A full ban, or "a quota of zero" is much more observable and enforcable than keeping track of individuals' permits and catch limits. Not here for enabling more violence on behalf of the enforcer class, but this argument didnt make much sense to me
See I'm pro freegan nugget liberating but as you said, definitely anti-this. I had a friend w an IM client in 2010 or so (maybe trillian?) with a plugin that notified him if I opened his profile to chat w him, as well as telling him whether I was really invisible, and finally one that gave a desktop notif if i was typing to him (NOT the typing indicator in a chat window with me).
We were both into computers so he acted like it was a funny/novel piece of tech but he used it in daily life. Felt like stalkerware. You don't stalk your friends, and you don't violate their consent in the same way that friends dont use a patched snapchat client that disables screenshot notifs/keeps photos. Thats creeper shit!!!
This is a really good start! Good list of possible testing avenues :)
I'm sure that the blind community has UX conventions documented or otherwise that would be best practice to stick to, but may be very hard for seeing people to understand or know off the bat. I definitely think abled people should test accessibility, but no replacement for getting feedback from the target audience.
Undermines the psychological warfare google is waging to make a normal part of life IMHO, it would be tacit acknowledgment that search ads and widespread data collection are a messed up business model. Youtube ads are different to them bc they interrupt directly and are much more of a clear "nuisance" in an entertainment product
wouldnt shutter control give the possibility of the image sensor overheating from extended exposures? I could absolutely be talking out of my ass but I thought I remembered that being a risk when I flashed ML to my Canon for star photos.