> To that extent can't kids just pop in a live USB and get a totally ephemeral and open os?

That's a lot more difficult if you leave secureboot enabled on the computer. Plus, most devices, especially newer ones, allow you to pin your own certificates and sometimes even disable the OEM certs.

That, in addition with locking the BIOS with a password (and if the device does not have known OEM override passwords like on bios-pw.org), should be more than enough to keep a kid out.

I eyed this program last year but resigned my desires because I didn't think I'd be able to juggle it.

Would you say that a 1 class/semester pace is too much for someone with a full time job, two littles < 3 years, and a spouse that expects a nonzero amount of interaction?

The program is quite intensive, so you'd have to be thoughtful selecting courses, and potentially making some trade-offs -- negotiate some weekends off with your spouse, use vacation days for studying, etc.

I have a demanding full time job, frequent travel for work, and two kids (although they're older, so not as time consuming as in your case). At times it has been tough to juggle (inc many late nights), but doable so far.

The workload goes anywhere from 8-10h/week per class for the easiest courses, to north of 25-30h+ for the hardest ones (GA, ML). Of course YMMV, depending on your background on each topic. Also, some classes are front loaded and release all projects early, so you can pace yourself. Others (I'd guess the majority) are released as you go, and you need to keep up with the schedule.

Another approach I use is to take advantage of the break between semesters to study the content in advance. This way I have some buffer when I need to travel for work, etc.

Feel free to drop me a note if you want to chat more. Email in my profile.

Thank you. This was insightful. I probably don't have the time now, but maybe I can revisit the decision in a few years once the kids are a bit older.

I'm convinced btc was created by the US gov specifically as a honeypot to determine if anyone had developed a functional implementation of shor's algo, and have propped the price up to keep the target lucrative.

There was a podcast episode I listened to once, probably Darknet Diaries but maybe some other tech one, where the person being interviewed was an active community member in some bbs back in the day. Everyone decided to meet up to play dnd, and he showed up as a 13 year old kid when everyone else was 20+. They let him stay after cleaning it with his mom.

This is one type of connection that would be unlikely to form if superficial anonymity is lost. That kid probably would be off in some "safe" walled garden.

This doesn't even touch on more obvious forms of discrimination like gender, religion, etc.

And political affiliation / speech isn't protected in the US, so an employer could term you anytime for policy disagreement. Such a policy would destroy the exploration of ideas overnight, as outrage mobs would try to get any dissident sacked.

>That kid probably would be off in some "safe" walled garden.

The technical barriers to entry to that early internet effectively made it a "safe walled garden" for nerdy types.

Repeating that experiment now - meeting up with anonymous posters from a given platform - I'm sure would have very different results.

Can't you do mac filtering on your router at the very least?

Why not install root certs on all your kids' devices and then force them through your home proxy so you can run content classification and proactively block and get reports of what you've blocked? A little privacy-invasive, but if your kids are young enough, it makes sense to get alerts when they've attempted to access boobs or gore so you can have a convo about it.

The easiest route here in my opinion aside from DNS services that claim to block adult content would be to use a Squid SSL Bump proxy. It's along the lines of what you are suggesting and requires installing a self signed CA cert on the client but gives you centralized management of what domains, URLs, file types, times of day, URL patterns are allowed/permitted as well as a memory and disk cache to reduce bandwidth. This [1] is a really old example based on Squid 3.x but this concept has improved a lot in Squid 6.x. Sites that still do public key pinning there are a handful will have to be added to Squid's SSL BUMP exclusion. Ignore the term SSL, it's TLS but they kept the term the same.

[1] - https://wiki.squid-cache.org/Features/SslBump

Thanks! I was just planning on manually building something like this when my little's got older. I'll give this a go!

Given the negative responses, I'd like to strengthen the position against positive rights by stating that positive rights require slavery the extreme whereas negative rights do not.

If the government guarantees food for children (or anyone), the government must provide it. If nobody is willing to be a farmer at any rate the private or public sector affords, the government must force someone to be a farmer to produce food to fulfill their positive right grant.

You induce people to do things with payments, not slavery. Or you ask for a volunteer corps. Or you have the army do it if all else fails. I presume you are opposed to the existence of standing armies if you are opposed to slavery in all forms as well as wage slavery.

I'm less opposed to standing armies because a voluntary contract is entered by both parties. I am not a fan of the draft or compulsory service.

My example was an edge case. I expect the government could find a price that someone would take long before they required slavery. But it still stands that it is a potential. I prefer all transactions are voluntary, even if that means you lose your country because nobody is willing to sign up for it's defense.

> He now wields enough scary-factor that even though we have handwritten proof of his involvement with Eepstein that his own party is too cowardly to impeach him or even release the files

I think they're only cowardly because each elected individual's goal is to survive long enough to get a sweet exit deal. Voting to impeach Trump is the correct thing to do (blatant corruption, violation of due processes, etc.), but it will surely lessen their chances of reelection.

I think Congress is full of a bunch of individuals trying to maximize personal gain agnostic of the outcome for the country, but I'm not sure how to realign the incentives to fix that.

It's a problem insofar as it exists and is illegal. I'm no fan of the current administration, but the Biden admin just plain refused to execute the laws. That seems problematic to me for an executive branch.

I have no problem with uncapped migration, but to flat out refuse to enforce the law is a bit ridiculous. What should be done is simple: Congress should just pass a law like is expected of the Legislative branch that says all immigrants are welcome.

As an added benefit, it would get rid of the illegal wages overnight. Americans complain that illegals are taking their jobs, but they're only taking the ones that aren't filled by US laborers. And US laborers can't legally compete with illegals if illegals are being paid less than minimum wage.

A single, simple, straight-forward law could fix all those issues with the stroke of a pen.

>but the Biden admin just plain refused to execute the laws.

The Biden admin tried to pass the single most restrictive immigration law the US has ever seen with bipartisan support from all but the most progressive democrats.

Please tell me, who killed that bill?

>As an added benefit, it would get rid of the illegal wages overnight

Speaking of laws not being enforced, republicans have spent 30 years bitching about immigration while utterly refusing to enforce existing laws punishing primarily republican owned businesses for hiring illegal immigrants and suppressing wages. Gee, surely they care about fixing things right?

Even Trump's admin is still refusing to enforce those laws. Desantis spent five minutes suggesting he might finally enforce such laws and was immediately stopped by republicans

>That seems problematic to me for an executive branch.

So you voted for an executive branch that demonstrably violates all sorts of laws, refuses to punish friends for violating laws, and pardons literal war criminals or literal scammers if they donate enough. Good job. Please tell me how pardoning the guy from Nikola Motors is enforcing the law and a good use of the executive branch.

>What should be done is simple: Congress should just pass a law like is expected of the Legislative branch that says all immigrants are welcome.

Again, democrats love nothing more than passing laws in congress and there is ample evidence of that. It is republicans who have spent 50 years OPENLY not doing their jobs in congress. They are the ones saying, openly, that congress not passing anything is an intended outcome. They are the ones saying that preventing democrats from doing anything at all is intended. Democrats, despite such bad faith, still cross the aisle and pass things republicans want, because the US system requires bipartisanship as a feature.

When the illegal migrant laborers come to cash their checks every week, those checks carry the signature of republican families. If you've ever bought potatoes that come from a Maine farm, they were picked by migrant labor, overseen by angry and lazy republicans who do nothing but bitch about migrant labor while smoking weed with the local cops, and choosing to hire that exact labor. LePage made zero effort to enforce laws on the book to stop those very republicans from using migrant labor.

Why hire the politicians that have a demonstrated history of making no attempt to solve the problem, voted in by the people causing the problem in the first place?

Meanwhile here in Maine, bulk asylum migration is pretty much the only reason why Lewiston is a functioning and thriving City, and migrants from former french colonies in africa are the only people who can still speak french and carry that culture after the KKK spent the early part of the 1900s stamping out my french ancestry and culture.

I'm late on this reply; have been solo parenting while the spouse was out of town, but I wanted to say thank you for the detailed response.

Also, I understand why you presume I voted for the republican candidate during the most recent presidential election, but I assure you I did not. Trump's interview with Bloomberg Business solidified beyond any doubt that he was a fool that had no idea how tarrifs worked.

I am equally dissatisfied with the lack of enforcement against employers of illegal migrants and agree wholeheartedly with your sentiment. My initial response was to point out that somehow Trump has quelled the rush of migrants without new legislation as a reference against what Biden's administration seemed not to be able to do. But you make a very good point about the unreasonable unwillingness of republicans to pass legislation that would likely have dramatically helped the situation.

Thanks again.

Ive gotten the same response, knee jerk reactions that regurgitate CNN talking points and assumptions that im a Trumpist. Im a lifelong NDP / Green Party supporter. lol..

I understand why it happens, and I am a registered republican, but that's mostly because I align most with small government and low regulatory environments philosophically. In practice, my voting record is probably some random smattering of blue, red, and green. I vote for the candidate I think is best, and I try to evaluate all candidates based on their positions before looking at their party affiliation.

But also I live in the Portland, OR metro area so my vote is pretty much irrelevant.

Well, then you should be voting for the party which will change the voting system.

Maybe their methodology worked at the start but has since stopped working. I assume model outputs are passed through another model that classifies a prompt as a successful jailbreak so that guardrails can be enhanced.