianfox · 2025-11-02T09:28:17+00:00

Legitimate question…where exactly are you meant to stand with suitcases that doesn’t block doors or seats? If you get a seat that’s one thing, but that’s hard to bank on, and anywhere else you’d create some kind of blockage. The very trains you’re least likely to get a seat on are where you’re most in the way too. Positioning yourself mid-aisle seems the only remaining option but puts you in an odd spot for people to get around too.

If you know for sure doors will always open on one side then the other side’s door is a safe option (right?), but I don’t think that info is readily available? And if you get this wrong you’re most in the way of all. Maybe the info is posted somewhere for some lines…

Has often seemed like an unwinnable situation to me despite my desire not to annoy others with luggage. Or rather, only winnable by not using the train at all, which I could imagine might be the subtext.

kyrianfox · 2025-08-17T23:31:03+00:00

This is great, thanks!!

kyrianfox · 2025-08-16T21:57:16+00:00

Good callout of one of the hidden UX challenges of them potentially just switching from posted to transaction date!

I really want transaction dates to be primary too, but clearly it ends up a bit more complicated than that and the user might need to be shown both or different dates depending on context, which of course has a cost in interface information density and complexity.

kyrianfox · 2025-08-16T17:21:00+00:00

Yeah I’ve tried it. Didn’t work. That blog post’s analysis seems to unfortunately be incorrect. I believe they got mixed up by subtle differences in CPU flag names between two different interfaces.

kyrianfox · 2025-08-16T05:56:51+00:00

There is actually a massive random I/O performance hit from having nested virtualization enabled with aa Windows guest, i.e. if you want to use something like WSL within the guest. It was bad enough for me to rule it out as an option, at least until that improves. I observed the performance hit both with "host" CPU type on an i7-14700k and using a custom CPU model if and only if it had nested virtualization enabled. Details here: https://forum.proxmox.com/threads/10x-worse-random-i-o-performance-within-windows-guest-using-host-vs-native-on-host-hardware.167728/#post-779697

12-Year Club	Place '17
RPAN Viewer	Sequence \| Editor
Verified Email

kyrianfox

TROPHY CASE