Please see HN rule #1, this is not the community for that kind of discourse.

The longer they're in it, the larger the estimate, and they've hypothesized that it will approach the size of the universe itself.

How is this not illegal? What prevents any nonprofit from doing this to sidestep its filing status and extract profit?

This is how surveillance operates at scale. You don't need a stable identifier linking a specific person's identity, you just need a few data points to narrow it down to even a few thousand people. Then you apply more focus on those people, gathering data points that eliminate people until you're left with your target. And thanks to decades of global iteration on surveillance infrastructure, and AI to glue data sets together, it's all automated.

Seeing something scary, disturbing, or sexual on the internet as a child does not result in a maladjusted adult. These laws are about one thing and one thing only - furthering the global surveillance network.

Everything else is a smokescreen. Pretending that a phone or any Internet-connected terminal is something that should be kept secured and away from children is a parenting decision, not a policy one, and any attempt to justify it as a policy decision is toxic nonsense at best and astroturfing for the surveillance state at worst.

Was it the devs fault for shipping code with a disastrous edge case, or the EMs fault for over- allocating work, resulting in less-refined code and a minimal review process that let the defect slip into production? Just as an example.

When we're entering the realm of "there isn't even a human being in the decision loop, fully autonomous systems will now be used to kill people and exert control over domestic populations" maybe we should take a step back and examine our position. Does this lead to a societal outcome that is good for People?

The answer is unabashedly No. We have multiple entire genres of books and media, going back over 50 years, that illustrate the potential future consequences of such a dynamic.

They're making their own accommodations, rather than trying to change the course: https://www.theguardian.com/news/2022/sep/04/super-rich-prep...

But it's seeming like the trigger for it will be

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/jul/23/tech-indu...

I want big corporations to be scared. I want them to fear for their own survival, and to tread lightly lest the sword of damocles fall upon them.

Arch is a Manual experience designed for power users. It is not a good choice for even your average Linux user, let alone a first time Windows convert dipping their toes.

Being a 503c, they're required to disclose their expenditures, among other things. CN gives them a perfect score, and the expense ratio section puts their program spend at 77.4% of the budget https://www.charitynavigator.org/ein/200049703#overall-ratin...

Worth mentioning that Wikipedia gets an order of magnitude more traffic than the Internet archive.

If the odds sit at 97% NO for weeks or months, then 3 hours before the invasion an insider makes their play, you would have to be constantly monitoring this market, interpret that spike correctly as an insider trade, and be able to, in that very short amount of time, take actions that change the outcome for you, personally.

Doesn't seem like much of an upside to me.