I mean that the dog will not just jump and rip off your head. Dogs need time to kill someone. This cop had backup. There no way the dog would be able to maul on him for so long that he would die. If you can’t get the dog off him then yes, as last resort shot it. Shooting the dog on sight is stupid. Mailmen interact with dogs all the time and don’t have to carry guns to survive.
No, that’s not it. If I wanted to be anonymous I would not use seflhosted instance tied to my personal domain, would I?
No. Because digital IDs are not used only for that. So you, like everyone else, are not really against digital ID but against universal identification?
What digital ID are you talking about? I have the type which I can import into my browser and use it to identify myself when accessing web sites.
Because it would be boring?
I’m talking about realistic situations. Yes, dogs kill people if they are attacked by a specific breeds or many dogs and there’s no one to assist them. Can a dog realistically kill a cop who’s surrounded by people, including other armed cops? No. Dog will not kill you with one, quick bite, no matter how big it is. You don’t have to shoot it before it can bite you. Firing a gun to save you from a bite makes no sense.
Shooting at dogs is incredibly stupid. I’ve seen video where cop shoots at a dog, the bullet hits concrete floor and pieces of concrete hits a child in the face. I’ve also seen a video where a cop shoots a child behind the dog. The dog will not kill the cop but he is creating life threatening situation to everyone around. Shooting at a dog is not an appropriate defense, It should be a fireable offense.
Yes, there are plenty of things we don’t know and COLREG is quite complicated but I’m pretty sure COLREG doesn’t simply give right of way to bots with guns. So them being on a collision course with a war ship doesn’t really matter here, right?
A sailboat will have the right of way over a motor boat. What gives a war ship the right of way here? Guns?
Nothingburger.
You’re just scaremongering. You’re equaling digital ID (which is a very useful tool) with universal online ID verification. Those are not the same things. You can have digital ID without mass ID verification (like I do) and you can have age and ID checks without digital IDs (like in UK). It’s like being against law enforcement because police is used to create police states. Yeah, it’s hard to create a police state without police but not every country with police is a police state.
The problem is the usage not the IDs themselves
I agree but the general attitude seems to be “digital ID bad!”, without ever going into any details. People on lemmy are simply scared of digital IDs without understanding what those do.
Yeah, I noticed that but for now it’s acceptable for me. There’s an alternative client in f-droid I will try later.
That’s ok, I don’t care if you believe me or not.
Many things can be used for online identification and oppression, for example credit cards or cellphones. Why singe out digital ID? Are you going to fight against credit cards and cellphones as well or just digital ID?
GitHub was great tool for Microsoft to funnel users to Azure. How did they fucked that up? Next they will integrate with Anthropic and lose copilot revenue.
netbird. I was looking at all the tools recently and discarded tailscale because it requires github/google account (or self hosting authentication provider or self hosting headscale). I’m logging into netbird with my email and it works great. It also easier to self host than headscale but I didn’t have time to set it up yet.
And I don’t use my digital ID to open online forums.
What for?
I’m not splitting hair. People are demonizing digital ID without understanding what those do. Like for many other things, there are good and bad use cases for digital ID. “Digital ID” is not a synonym for “universal identification”. I’m just making sure people understand that.