Maybe I should just be less cynical, but this headline doesn’t make me think “this is satire.” It makes me think “yep, par for the course for republicans.” This is basically what they’ve been promising to do for decades. It’s one step away from a headline like “Republicans cut taxes for the wealthy.”
How long until democrats are campaigning with him
Not quite the same thing, but there’s a project that lets you use TPM to protect your host keys: https://github.com/Foxboron/ssh-tpm-agent
[edit: its primary function is to work with clients but buried in the readme it also explains how to use it for host keys]
Telegram isn’t encrypted end-to-end by default; apparently if you do encrypt e2e you can’t access chats from multiple devices.
Signal’s protocol is widely understood to be the gold standard for security, which is one reason it’s been adopted for multiple messengers. Telegram has a bespoke protocol which is not as well regarded.
Trump voters are the victim of a con, but the con is bigger than Trump. Conservatism in general is a con that needs misinformation networks like talk radio, fox news, facebook groups, etc. Without having been steeped in that bullshit for 40+ years, Trump would never have succeeded. It’s the whole ecosystem that’s doing the radicalization, not just Trump.
When the Trump fever finally breaks
Oh you sweet, beautiful child. Never change.
expect the backlash to be swift and bloody
I do. I just think you and I have different ideas of who the target will be.
The gadsden flag but the snake is being tread on and says “one day I’ll own this boot”
No, it’s obviously soy consumption
I lowkey kind of love these folks? I mean, I know they are assholes in other ways, so actually I don’t. But I do love how they make shit up and try to get cops to go along with it. For one, the actual legal system is more absurd than whatever they come up with, and for two, they annoy the shit out of cops which is always a good thing. I dunno, maybe reading a ton of posts where they are pestering cops and that’s all has skewed my views on these people.
I’m curious if you watched the video and if it persuaded you or not. Like you, I’m open to change if I find better information on a subject
My guess is that it’s related to the Weber-Fechner laws of perception. This is the same principle that explains why turning a second light on doesn’t make a room seem twice as bright. Fechner’s formulation is “the intensity of our sensation increases as the logarithm of an increase in energy rather than as rapidly as the increase.”
Chamber of Commerce Republicans sowing: Haha fuck yeah!!! Yes!!
Chamber of Commerce Republicans reaping: Well this fucking sucks. What the fuck.
Reminder: Hamas does not have a presence in the West Bank. Mass killings of Palestinians have never been about containing or defeating Hamas. The killing, destruction of property/seizure of land, and creation of fear are the point.
Here are some similar aphorisms:
Statements like these are truisms. They are widely accepted and often broad enough that they can easily be turned against their intended purpose. For instance, you could use “no labels” to say that people shouldn’t be racist. But you can also use it when people are pointing out or trying to correct racism, because correcting racism necessarily involves pointing out the racializing labels that are applied to people. They can also be used by dominant groups to say “don’t label me as a member of the dominant group” in order to mask the material benefits they are receiving as members of said group.
They are owned by governments in the sense that they exist at the pleasure of the governments they depend wholly upon. Corporations are legal entities; who administers the law? To use a tech analogy, I’m pointing out that though a file has an “owner”, which is a user account, the true owner is the operating system itself.
I have to admit I’m surprised this is as controversial a take as it is.
All corporations are owned and funded by governments. A corporation must be incorporated somewhere by some government. These corporations benefit from services, grants, and special benefits (e.g. limited liability) provided by that government.
However, I don’t think governments are using this to do mass surveillance on people with VPNs, if only for the reason that there’s not much to be gained by such an action. Most privacy invasion is of the kind people freely allow. Using a VPN doesn’t make logging into Google meaningfully more private. The only groups I can think of that would really want to be able to spy on VPN users would be the MPAA, RIAA, etc, and I don’t think they have the kind of sway to get governments to do that.
But yeah, if you are doing something a three letter government agency will target you over, a VPN ain’t going to cut it.
This is not a savvy or mature take, it’s a pedantic take. And I am no stranger to pedantry.
Nobody looks at this headline and thinks the Trump admin is directly putting pollutants in the air.