> the enormity of what is in front of you and actually being able to feel the sound in your body it can only be experienced by being there.

I have a video of the coolest moment of my life and it looks like maybe the magnitude of a firefly on film. An asteroid impact was predicted and I heard of it in time, so I went to observe it. No sound (or body feel) in my case, but knowing how crazy big and distant the fireball that you're observing is, lighting up the sky from the far side of France...

People whom I showed didn't really have a big reaction. I didn't really understand that, but by now I have enough distance to the event to look back at the video more objectively and realize that, indeed, it's cool but it's just another video. This, too, seems like it can only be experienced in real life

Eleven have been predicted ever (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asteroid_impact_prediction#Lis...), none yet in 2025. If you see the notice and you're within, say, 750 km, share the news with a friend and go see it! Of course, it objectively really is just what it is: bigger version of a shooting star. Idk if everyone would have my reaction, but I did ^^

Thank you for sharing iceberg cracking. I love 'cold vacations' anyway (two months in Finland were some of the best months), so this is a new entry on my bucket list :)

Thanks for the elaborate and thoughtful reply! I have little to add to the bigger paragraphs, but about the question at the end: I've been wondering the same and think it must be an information age thing. Not in the abstract or the "kids these days" sense, but in that everything is stored somewhere and processed in invisible ways

I don't remember caring that someone took a picture of me with their Nokia when I know that they'll at worst share it to a handful of people via Bluetooth or try to upload it to a friend's MSN channel via GPRS. It won't be uploaded to Facebook, facial-recognized, and stuffed into a global database. Or visiting websites: I operate a website and I know you can parse which pages I viewed straight from the access logs. I don't mind, you can see what paths I took through the website and you might learn how to make a better flow. But technically, drilling down to such an individual user level is tracking based on personal identifiers and so would require consent under 2018's GDPR. I'm happy that it now does because I don't want Google to track every page I visit, and ~everyone uses Google Analytics because then you get perks like knowing what search queries you are doing well on (how convenient that google removed referrers for privacy)

I don't really have a solid answer -- why do I care about Facebook and Google but not about John "Malicious Sysadmin" Doe? -- but maybe it makes sense on some level. I need to think about it more still

> The tldr is that they have a legal requirement to bind "verifiable credential shares" with the same human who got the e-ID

Glancing at the thread, I don't see that conclusion. User 'sideeffect42' cites some laws and says

>> As I read this it nowhere says that the e-ID has to be bound to a device. It only speaks about binding it to its owner which (IANAL) could be implemented by password protection (like KeePass) as well, since only the owner knows the password.

Nobody seems to have replied to that

Alternatively, the software could just scan your ID card's chip when you need it, or whatever it is that it does for first-time-use verification anyway. It needs not require your phone is locked down, locking you out of any control over tracking, installed apps, or reading the phone's storage and network traffic to merely see what it tracks about you. The phone can simply act as an NFC reader so that your ID can sign a challenge with an "over 18" flag included within the signed data

And that's if you want ubiquitous age verification in the first place. I find that u/raincole made a good point here that outlandish implementations have successfully shifted the discussion away from the aspect of whether ID-based checks must be widely performed: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45361883

> so I urge [to vote a certain way], if you're a Swiss citizen

Is this post genuinely trying to add something to the thread, or a way to promote your agenda?

You don't only need the account, you need a phone that is locked down with hardware components and cryptographic keys that attest it hasn't been modified "unauthorizedly". Where the authority is not the device "owner" but Google, Apple, and the manufacturer

The account would be easy enough with fake data and a 10€ prepaid one-time-use phone number. Finding an exploit in Android such that you can turn off Google's tracking but not trigger their "you modified your device" scans (that are to be tied to your government identity verification continuing to work) is a game I'm not looking forward to playing.