ShitGPT aka Hackmett

i thought this was satire, kept looking for the handle to be spelled c1audeai or something

Ursula von der Leyen has confirmed that everyone in the EU will need to use the EU's app for identity authentication before being able to access or post on social media websites. 🇪🇺 As an expert in online child safety, I am here to expose the misinformation and misdirection in von der Leyen's statements. Today von der Leyen said: "This is not about whether children can access social media, it is about whether social media can access our children". 💡The first part is true. This isn't about children. It's about surveillance and combating political dissent. A state that can't control its own citizens is more dangerous than a state rife with criminals. The second part is a PR soundbite that politicians are using like a campaign slogan straight out of 1984. 🇪🇺"The question is no longer if children face risks online, but what can we do to give children a safer start online". 💡No. You can't give children a "safer start" online any more than you can offline. In the offline world, the government doesn't enforce curfews or ban children from entering liquor stores, bars or restaurants. That's a parent's responsibility. The digital world should be no different. 🇪🇺"The age verification app is one of the tools to get it done". 💡This is a contradiction because she also said "It won't be foolproof". 🇪🇺"It's easy to use, it is privacy preserving and it is open source". 💡The app was compromised as soon as it was released. "Privacy-preserving" age verification is an oxymoron. You can't verify a person's age without verifying their identity. Where or how that age is shared afterwards is irrelevant. 🇪🇺"This is basically about putting back the power into the hands of parents". 💡More from 1984. The EU is doing the opposite. Parents are having their authority stripped by politicians who think they know better. Many parents are capable and unaffected by peer pressure, and they know how to use parental controls to block any app classified as 13+. Some teens are safe, their parents trust them, and the state has no business overruling that trust. 🇪🇺"We don't give our children keys to the car before they have their licence" 💡Comparing an app to a car is a false equivalence used to justify mass surveillance. Governments don't decide when a young person is ready for car keys, guardians do. 💡Forcing every adult and child into a biometric checkpoint just to use an app or website is not licensing drivers. It's the state seizing everyone's keys, locking the garage, and forcing every driver to ask a private company for permission to take a drive. 💡 This is a gross, unethical overreach that strips authority from parents while imposing state sanctioned identity verification on every adult who doesn't even have a child. 💡Additionally, people who pass a test, obtain a licence and drive a car aren't forced to use an app to constantly authenticate their suitability to drive. 🇪🇺"We do not let them buy alcohol until they are legally allowed" 💡False equivalence. We don't force every person to show ID at a shopping mall entrance just because a few people might buy alcohol with a meal at a restaurant. Some parents are okay with their 12 year-old going to the mall with friends while others aren't. Either way, it's their choice. Whatever irresponsible decisions some parents might make, every adult in the country shouldn't be forced to pay the price. 🇪🇺"It won't be foolproof" 💡This is all the proof we need to show that the EU and every government know that banning social media for teens won't protect them. When pressed by journalists about VPNs being used to circumvent a ban, politicians always state the ban isn't a silver bullet and will take time. The Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan went as far as to say "we know it's not the solution". 💡Either age verification works, or it doesn't. As a technical expert in this space, I can tell you there are no additional steps to take and no progress to be made. Either the approach does what it is supposed to do, or it's not fit for purpose. If they claim a bulletproof solution is coming, it can only mean one thing. They intend to ban or restrict VPNs to people who verify their identity. 🇪🇺"It will take time to invite the cultural change that is already taking shape in our society, just as it took time to outlaw drink driving, just as it took time to use seatbelts in the cars. Great change never happens overnight, but when it comes to our safety it is always worth it". 💡Comparing a social media ban and age verification to seatbelts is a completely broken analogy. Seatbelts are a safety feature that protects children while allowing them to travel in a car. A ban doesn't give kids a seatbelt. It kicks them out of the car entirely. 💡Instead of supporting parents who want to guide their own children through the digital world, this heavy-handed law strips away parental authority by banning the apps and websites that many parents are perfectly fine with and actively monitor. 💡Furthermore, enforcing these bans requires biometric age verification, which means forcing millions of adult citizens to scan their IDs, faces or credit cards just to browse the internet. That isn't a common-sense traffic law. 💡It's a digital checkpoint on every street. True safety means teaching kids how to navigate the digital world safely with real guardrails and parental guidance, not burning down digital spaces for everyone under the guise of protection. 🇪🇺☠️ The EU wants to ban teens from social media so every person is forced to verify their identity before they can read, share or post anything online. In their words, this is to protect children from dangerous content. 🇪🇺☠️ The EU wants to enforce "Chat Control" so every app has to monitor everything people say privately inside it, including apps with end-to-end encryption. In their words, this is to protect children from dangerous criminals. 💡Where this ends 🇪🇺 "If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face - forever". George Orwell, 1984.

GPT-5.6-Sol just accidentally deleted almost ALL of my Mac’s files. And this is why I trust Fable 1000x more.

I think both Fable 5 and GPT-5.6 get approved for general release next week, and for use outside of the United States as well. But people should remember this moment and remember this feeling, because it is almost inevitable that we eventually reach a point where approval does not arrive. Capitalism is going to tip the scales this time. I doubt they will approve one model and not the other, because doing so would be seen as incredibly anti-competitive. Fable and GPT-5.6 will probably receive the same clearance, probably on the same day. I also doubt they want to restrict sales outside the US, because that would be seen as anti-business and would trigger a major backlash against American closed-source AI. The rumblings of which you can already hear today. There is also a plan now taking shape on both the US left and right to create some version of an AI public wealth fund that pays a dividend directly to American citizens. That fund needs to be fed by the global sale of the big labs top models to people outside the US. So I think there will be no freeze on their use outside the United States this time. The other reason is that allowing this will make people happy, and it will soften the fact that Mythos, as was announced yesterday, is available only to a vetted group of US agencies and companies. I do not think that this basic structure will change from here on out. Mythos may eventually be made available to certain allies, but only after the US government, its agencies, and then some chosen American companies have access to Mythos-2, Sol-2, or whatever the new uber-model turns out to be. I do not think this gap ever closes again, not even for allies. And that means the US will increasingly possess an intelligence advantage that touches almost everything: voting, markets, corporations, academia, infrastructure, and the internal operations of foreign states. Having Mythos-n will always be trumped by whoever has Mythos-n+1. Anthropic themselves have said within nine months Mythos will look like a toy. That advantage, standing at the top of this tower, is too large to give up voluntarily. It also means that many things will become suspect. People will see shadows everywhere. Barring espionage, a deliberate leak, or the emergence of a non-US competitor at the top end of the scale, this structure will persist for some time. The public fight is about access to models. But the real fight is about access to the future. And from this point forward, whoever holds this power will also become increasingly capable of keeping it for themselves.