It's a bit late to worry about internal mics when everyone has their phone on them at all times.

Probably stuck on an older os which doesn't support the newest browser updates.

That's because it's not dirt but normal pigmentation of the shell.

What would be the point of washing that part of the egg you're going to throw out 3 seconds later?

Do you mean malware?

Am I the only one who fails to see anything seriously wrong with what you list there? I'm purposefully ignoring "misinformation spreading conspiracy theorist", because that's a pretty meaningless accusation and is often added as an easy character assassination rather than something substantial, but I'd like to see you elaborate.

I mean, we're talking jail time and extradition, and nothing you've mentioned is even against the law in the slightest. Yes, there was piracy on his file sharing site, but that's true for practically any service on the internet, from Google drive to Amazon S3 and anything in-between and vaguely related.

Characters like him are targeted because they are both successful and anti establishment, the eccentricity just tops it off. But why should that result in a lack of sympathy? The world doesn't have enough of these people who rock the boat if you ask me.

Unless you're saying bibi paid hamas to attack them

Bibi paying Hamas is common knowledge. I assume the attack on October 7th was really convenient, and I would assume they at the very least let it happen. I think there is also evidence to support that theory, but since I've only watched from the sidelines, I'm not going to try and build a case.

this should not be painted as Iran being the reasonable guys in contrast

Well, what would be reasonable for Iran to do when it is being encircled, attacked, and for years called out as the next target? I think they've shown quite a lot of restraint as it is.

Neither Israel nor prticularly Palestine benefitted from triggering Oct 7th.

Apart from Israel getting the excuse to do what they've always wanted to do, of course.

none of that refutes that Iran has been using Gaza, Hezbollah and the Houthis like chess pawns to strengthen their position in the middle east

Are they strengthening their position? Or is this a matter of survival? They've been under attack by the US and Israel for the past 2 decades. Framing their actions as some surreptitious plan to conquer the middle east is no different from describing Israel's actions against Palestine as self defense.

It's not so much that Iran is the voice of reason, but that they're left with no other choice than to be the counterweight to what is happening. And if they had not done so covertly, they'd be putting their very existence in danger as well.

The article doesn't talk about lung cancer.

I've posted the link to the article I quoted in another comment.

Yeah, basically ecstacy is MDMA plus fillers. The former is in pill form, the latter generally as crystals.

True, but it's not that simple.

The largest study of its kind has unexpectedly concluded that smoking marijuana, even regularly and heavily, does not lead to lung cancer. The new findings "were against our expectations," said Donald Tashkin of the University of California at Los Angeles, a pulmonologist who has studied marijuana for 30 years. "We hypothesized that there would be a positive association between marijuana use and lung cancer, and that the association would be more positive with heavier use," he said. "What we found instead was no association at all, and even a suggestion of some protective effect."

You'll probably be shocked to hear that people who smoke cannabis are less likely to develop lung cancer than those who don't smoke.

“We hypothesized that there would be a positive association between marijuana use and lung cancer,” the study’s lead author explained. “What we found instead was no association at all, and even a suggestion of some protective effect.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/2006/05/26/study-finds-no-cancer-marijuana-connection/ea496081-b529-4948-9960-9e725a376e5a/

I'm sure it's a classic because people tend to latch on to any opportunity to start waffling after reading just the title. Ironically, you start your comment telling me I didn't read yours and you end it with admitting that I address exactly that which you go on about. So which is it?

What bothers me most is that your solution is not realistic, you're just proselytizing out of idealism but who is it really aimed at? Who's going to self host a password manager? Uncle Jim and aunt Betty? You know what the average person is capable of? Writing down their passwords on a piece of paper, usually 4 separate ones with different versions for every time they've lost it. At best, they allow a key manager on their device to save a password when they enter it, and if the stars align and all their devices use the same OS and they authenticate, then maybe there is even some synchronization involved. That's a lot of ands and maybes, but you suggest to ignore that and instead use a solution where they not only understand all those steps but also set it up for themselves.

The masses are not going to wake up one day with the know how to do these things, it's not even going to happen gradually. I don't even want to do it, and I was born with a computer and run servers for a living. What is going to happen is that solutions that are easy enough to use will become safe enough in order to minimize the risks. Anything else is a pipe dream.

Does nobody read the article? 1Password works on any platform but the attack is Mac only because it's actually getting passwords from a Mac's keychain through older versions of 1Password.

Your comment is irrelevant to the issue at hand because it's a local attack and your suggested alternative could therefore be just as vulnerable.

Self hosting is cool for 0.0001% of the population, for anyone else it's either too difficult or a hassle. It's also an oversimplification that I have to "trust" the cloud company and imply that a self hosted solution is inherently safe. You run that program on a computer with 100 different apps, each of which is an attack vector and you're just you, without the backup of a small army of developers hunting down issues and independent parties auditing the whole shebang.

The only thing self hosting has going for it is that the target is incredibly small, but this is not as big a factor as you suggest because of the maturity of some of these services who basically just store a blob of data you encrypted locally and access to their servers or even your data is usually without danger.

Oh right, so you were talking about the content, that's not what I understood under "frontend". Thanks for clearing it up.

I don't have any experience with the platform, so I'm not in a position to judge their decisions, but it's always tricky when you present yourself as censor free. There's things you obviously don't want on your service, but if it falls within the legal realm, it is no longer a matter of "will we block Nazi material" but whether from that point onward you start taking a moral and political stance.

Things get incredibly tricky and cumbersome if you choose that route, not just from an administrative perspective but also technically. I can understand why the people who operate the platform would prefer to primarily use legality as a deciding factor, as not every ideological issue that you open yourself up to if you take the other route is as straightforward as fascism.

Guys, just because the backbone of your site is decentralized doesn't mean your centralized frontend can't be modified by you.

I don't understand what you're saying here. Did you mean can be modified? Or what does this have to do with Nazi rhetoric? Maybe you have a different idea about the word "frontend"?

How incredibly selfish do you need to be to think that not being inconvenienced for 5 minutes while you wait for a bus to your cozy home justifies turning public resting spots into torture devices to make sure those who have nothing at all can't even lie down?

The entitlement and lack of empathy is absolutely mind-blowing. Not to mention how you wrapped it all up as a false dilemma and then act as though you're doing it all for the elderly and disabled. I guess the homeless people just aren't disadvantaged enough.

Honestly, at what point do you go "well the issue is real, but when it comes to "solutions", let's draw the line here"? These measures should be scoffed, ridiculed, and anyone suggesting them as a solution be forced to live on the street for 6 months, and for the remainder of whatever career they have left have a cut of their salary spent on getting people off the street.

These contraptions, after all, are not there so uncle Bob and pregnant Priscilla can have a rest, they are there as a cheap, short-sighted measure to hide a problem nobody is interested in solving. They're a hackjob by politicians to force those already in the gutter even deeper into misery so you don't have to endure looking at them, cause you know, you might actually start demanding a real solution if you are reminded of it every day.

No.

"There is no hard evidence linking Bin Laden to the attacks of 9/11". -FBI

Of course, there is no evidence for KSM's involvement either. He was tortured more than 100 times over the course of a month. The 9/11 commission had no access to him, not even his "interview" transcripts. Everything we know is from the mouths of the CIA agents who interrogated him, who admitted that he was completely unreliable.

Either you understand that the consensus is that naming things is hard and you just want to elevate yourself above everyone else by arguing against it, or you're unaware that it is the consensus, in which case your opinion doesn't really matter because you most likely underestimate the issue.

It's such a truism that I'd suggest googling "naming things is hard*.

There are only two hard things in Computer Science: cache invalidation and naming things. -- Phil Karlton

https://www.namingthings.co/