I find it doubtful and regret using it. It showed me a bunch of people I already follow, and proposed that I follow them. I'm expecting to get some spam now :/
Joke's on them, I've already been working on that for decades. *pats ublock* This baby can bankrupt so many websites and I always hoped it could collapse the ad model completely.
In all seriousness, it's becoming increasingly clear that we're eventually going to have to build a new, free internet out of the wreckage of this one once the corporations are done with it. Technically it's already there, nascent but ever so slowly growing and taking root, hiding in plain sight. Like the so-called dark web of tor, it already exists in parallel to the existing structures of the internet. Call it the deep web, the indie web, nostalgia web, unsearchable web, I've heard countless terms and most of them aren't terribly accurate, but the web doesn't need ads and google search to exist, it never did. It just needs humans, which despite the best efforts of big tech many of us still are, communicating directly with one another and documenting our billions of lifetimes of diverse collective experiences and knowledge.
We are the wealth of information in the internet. Corporations don't own it. We are it.
I've been wondering how we can build a new underground net that is just the internet of 2002, but with more bandwidth. Somewhere normies can't access easily and with a bad ui so they don't want to.
I’d expand it a bit further. Maybe 1999 to 2009. While Facebook did exist towards the end there, everyone’s grandmother wasn’t on it yet and they weren’t entirely intrusive and walled gardened. Forums still existed. Search engines still returned good results. But it was the beginning of what would come. After 2009 it went downhill fast.
It’s just nostalgia applied to the internet. Some people call it Eternal September. Everyone prefers what the internet was when they first discovered it and hate what it’s become since then. I remember the internet from 1996 most fondly. Many prefer it from the 80s or earlier 90s. This is no different from other media: music, TV, movies.
Of course this is separate from the real issue which is the consolidation and silo-ification of the modern web.
As what was said below, it was kind of a golden age. It was usable by normal people but still pretty novel to most. And it was a while before corporations ruined it. I lived through it so I can confirm it was better in most ways, besides speeds. I should say, 05 would be a better choice.
I have this great visual image of the corporate web, marked by neon signs and billboards and holographic ads, populated entirely by bots talking to each other while the humans sneak away, giggling and shushing each other.
The internet has always had ads, some of the most obnoxious were those mid to late 90s banner ads with sound. I’ll never forget loading a random page and my speakers screaming: Helllllloooooooooo.
Yes. The secret to telling what a search engine wants you to do is whatever is on top of the search results.
You and I might scour the results to find the exact best results, but most people simply look at the very first thing they're presented with and call it a day.
When I saw all of the search engines putting AI answers first, I knew they were intentionally trying to stop people from clicking through.
I'm not sure I fully understand the play here. Like, what's the grand vision? Fewer click-throughs == less ad impressions, no? They just want you to see the AdWords ads only? I'm not sure it's a fully-baked idea. I'm not convinced they can really create a moat around all information on the web
Google probably wants to keep you on google.com, where they have ads. By doing the AI stuff, you never click through to someone else's page. They get 100% of the interactions and can sell all the clicks.
It's monopoly stuff. They should be stopped, with whatever box of liberty is needed.
It's to keep you on Google as long as possible. Google doesn't care about ad impressions off-site. Look at it this way:
You search for something and AI surfaces full answers to you at the top. Now, Google can "alter the deal" in the near-future where "sponsored AI results" come into play and are incorporated into The Answer. THAT is the gold mine. Right now (and forever) it's been about being on the first page of results and now it's about being the first result "above the fold" so people don't even need to scroll. This is going to change to be the "AI answer" so your website / product / service is mixed into the answer. Pay-for-play just like everything else.
This method will rapidly train users to just search, view AI results, then click through those paid results or move onto something else. Those AI incporated impressions will make Google money and the possible click-through from the AI answer will yield more money.
Companies are already working to optimize so AIs will recommend their products and services when people ask things like "I'm going on vacation to the mountains for a week. What gear would you recommend?"
What if content amount is the problem and old search algorithms simply do not scale well? (Pagerank algorithm has bunch of assumptions, are they still true/good enough?)
I’m not a programmer. Let me state it better though. I want the algorithms or lack thereof of the early 00s. I want to be able to search for something and get more than scrape sites and top 14, 17, or 22 lists. I want to be able to search for a businesses and contractors and get more than national chains with 800 numbers. If I type in electricians in city, state, I want it to actually do that instead of making me find a map app.
Right back to the old days of having to go to the library to use the internet, but it will be because corpos destroyed all usable info and require a 200 dollar per month th subscription to use their shitty Hitler ai.
Kagi is worth it though. Been paying for 3-months and the ability to search, get info, click through quickly is a breath of fresh air. It's what Google USED to be. Plus it downranks pages with excessive trackers, you can prefer or omit websites from results based on personal preference, and it'll even alert you when websites have paywalled answers. The Kagi free trial is all I needed to be convinced.
This study isn't about total clicks, or a drop in traffic to Google caused by people not liking the ai overview. It's about for each Google search that was executed, how often did someone click on a link. Without ai it was 15% and with ai it is 8%. So if anything its proving the customers like the ai overviews and believe they are getting enough from them to answer their query.
Sure there are probably a couple people who see the overview at the top and hate ai so much they leave Google without clicking anything, but those people will probably only do that once or twice before they stop using Google entirely or disable the feature, and thus wouldn't count much in the data about ai overview searches.
I'm reading comments on arstechnica and seeing people mad at... what exactly?
The reason I go to web search is to answer my questions. Now it's given to me at once, without need to go anywhere. Is it sometimes hallucinating? Of course it is, but have you really 100% trusted information on the Internet before anyways? I haven't.
You say that ads driven websites are going to stop receiving money. But have you really liked ads driven websites? The same ones whose main incentive is to keep you on the website as long as possible or, in fact, wasting as much your time as possible to sell it to ad companies? The ones that were really worth visiting already changed their business model.
Thank you, I really don't understand all the complaints on this thread. It's like everyone became really pro advertising lol. If I want an answer to a question(say what internal temp do I need to cook chicken too), then I can easily get it without scrolling through a bunch of ads and articles about cooking chicken.
The original Google algorithm was powered by establishing 'reputation' by the number of links to that page. Would be cool to see an algorithm that started with that analysis, but also weighed pages by their Erdős distance to your Fediverse account(think 6° of Kevin Bacon) - basically much higher scores for links from you, higher score for links by your friends, moderate boost for friends of friends, etc.
The internet was never designed to exist in a capitalist hellscape. It was designed for the free sharing of information by people putting random servers on the network.
Technically it was invented by Xerox then developed for the military. The 1990s version of the internet was more akin to what you described but I wouldn't say it was designed with that in mind.
I think you're both right, but one of you is talking about the internet, and the other is talking about the world wide web. Both technologies were intended to facilitate ease of access of information, which is incompatible with robber baronism.
In a sense it very much was. Al Gore as a young congressperson was shown the military version (Arpanet) and then pushed a series of bills that expanded this to the civilian world and created what became knows as the Internet. His explicit goal was to create an "Information Superhighway" that would allow for the free exchange of - wait for it - information. This phrase (popularized by Gore but probably not originated by him) was so well-known in the '90s that it became a standard joke format: "{fill in the blank} Superhighway" was sure to get a laugh.
Incidentally, during the 2000 presidential election cycle, Gore gave an interview where he said he "took the initiative in creating the Internet", which was a perfectly true and reasonable statement for him to make. In fact, all he was doing was emphasizing an achievement that he was already well-known for. Months later, Bush advisor Karl Rove found this quote and mangled it into the "Al Gore claims he invented the Internet!" bullshit that so many people still think was real.
I’ve googled several things recently, the AI shit really sucks! It’s fine if you’re looking for something basic, like translations of words and what not. But if it’s something more specific it’ll easily bullshit you and claim it’s correct.
Yeah not using Google but duck.ai gave me some claim about a product I was looking up that had some categories. I asked how many of category x and it said 11 but the product only had 11 in total. Oh yeah oops I have actually no idea how many of category x there is out of 11. Cool, people who trust it would have just wasted money.
I've switched to startpage and have no complaints. Not that Google has deployed much of its latest crap in Europe, but it's been shit for quite some time anyway.
"Only beer and Coke come in cans, what are you talking about? Have you ever seen anything else come in cans? I haven't! And if you have, that was probably fake news."
Omg, this guy's the fucking President of the USA... (I do have object permanence, yes, but he's so fucking dumb, that I frequently re-experience the shock)
This is a clickbait headline from Tom’s, as that’s not how the speech was worded. Per their own cherry picked quotes
Trump continued, "I said, 'Who the hell is he? What's his name?' 'His name is Jensen Huang, Nvidia, ' I said, 'What the hell is Nvidia?' I've never heard of it before.
The context being he had never really heard of Nvidia before they got so high profile, like most of the US population.
Tom's does this all the time; they’re notorious for it in the PC Hardware news community.
Yes Trump is an idiot and his speeches are stupid, but can we please not have ragebait stretching it even more?
I’m sorry to keep bringing this up and getting so sour, but I feel like Lemmy's information hygiene is deteriorating, and we're happily upvoting it away. Big community mods need to put their foots down and put up basic soft rules, like:
Link the original source (in this case the NBC video), link the place you found it in the description if you wish.
Not sure why you're being down voted. If you never built your own PC, you would have had zero reason to know who Nvidia was.
And most people buy pre built machines. Most of those have probably been laptops for the last 10-15 years, so not even the chance to upgrade. They just but the latest things with the biggest numbers and assume it will handle their needs.
Nobody but computer nerds had heard of NVIDIA back then. Go outside right now and snatch 10 neighbors or strangers, ask them if they know anything about the company.
I can only think of 3 people on my block who have heard of them. Me (35 years of IT), young neighbor (works county IT), young neighbor (PC gamer). Bet not another soul on the whole block would have a clue.
As my favorite YouTuber Paul Harrell (RIP) always said:
"Everything I'm saying today are my conclusions and my opinions. My opinions are based on my education, my training, my experience. Different people have different experiences so they have different opinions. I make no claim that my opinion has its origin in the mind of greatness. And if someone does tell you that their opinion has such origins, you should be very incredulous."
I think it was a couple of years ago, I made a reply on a thread where people were accusing the average Reddit user of being a bot or a shill (rightly so) - anyway, my position was that Lemmy is already being infected by similar.
Oh man did people get salty; but I swear it's only been getting worse.
It doesn't take very many who participate in bad faith, though, before information hygiene, as you put it, starts going by the wayside.
But, my apologies if it sounded like I was trying to hijack your message; was not my intent! Whether it's bad actors or just people giving in to emotional reactions instead of reasoning out the argument, it is for sure important to be careful of misinformation. I'm sure a distressing amount is spread quite unintentionally.
No worries, I got the idea (and was a tad blunt clarifying). And yeah, for sure.
To expand on my perspective, I’ve encountered genuinely curious comments about link sourcing, questionable but popular sites and such. It reminds me there are young folks or newcomers still learning those concepts and “characters” of the internet, and I mean that with no intended condescension to anyone.
I have a bad habit of being condescending myself, I appreciate the reminder.
Some time back I saw a blog post where the author was making the claim that the only possible way to deprogram someone who had been radicalized starts with compassion. Real, honest compassion for the person; which can be hard with the hateful ideals that are spread so freely these days! But he is right. Without compassion, whoever you are trying to communicate with has no honest reason to listen.
Anyway, thank you again for sharing your perspective!
THANK YOU. I've said many times, lemmy will upvote anything they believe to be true without a second thought. Then we turn around and make fun of gullible Boomers on FaceBook.
Around 1999 I learned to fact check if a headline or meme sounded crazy. Still applies today y'all!
Twitter did exactly one thing right, and it’s community notes. Lemmy could definitely use a feature like that where the users can provide context that corrects clickbait headlines. Other than comments of course.
On the backend, Twitter must use some kind of (pre-LLM) language model to aggregate the sentiment of comments? I've never used Twitter before; how is it generated? Do mods post it or something?
Lemmy could theoretically do that, but it'd either have to hit an API, host it with their server resources, or lean on potentially power-tripping/busy human mods to do it.
Well, ML is kinda toxic right now, and even a hint of "let's draft community notes with a language model" is going to be shot down by the huge fediverse anti-AI community. So I think that's, unfortunately, a non-starter.
And again, mods purely doing it would be problematic.
It seems like a great idea to me, but I'm just not sure how it would be implemented.
Totally. I remember this happening back when everyone was using forums. This is a "Social Media" problem, not just a Lemmy problem. I have no idea how to fix it, but it's been around longer than votes have been a thing.
Trump continued, "I said, 'Who the hell is he? What's his name?' 'His name is Jensen Huang, Nvidia, ' I said, 'What the hell is Nvidia?' I've never heard of it before.
The journalist pretty clearly put the quotation marks in the wrong place. It should be this:
Trump continued, "I said, 'Who the hell is he? What's his name?' 'His name is Jensen Huang, Nvidia, ' I said, 'What the hell is Nvidia? I've never heard of it before.'
He's quoting himself, in the past, saying "What the hell is Nvidia? I've never heard of it before." He's not saying that he hasn't heard of NVIDIA in the present moment. The context makes that clear, because in the next paragraph he describes how he got to know Jensen Huang and learn about NVIDIA. But the journalist closed the quote too early, making it a bit nonsensical. On this rare occasion, Trump was not being 100% incoherent.
I dunno. I feel like trying to make sense of anything he says is like trying to make sense of Bible verses. The only person who knows is the one who said it but they're incapable or unwilling to clarify.
Trying to put Trump quotes into context is like trying to read a Pollock, it's not possible and it's not supposed to be. Your interpretation really didn't change any of the meaning for me, and it certainly didn't contradict the headline.
And if you don't want that, a clip of the auto transcript I ripped from YouTube:
...And a very special thanks to some of the top industry leaders including somebody that's amazing. I said, "Look, we'll break this guy up." This is before I learned the facts of life. I said, "We'll break them up." They said, "No, sir. It's very hard." I said, "Why?" I said, "What percentages of the market does he have?" I said, "He has 100%." I said, "Who the hell is he? What's his name?" His name is Jensen Wong. Nvidia. I said, "What the hell is Nvidia? I've never heard of it before." He said, "You don't want to know about it, sir." I figured we could go in and we could sort of break them up a little bit, get them a little competition. And I found out it's not easy in that business. I said, "Supposing we put the greatest minds together. They work hand in hand for a couple of years." He said, "No, it would take at least 10 years to catch him if he ran Nvidia totally incompetently from now on." So, I said, "All right, let's go on to the next one." And then I got to know Jensen, and now I see why. Jensen, will you stand up? What a job. What a job you've done, man. Great. It's a great He's a great guy, too. Lisa...
Trump's clearly referencing learning about Nvidia in the past, and getting to know Jensen. He's telling a story about pondering breaking up Nvidia and putting together a government chip development effort before he learned the finer details on what they do. Tom's headline, on the other hand:
President Trump threatened to break up Nvidia, didn't even know what it was — 'What the hell is Nvidia? I've never heard of it before'
Is worded to imply Trump 'threatened' Nvidia blindly, or that he didn't know who Nvidia is during or just before the speech, cherry picking a quote with no context. It's technically plausibly deniable.
Call it what you want, but that is classic tabloid journalism from Tom's.
The headline contradicts what Trump was saying. It sort of contradicts their own article.
Profitez des vidéos et de la musique que vous aimez, mettez en ligne des contenus originaux, et partagez-les avec vos amis, vos proches et le monde entier.
If it was so clear, we wouldn't be having this conversation because I disagree. Like I said, even all that context doesn't actually give any context because nothing Trump says really has any meaning. When he says something happened "in the past", it could mean it happened at literally any time previously, it could mean he expects it to happen soon and as such is an inevitability so he just says it already happened, it could mean it never happened and never will. But even taking him at his word, nothing from that "context" makes me any less likely to believe he found out what Nvidia was minutes before taking the stage. And even if he did know what Nvidia was "in the past", he did try to break it up without knowing what it was, so where's the contradiction? I don't see how that headline is implying any kind of timeframe, inaccurate or otherwise.
It's not unreasonable to simply dismiss what Trump says entirely, but it's a different matter to assign it a meaning other than the meaning that can be inferred from context. You're just putting words in his mouth at that point.
Given all the possible context, I still don't see the headline as misleading 🤷♂️ idk what to tell y'all. Typically "breaking" news headlines are written in present tense "Trump threatens...", so any headline that starts "Trump threatened..." I just automatically assume to have happened sometime in the last 10 or 15 years, while bearing at least a semblance of relevance to current events. Like this one. It's definitely a nothingstory, but it doesn't read to me as a decrease in journalistic quality.
This is reductive. Why report on anything he says then? But for the sake of argument let's go with that.
When he says something happened “in the past”, it could mean it happened at literally any time previously, it could mean he expects it to happen soon and as such is an inevitability so he just says it already happened
So how do you go from that to concluding:
othing from that “context” makes me any less likely to believe he found out what Nvidia was minutes before taking the stage
You're not making any sense. You're saying "nothing Trump says really has any meaning," effectively refuting his whole quote, while somehow holding up the conclusion that he "found out what Nvidia was minutes before taking the stage" with, per your own standards you just emphasized, zero evidence, out of thin air.
You very conveniently left out the "But taking him at his word" part of my comment, which kind of negates everything you're complaining about. See, that's a good example of taking a quote out of context and changing the meaning, unlike this headline. I do agree that we shouldn't report onanything he says though, just report on the administration's actions.
Thanks for all the info. He talks about learning about Nvidia in the past, and mentions talking about breaking it up. That doesn't sound like a business man talking about getting involved in the company, or competing against it, that sounds like a politician wanting to address a very strong company. Trump has only been a politician for the past 9 years. So Trump just found out about the largest chip designer in the world 9 years ago... That seems absurd to me.
I mean, I don't have a problem with hating Trump being a personality trait. explain why I should like him, he represents everything I despise and is making my country somehow am even bigger laughing stock of the world. Now I obviously know this is a problem with American elites...far beyond trump but he's effectively the CEO of the country and as such would be the person to blame.Just as they like to say Biden this Obama that Clinton this other thing...not that any of it matters anyways because obviously one single person doesn't control much anyways as people should know
I mean I think he's a character and fun to watch sometimes, but that's about it. don't really know how you can make Trump look worse than he already does with his hateful vile words and disgraceful record. he's brought a new level of corruption to an already corrupt office, which I find quite astounding
I can't see how anyone would be like, 'why are people so quickly anti trump' if you ask me-- noone with braincells and good intentions should be supporting him (or the Dems for that matter)! but certainly not an administration that is actively covering up one of the greatest child trafficking rings in modern history.
sorry for the rant but I just truley do not get this take 😭
I'd be more shocked if I came to lemmy and it read like r/conservatives
Because that's exactly what Trump supporters do: don't think critically, just blindly, loyally assume the opposition must always be incorrect.
It's not about supporting him or not, it has nothing to do with that. It's about seeing through objectively false posts (often posted for money, attention, or simply from gut feelings) and people cheering them on, which is exactly what has empowered Trump and given his supporters something to point to painting them as victims of lies.
You should set aside any thought about Trump and look at the material first. That's critical thinking, in a nutshell.
Or you can play the engagement hate game that got that man into office.
I smell another "lawsuit" that is totally legit guys I swear, and NVidia just happens to settle out of court with DJT to the tune of millions even though every laywer/judge on the planet says the case is without merit. Move along, justice working as expected.
Whenever a company has reached a critical size or control of the market that it is no longer incentived to serve the interests of its customers and starts serving its shareholder's instead, it should be broken up. This is the only way you will see actual innovation and positive growth again.
Apple, Google, Amazon, Microsoft, Nvidia, Meta are only a few in a long list that are long overdue to be broken up.
That being said, Trump is more believably saying that to scare them into giving him a bride. He just pulled his head out of his ass just enough to hear about a "new" company with deep pockets and smelled the money.
This is the guy who, as president, literally asked "who knew health care was so complicated". And more recently, he thought he could waltz in any stop the fighting in the Middle East just by telling Israel and Palestine to get along, then threw a hissy fit when that didn't work.
How anyone takes this man seriously or thinks he's anything but a complete moron is beyond me. Not knowing what the fuck he's doing is literally his only move.
Profitez des vidéos et de la musique que vous aimez, mettez en ligne des contenus originaux, et partagez-les avec vos amis, vos proches et le monde entier.
some people on this thread need to understand that two things can be true,
the headline can be misleading yea but it can also not really matter
in other words, I'm the grand totality of all the actually harmful things he has said and actions he is doing... this feels like a nothing burger to me lollll. So people think he can just wear his little fingers and Nvidia magically breaks up? even if he goes after th administratively, it's not like Nvidia would just roll over 😭it's just absurd to even take this seriously in the first place imo. idk I think it's funny people are debating about what he actually said when it doesn't really matter, dudes going senile and Nvidia is gigantic corporation that can defend itself and also fuck it I wouldn't mind if they got broken up tbh. people will find whatever to argue about
Forests play a major role pulling planet-warming carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere. As the world heats up, some forests are becoming emitters in their own right.
Malicious design is putting it mildly. This is fraud with a bit of blackmail sprinkled in. They bricked perfectly functioning trains that their customers already had paid for, because another workshop was chosen for servicing them after the warranty period of the train ended. Then they charged over 20k € to unlock trains they deliberately locked before. The unlocking itself took them 10 minutes.
In a just world the Newag CEOs would go to jail for this, but sadly we all know this won't happen.
This and many other things is why I always thought that even from the viewpoint of "common good" reverse engineering, copying and disassembly and whatever else of everything digitally stored should be absolutely immune to the law. Otherwise it's illegal to know if the other side is breaking the law to sue it.
And one batch of the 45WE EMU (electric multiple unit, the kind of train that doesn’t have a separate engine up front to pull the passenger cars), would switch off automatically when passing through the Mińsk Mazowiecki railway station. Trains full of passengers were left stranded.
I was just thinking this. I imagine that there is only a few hundred train operators in the world, so they can all be reached easily, and would pay attention to the Polish rail operator.
Simply explain the whole ordeal and bullshittery, and let them know what will happen to them.
It's unlikely that Newag would get another sale. They are fucking with mainly state operator, who have a LOT of time and resources.
If I were the Polish operator, I would have found a new hobby.
Operator in my country luckily ordered a bunch of Škodas to complement and replace the old Stadlers, so I don't think we're gonna be using Newag any time soon.
Newag [train maker] claims that the Dragon Sector [whitehat hacker] team endangered passengers’ safety by modifying the software without proper experience. But Newag then turns right around and claims that Dragon Sector did not modify the software at all. They point out that EU law only allows reverse engineering of software in order to fix bugs. And if Dragon Sector did not actually modify the software, it cannot have fixed any bugs, in which case their reverse-engineering must be illegal.
It's worse. They are saying that the EU copyright law, as written, only allows decompiling/reverse engineering to "fix bugs". A bug fix would involve a software patch of some sorts. But the security researchers did not have time to write a patch yet, what they did is tell the customer "Yep, it's fucked. Your vendor put in a killswitch to make the trains brick themselves." So that does tell them where the problem is, but it is not a bona fide bug fix from the Bugfix region of France, and therefore illegal.
But the security researchers did not have time to write a patch yet
This is not true. They never intended, and said would never try to make any modifications to the train software, because it would be very illegal, you can't make modifications to the trains without the train having to go through recertification again and they have no credentials to be making any modifications to trains.
They only analysed a copy of the software, and found secret undocumented unlock codes that could just be typed in at the cabin without having to modify anything.
So if they just say they were gonna get to the bug fixing part but haven't yet they're in the clear. Boom, another decisive victory for the Dragon Sector.
2022, members of #DragonSector were called by a train repair shop Serwis Pojazdów Szynowych (#SPS) work out why #trains refusing to run. Digging into the code revealed a #software trap that would disable trains if they were anywhere near a #repair facility that wasn’t run by the manufacturer, Newag. But Newag used a pretty inaccurate way to determine when the trains were in a rival repair shop, which led to some unexpected consequences. #right2repair
Newag zawarł z PKP Intercity umowę na dostawę i utrzymanie dwunapędowych zespołów trakcyjnych o wartości ponad 2,7 mld zł - poinformował Newag w komunikacie. Kurs Newagu przed godz. 13:00 rośnie o ponad 3 proc. i osiąga historyczne maksima.
It's the general modus of today, exposing corruption is illegal and extremism, fixing intentional sabotage is illegal and against IP law, catching pedophiles is illegal and a stalking attack on respected people like Sourgay Brin and Mark Suckerberg. Bypassing censorship is illegal and making tools for criminals. Bypassing propaganda is illegal and inciting to violence. Laughing at unsubstantiated demands is illegal and a challenge to elected or other authority.
It's slowly drifting to the point where "illegal" is trying to make sense in what's allowed and what's not, and "legal" is having approval from power.
Keep in mind that legal/illegal can (and often is) be different from ethical/unethical. In a perfect world, laws protect everyone equally from unethical behavior. But nowadays, law is more and more misused to protect the upper class and oppress the lower class. Not saying it wasn't so before already, but it's leaning that way a lot stronger in recent times again.
It's obvious that they are different. In the old understanding of things, you sometimes have to do illegal stuff when it's moral. Enemies have to be fought, laws have to be broken before changed. At the same time laws were perceived as something specific and precise.
Now there's some weird perception that all laws have an inertia of moral virtue because of being descended from popular will or something like that. At the same time it's a fuzzy, almost mystical, entity and asking "why the hell should I do that" from authority is like attacking that entity. In the old understanding of things it wasn't. So laws have become fuzzy, and it has become a small sacrilege to question them.
Which is what always happens, a thing perceived strictly and literally will always run into contradictions resolved outside it, and such a resolution is a normal process. Like with segregation.
And if you make an outside resolution absolutely impossible, the thing will become fuzzy.
I couldn't tell better. "The sheep are made to be sheared". Each day, critical thinking fades a little more, leading people into a spiral of submission that has never been as swift and humiliating.
"We once again urge the Israeli authorities to allow journalists in and out of Gaza. It is essential that adequate food supplies reach the people there." In a separate joint statement, Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF), Save the Children and Oxfam, said their colleagues and the people they serve were "wasting away". But Israel, which controls the entry of supplies into Gaza, has accused the charities of "serving the propaganda of Hamas".
News organisations say local journalists are increasingly unable to feed themselves in Gaza, facing the same "dire circumstances as those they are covering".
BBC News and three leading news agencies have expressed desperate concern for journalists in Gaza, who they say are increasingly unable to feed themselves and their families.
Did…did you read the first sentence in the article, or just the headline? Things are bad enough under Israel’s siege that news agencies are worried about journalists starving too.
The German government has approved the deployment of two Taliban-appointed consular officers to Afghanistan’s diplomatic missions in Berlin and Bonn as part of efforts to facilitate the deportation of Afghan nationals with criminal convictions.
A new Human Rights Watch report has found that hundreds of Bengali-speaking Muslims in India have been forced into neighboring Bangladesh. They told HRW that they feared for their lives if they did not comply.
I mean they're sorta trying to do that. They're calling for effectively more immigration and listening to younger people and women rather than just having a bunch of old dudes decide everything. They've kinda got a lot of problems that have piled up though (economy, work culture, shrinking rural communities, etc.).
Japan’s far-right populist Sanseito party was one of the biggest winners in the weekend’s upper house election, attracting many voters with its “Japanese First” platform that included calling for tougher restrictions on foreigners and the curtailment of gender equality and diversity policies.
What I said was literally from the article. This is about an association of governors, not parliament.
Also, I'm assuming you're talking about Sanseito, which does not have a majority. The recent election just gave them more seats (which isn't great obviously, but is very different from them controlling parliament). Note that when I say "more seats," I mean it went from 1 to like 15 or something out of 250 or so.
8 billion people isnt too many people if resources were used appropriately and we had less severe inequality. The real issue is that of the 8 billion people on earth, way too many of them are on the older side and no society has a good plan to deal with it. South Korea has been doing some interesting things with turning children’s infrastructure, like elementary schools and daycares, into daycare for aging seniors. Theres a lot of overlap in the need for physically safe environments and their recreational activities, so it makes sense. But its not a holistic solution
The world population is virtually guaranteed to cap out at about 10B people in 2050 or so before entering decline, and at that point virtually every country in the world will be dealing with the same issue Japan, South Korea, Italy, etc are dealing with right now. There wont be enough young people to care for the old people because the majority of countries are already seeing below replacement level births right now.
As much as people think overpopulation is an issue, we will never have to deal with that problem. The problem we will actually have to deal with is steep population decline, caused by periods in the past where some or almost all countries had birth levels well over necessary replacement levels
I don't want my children or anyone elses to take care of me, or other old folks. No one should place that burden on our youth. When it's time, its time. I'm reminded of a friend who had to take leave off work because his dad was in a home and couldn't feed himself and they had insufficient staff to care for the old folks feedings and washings. What a disgusting way to live. I'll never be that burden on anyone.
I'll take care of myself and when I can't do that anymore I'll take care of myself. ಠ_ಠ
With any luck, society will learn sensible limits to eldercare.
You do you. After slaving away to support the capitalist utopia for 50 years, if all I need it someone to come by and stuff some mashed potatoes in my mouth and I'm not otherwise in any pain or hardship, that seems like a reasonable enough trade to me.
Agreed with all that except that I think 8 billion is way too damned high. 73% of the animals on this planet have disappeared since I was was born, and back then we had "only" 3.7 billion people. I've seen radical declines in my local ecosystem in just the last 5 years. That's in a hood on the very edge of town, surrounded by rivers, creeks, woods and swamps.
People blame global warming, but that's very recent and only the tip of the iceberg. Human activity is directly killing everything.
We have too many greedy and sociopathic people. We currently have the tech and knowledge to provide (of course not over night) for every human... While also protecting and restoring the environment. We don't have a space or resource problem. We have a economic system(s) and morality problem.
Because when western society says too many people, they mean too many POC. I know you mean everyone should be having less children, but it's impossible to apply that logic equally everywhere. Improve everyone's standards (through wealth equity) of living and the population will naturally reduce then stabilize.
Parks Canada says a U.S. singer and rising star in the MAGA movement will not perform at a national historic site near Halifax after the federal agency revoked the organizer's permit, but the show is slated to go on at a new venue.
Christian rocker Sean Feucht was scheduled to play a concert on Wednesday night at the York Redoubt National Historic Site, a fortification constructed in 1793 to help protect the port city.
Feucht, who unsuccessfully ran for U.S. Congress as a Republican in 2020, is also a missionary and an author who has spoken out against the 2SLGBTQ+ community, abortion rights and critical race theory on his website.
It blows my mind that people from outside the US are infatuated with MAGA. It's like seeing someone drowning in quicksand and diving in head-first because it looks fun.
Yep, right now worldwide. Violent bigoted authoritarian movements are all surging in power. All the least qualified, most fragile insecure men you could ever suffer meeting. Making eyes at each other, and threatening retribution if rebuffed.
probably because you, us(Canada), and others are making new deals with reliable partners. I am disappointed in how Carney is handling this but I only know the public stuff, not the "behind the scenes" stuff. He may just be buying time, or he may be capitulating, only time will tell
...is currently just a rumor. Everything is in a state of flux. And still, an agreement with Trump is just a piece of (toilet) paper, as he has proven repeatedly. So, let's see how and if that all plays out.
Also, if things get worse with the current pollling in mind, he'll probably lose the Congress. Either in Nov 2026, or maybe even before if he also loses some of his Rep. backing during the next months.
I think that this is the greater point. 15% is just today's number, but it's better than yesterday's number, and if it came from a deal, it islikely more stable than last week's number. This is not about the number, it's about slowing tu ngs down to stabilize other options.
Nick cave è un Grande musicista, questo va detto subito, ad onor del vero. Va detto soprattutto come riparo da pareri contrastanti e come salvaguardia di un "patrimonio" musicale tra i più interessanti degli ultimi trent'anni... Lerggi e ascolta...
Nick Cave & The Bad Seeds - Push The Sky Away (2013)
Nick cave è un Grande musicista, questo va detto subito, ad onor del vero. Va detto soprattutto come riparo da pareri contrastanti e come salvaguardia di un “patrimonio” musicale tra i più interessanti degli ultimi trent'anni. Bisogna ricordare infatti che il nostro Nick, tra “Boys Next Door”, “Bad Seeds”, “Grinderman”, “Warren Ellis” e alcune colonne sonore, ha inciso ventisei dischi, quasi uno all'anno, mica... artesuono.blogspot.com/2014/10…
Put us behind the rest of the world so that we would be forced to play catch-up by investing a bunch of money, and then have the government funnel that money into private corporations owned by tech billionaires
A US mercenary unloaded an entire can of pepper spray into the face of a Palestinian man picking noodles off the ground, and other contractors shot into crowds of starving people trying to collect food in Gaza, a US security contractor told Israeli m…
If you're from a country materially contributing to this madness, ruin your government's day until they stop. Especially if you're from an EU country, push for a repeal of the EU-Israel treaty and sanctions. If you're not, then unfortunately nothing.
Hell yeah, buddy! Jolie is THE Queen for signing that sternly worded letter with twenty five other people! So massively proud of her, I could just Kiss her all over. I don't even care that her and Gibeault (my Rep) were completely silent on the issue for the past two years.
At this point? Not much. For americans the last major chance was elections, but too many of us either voted for this or abstained (which allows the R party the most efficient path to arm Israel).
That's what they want you to think. The people's power doesn't end where the ruling class decides. Elections didn't end the Vietnam war; mass popular resistance did. Most things you believe the government "gave" to you were actually taken by force.
Neat, where is it? I am not trying to be an asshole here, but many of my fellow lefties here keep acting as if the elections didn't have a consequence. There aren't mass protests, certainly not at the scale we need them. Insofar as what the relief Palestine needs; nothing is in place and it will take months we no longer have.
I'm not saying that the election had no consequences; I'm only saying that things can (and usually do) change without elections, so elections weren't really the last chance for anything. Whether they will this time aside, they at least in theory can; the problem is lack of popular will, not lack of opportunity. Again not dismissing the impact of the election, just keeping things in perspective.
I don't know that the suppression by the government during those protests was anything like what is going on today though. The government has been detaining regular protestors alongside movement leaders/organisers to scare people into thinking that nobody is safe. The Trump administration has even been targeting people for deportation based on the fucking Canary Mission.
Another big difference is the fact that many of the protestors back then were at risk of being directly affected via the draft, whereas the impact of the Palestinian genocide on the majority of Americans is minimal to nonexistent.
I don't know that the suppression by the government during those protests was anything like what is going on today though.
The 60s and 70s were the height of COINTERPRO and CIA shenanigans so if anything protesters today have it good, but that aside:
Another big difference is the fact that many of the protestors back then were at risk of being directly affected via the draft, whereas the impact of the Palestinian genocide on the majority of Americans is minimal to nonexistent.
True, but we're really not looking at just the genocide here. There's a whole full-speed march to fascism that already is and will continue affecting the majority of Americans, so really what we should be seeing is mass anti-fascist resistance that would naturally have strong anti-Zionist presence. The fact that there's no mass anti-fascist resistance is the big problem here, but that's not due to lack of impact on the average American. Also given that the IDF trains American cops using lessons learned from their subjugation of Palestinians, I'd say there's a fair bit of impact on minority communities.
What I meant was the difference in who was targeted. My understanding, which could be wrong, is that specific groups (and more specifically, their leaders) were primarily targeted by the operations carried out back then, whereas today they are also detaining/deporting etc people who genuinely have no offenses or ties to such groups. Even Trump supporters and their family members are being persecuted. I think it's these seemingly indiscriminate actions that make the average person less willing to take a stand, especially if they don't feel as though they've been affected badly enough yet to risk sticking their neck out.
In any case it's a terrifying and truly fucked situation.
I've been wondering a lot, for over a year. The solution is to donate money. Right now that's the most important thing you can do, because people are dying of starvation, and this is their only chance to buy something to eat.
And yes, it's really hard to find a legit way to donate. It's not like Ukraine, where there's an easy central donation platform like united24 plus various other foreign platforms. Since the world fails to even acknowledge the genocide, individual people must take the matter into their hands. Everyone. Every single person who considers themselves a human.
I briefly talked to one of the kind family members on Mastodon in an attempt to verify whether it's a scam, and it seems very legit. And they really appreciate all donations.
I guess, there are plenty of other similar fundraisers as well. Do some background check, and donate, and share the link!
And last but not least, do vote on elections. Preferably for those who are not completely incompetent for leading your country, and their foreign policy is in its place as well.
They really don't care. They are indoctrinated into thinking they are the victims and the world hates them for being chosen by God.
As long as they exterminate all the Palestinians it's mission accomplished. They have enough puppets in the West to make sure the blowback isn't too severe.
Only if the world makes them regret it. I wish I could say that with the mountain of documented evidence (mostly by IDF soldiers themselves) that the history will bring justice for Palestine.
But, I didn't think we could be 655 days into a genocide and still have the New York fucking Times running articles saying "it's totally not. Because not enough babies have died yet. Israel could kill so many more babies if they wanted to".
The one thing that will be true with time though is that Israel will collapse. Fascist Ethnostates are by their very nature self destructive and cannot maintain themselves.
I just want to live long enough to see it fall and the children of Palestinian today be able to serve out the justice to the western world that they deserve.
I want everyone from Israeli officials all the way to New York Times writers to be brought to justice and answer for their crimes.
One day; everyone will 'have always been against' this.
And those people that today still spread genocide propaganda will pretend they were always against. It is important we don't let those demons get away with it.
It’s often said that what’s inside matters more than one’s looks, but it’s hard to argue that a product’s looks and its physical user experience are what makes it inst…
Profitez des vidéos et de la musique que vous aimez, mettez en ligne des contenus originaux, et partagez-les avec vos amis, vos proches et le monde entier.
I like it boring. I get to customise a blank slate how I want. I really rather not have things in my life that are by someone else's interpretation of "good" design. Ending up with more shit like my Dyson, or a modem trying to be the centrepiece of the living area..
First of all, my modem sits on a pedestal in a glass case. Second, you're wrong. Third, if you can't get curls to stay with your Dyson air wrap that's a skill issue, it's definitely not inferior to a curling iron in every way. -s
Boring is cheap. Look at the way houses and apartments are being built now. Soviet Bloc Block Housing. No need for architects if the preexisting plans are pre-approved.
Yay capitalism.
Edit: a lot of people are missing the nuance. Surprise.
I've just been reminded that in the wonderful 70s people felt a bit similarly suppressed and the future dim as compared to 60s as we do now as compared to 00s.
Nothing is new.
What is important, though, is that nothing existing has been given to us be benevolent or harsh, kind or cruel gods. It has all been built by people just like us.
To dream and to work are the most important parts.
Been reading Vonnegut again and it's astonishing how he's calling out the exact same societal ills we have today. Only thing he missed was global warming and that's because many in the 70s thought we were headed for an ice age.
Blame minimum parking requirements. An 800 ft^2^ 2-bedroom apartment is really 1200 ft^2^, when the zoning code requires one parking space per bedroom.
Except with supposed technological advancement and bigger efficiency it's supposed to become more affordable on a competitive market, yet it doesn't. It just becomes cheaper for the construction companies.
Soviet serial housing was better planned. There were intended green spaces and microdistricts (those didn't turn out very well, it became apparent that they are convenient to small crime).
It's not really "capitalism", it's an oligarchic system where everybody having power feels that it's very good for them. Ask Sergey Brin if he wants to change anything. It's the same in construction and everywhere, because why wouldn't it be - an oligarchization of one sphere of economy leads to the same in others.
At the same time the ideas of authority and law in the Soviet space were kinda similar to what your "land of the free" is developing now. Easy to forget that in USSR your boss knew all your history of past employment, and when you'd be leaving could write something so nasty there that you'd never work anything better than janitor after them. Or that a kid living with their family in one small room of a communal apartment in a Khruschev-era serial building could go as guest to a kid living with their family in a three-room apartment in a Stalin-era special building, both given by the state, see and eat something there that they would never at home, and that was the normal degree of inequality in the USSR.
BTW, yeah, I've gotten a taste of mentioning the Soviet elites the justice against whom still hasn't been restored in any way, - so my family lived in a two room apartment in a Stalin-era building (my grand-grandfather was a railways analog of an infantry general, and my grandmother is one of the architects of the Boguchan hydroelectric station), and judging from Wikipedia, Sergey Brin's family lived in a three room apartment in such (it's also there who his parents were). That's about who those immigrants were who could afford to be otkazniks for a few months\years before leaving for the USA. Jackson-Vanik was basically targeted at a small subset of the Soviet elite with Jewish ancestry. Soviet antisemitism was sort of a Soviet version of "first world problems". Again, my grandmother's sister's family also emigrated then.
And in western stereotypical portrayals of "how people live in (ex-)USSR" of late 80s and early 90s they too often show such living places. As if that were normal.
Yet the absolute majority didn't.
So, one of the reasons Putin could do what he did, - the absolute majority saw how people who didn't live too badly in the first place got an opportunity to be "liberated" and play "discount USA", while their own workplaces which would feed them somehow stopped doing that.
It's a very particular feeling of collective injustice when those who benefited most from a system dismantle it and blame it on those who benefited less.
So, getting back to Soviet bloc housing, interpeted as Khruschev-era. It wasn't so bad, considering the green around and the fact that people would move there from actual wooden barracks. And Stalin-era housing wasn't bad at all and still isn't.
Yep, 35 storeys and 400 units of plain beige whatever.
But you're missing the value of the modern mixed-use building. They just finished one nearby and it's insane: - ground-floor light commercial - a pizza place, a daycare and I think a pet store in there so far - parking is secure and underground, with a loading bay, - 2 floors of professional - physios and notaries and some ad-hoc wework space - 30 floors of apartments - an entire floor of guest space - airBnB units, essentially - and common play-space.
All these pictures are accurate as I remember from the tour:
The units will look more familiar if you've been to Northern Europe, but a bit bigger. We looked at a 1150sqft 3bd unit with huge triple-pane windows and - 2024 building code - A/C built-in. If you don't count a garage - underground parking - the bigger ones are like small ranchers stacked on one another -- in concrete, so you don't notice you have neighbours.
They're not Bloc blocks; they put a few of these together and they have a small city.
I've got the Armor 21, giant speaker. Almost upgraded this year when the USB port died, but then I remembered the dock based charging that also exists for some unknown reason. Was looking at one of the Thermal options, just because they're kind of neat, not that I really have a use case.
I just love that they take some random idea and make a crazy phone.
Profitez des vidéos et de la musique que vous aimez, mettez en ligne des contenus originaux, et partagez-les avec vos amis, vos proches et le monde entier.
They were good enough as PDAs, those keyboards' buttons usually used for navigation are not much different from what's normal under Android now. Fit in one hand, convenient display angle. They were just ergonomically all around better.
iPhones and Android phones I still have anxiety using.
Idk I kinda like modern minimal / flexible, assuming it works. It's often easier to customize something in an app than with a bunch of dials. Stuff like hue has shown it possible to make physical buttons to control smart devices, if you want them
Meanwhile he glosses over the fact that Samsung has all the foldables now, and that's a pretty extreme industrial design in the modern era
Smartphone where almost a solved problem til LG stopped making the V20 and made the next one with a sealed battery.
Combine the hardware features of an LG V20 and grapheme is, and you might have a phone actually fucking worth using. I want my DAC and 16 screw disassembly back, fuckers.
I'm 50/50 on this one. On one hand, yes, absolutely. On the other, there's lots more to the design than just its outline. Materials used, touch and feel, hardware switches... I remember holding a very new but compact iPhone a few years back. It felt so fucking good. Sturdy. Those rounded corners were actually a metal band going all around the phone. Not too big, not too small. Not too thin, either.
I also sorely miss the Nokia N9 in this picture - another of these devices you have to actually hold in your hand, or know a little more about, to appreciate the design. I mean the design is cool to even look at, but the shell is also carved out from a hard plastic block. That's beyond sturdy, and feels very good in your hand.
Yeah, and personally, I don't feel any wish to go back to skeuomorphism. It is funny to look back to and feel some nostalgia, but I think it would look cheap now if they did it like 15 years ago. Maybe iOS' glassy-ui will create some elements that people like about it, but they luckily did not move back to busy ui element backgrounds.
I do partially agree with his buttons and app-points. I dislike how we are forced to download apps for everything, including the questionable tracking software.
I do partially agree with his buttons and app-points. I dislike how we are forced to download apps for everything, including the questionable tracking software.
While your average early/mid 2000's CRT TV is certainly not stylish, I do appreciate the buttons and convenient access to a set of inputs and the headphone jack. Today's TVs are all form over function, which is especially annoying since the form is just a black slab.
Picked a great time to follow my dream as an industrial designer, only to graduate during COVID and realize that not a single company actually cares to improve the user experience of their products or systems.
Feels like I got a more exclusive and more expensive art degree.
We already lowered the rate of emissions growth, taking us from 4°C by 2100 to ~3°C by then. Getting more is on us; you can't sit around hoping somebody else acts
2°C is likely to be ecologically and economically quite damaging, and also at the edge of where we can be reasonably assured that agriculture remains viable. Its not an everybody-dies-instantly threshold
Corruption—commonly defined as the abuse of entrusted power for private gain—is a pervasive threat to health, health systems, and societies worldwide.1 Corruption compounds inequities, disproportionately harms marginalised populations, and undermines the right to health and the health system by diverting resources from their intended purpose and limiting access to essential services.
Corruption can affect countries at every income level. High-income countries have experienced major corruption scandals, such as during the COVID-19 pandemic.10 These same countries are often complicit in enabling global corruption by hosting financial institutions and tax havens that allow illicit profits to be hidden.
Despite decades of reform, anti-corruption efforts have had limited success.11 Most initiatives emphasise transparency and legal enforcement, yet overlook deeper institutional and political drivers. Focusing solely on sanctioning individuals fails to address underlying systemic incentives and structural weaknesses,1 many of which originate from outside of the health sector. Tackling corruption effectively, therefore, requires engaging with the broader political economy.
The Lancet Global Health Commission on anti-corruption in health will respond to this challenge with a novel approach. Corruption is not merely a moral failure but a deeply embedded structural issue that requires evidence-based, context-specific solutions. We recognise that health systems are shaped by both formal rules and by informal networks, kinship ties, and political allegiances. Tackling corruption could involve high political and practical costs and might even worsen conditions in the short term. The Commission will move beyond punitive approaches to champion pragmatic, politically realistic solutions that build trust, strengthen institutions, and drive progress towards universal health coverage.
The Commission will highlight the mechanisms linking corruption to health outcomes, making it harder for policy makers to ignore root causes. We will examine how governance structures, labour rights, and economic conditions interact with health policy. Our recommendations will address the incentives facing actors at every level—from rural clinics to global financial hubs—and promote the role of civil society in holding power to account. We will identify the opportunities that prompt actors to engage in corruption and will propose ways to strengthen appropriate checks and balances in health systems and beyond. Health institutions need to embed safeguards and early warning mechanisms to foster integrity and resilience. Addressing low pay and poor working conditions is crucial to curbing misconduct driven by desperation. Above all, proposed measures should consider unintended consequences, including the misuse of anti-corruption policies to target political opponents.
Our commissioners, drawn from diverse backgrounds, will rely on evidence synthesis, exemplar case studies (especially those that have had demonstrable results), and extensive stakeholder consultations. By engaging policy makers, health workers, civil society, and researchers, we aim to ensure that our recommendations are practical and adaptable across all contexts. This approach will support stakeholders in navigating political realities and implementing effective, evidence-informed responses to corruption.
We will measure our success not by the publication of a report, but by the movement we want to spark—a movement that catalyses sustained action, fosters accountability and resilience, and ensures that health resources reach those who need them most.
All three people aboard a small twin-engine Beechcraft 95-B55 Baron (registration N8796R) that crashed into the Pacific Ocean off Point Pinos, near Monterey, California, have died, officials confirmed. The aircraft departed San Carlos Airport (SQL) at 22:11 on Saturday, July 26, and was last tracked near its destination, Monterey Regional Airport (MRY) at 22:37.
A small aircraft crashed into Lake Lucerne near Kehrsiten NW on the morning of Monday, July 28. Both occupants — a 78-year-old Austrian pilot and a 55-year-old Swiss woman — were rescued alive. The pilot was uninjured, while the passenger was taken to hospital with injuries.
If you demonstrate you're willing to murder civilians and kids to accomplish your political goals don't be surprised when someone does the same to you.
The U.S.-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation boasted this week about meal deliveries – but a closer look at the numbers shows hunger in the Strip has only worsened since the weekend
Israel has enacted a total blockade on Gaza. Even before the full blown genocide Israel already starved Gaza for years by limiting calories allowed to enter.
Israel is killing fishermen off the coast of Gaza and systematically destroyed agriculture in Gaza since 2023.
The point you refer to has been reached about two month ago. This is why now people drop in the streets from starvation.
Short answer, it can't get to the palestinians because of the Israeli embargo assisted by US forces. They are gunning them down in line for food, not handing it out to those in need. Genocides tend to not care about the genocidees, not sure y'all are aware of this?!
The World Health Organization warned on Tuesday a major chikungunya virus epidemic risks sweeping around the globe, calling for urgent action to prevent it.
Il più crudele di tutti i pirati fu l’inglese Edward Low, attivo nei Caraibi e nell’Atlantico orientale dal 1721 fino al 1724. “Ned” Low costruì un catalogo di spregevoli crimini. Nel 1722 fece a pezzi e impiccò un gruppo di passeggeri portoghesi tra i quali due frati.
(Cartwright, Mark. “Punizioni dei Pirati nell’Epoca d’Oro della Pirateria.” Tradotto da Omayma Ghendi. World History Encyclopedia. Modificato il ottobre 07, 2021)
Da Wikipedia: William Kidd (Greenock, 22 gennaio 1645 – Londra, 23 maggio 1701) è stato un pirata scozzese. Uno dei più celebri corsari di sempre, era stato incaricato inizialmente di combattere contro i pirati, ma si unì in seguito alla pirateria e finì per essere catturato e giustiziato
I pirati durante il periodo d'oro della pirateria (1690 - 1730) infliggevano e subivano una vasta gamma di punizioni creative. Le vittime della pirateria sopportavano torture, frustate e cerimonie di...
The occupation army ordered the civilians to approach aid trucks with their hands raised—a clear sign of surrender—and then opened fire on them without provocation.
The U.S. government said Monday it is immediately placing a 17% duty on most fresh Mexican tomatoes after negotiations ended without an agreement to avert the tariff.
The US has plenty of areas with a shitton of sun in the winter. Very dry areas, like southern Spain, or Israel, produce year round and with little available water, but well managed.
The Netherlands produce vegetables, competitive for export, with half the sun or heat.
Vegetables are one of the few sectors that can be repatriated in a short time through tariffs.
When you get into tree crops and such is when you have the same problem as with factories, years until production.
Given that tomatoes suffer when nighttime temperatures start going below 55°F (13°C), there is pretty much nowhere in the continental US where they can be grown successfully year-round without some sort of environmental control or protection.
Yes they can. See Almeria, Spain. Similar to Arizona/NM weather, and as dry. Also, the Dutch do it, in climate controlled greenhouses, price competitive.
The temperature in Almeria has never gone below freezing in all of recorded history, which is not the case anywhere in Arizona or New Mexico. Even Yuma, AZ goes well below freezing sometimes, and winter averages are well below the comfort threshold for tomatoes, where in Almeria average lows are warmer. And the summer highs in the US southwest (tomatoes also suffer and will not set fruit when temps are consistently above 95° (35°C) blow Almeria and everywhere in Europe out of the water.
I'm not saying you can't grow in greenhouses and still be able to afford tomatoes, but there's no situation in which growing in a greenhouse doesn't cost more than growing outdoors in a suitable climate. Mexico has that suitable climate year-round, and the US does not, and as a result this tariff on Mexican tomatoes is going to significantly raise tomato prices in the US.
I imagine you have searched for data, and have looked up Almería (city) not the province. The city is on the shore. Almeria province is hilly. As soon as you go some few hundred meters up climate becomes way more extreme.
temps are consistently above 95° (35°C) blow Almeria and everywhere in Europe out of the water. Hate to tell you, but in Madrid (and it's not the hottest) it's been between 34 and 40ºC since June. Albox, in the province of Almeria for example had a max in 2021 of 45º C.
For most vegetables, passive methods, such as greenhouses, with shade systems and ventilation, these extremes can be reduced.
Extremist Israeli politicians and right-wing settlers held a conference in Israel's parliament on Tuesday where they said the US had given them the "green light" to transform the besieged Gaza Strip into a "resort town" once they had completed the et…
I mean, it was Israel who suddenly started bombing Iran. Iran doesn't want war with Israel, but they're rightly not going to drop their nuclear program for it. I don't think that was part of the ceasefire deal.
Every thinking human being with a moral compass should want to see Israel (as in the apartheid state, not the people) destroyed. That's one thing and active belligerent action is another. Iran policy with Israel has always been one of low-level proxy conflict, not war.
Please use the sharing tools found via the share button at the top or side of articles. Copying articles to share with others is a breach of FT.com T&Cs and Copyright Policy. Email licensing@ft.com to buy additional rights. Subscribers may share up to 10 or 20 articles per month using the gift article service. More information can be found at ft.com/tour. isideload.com/?q=https%3A%2F%2…
The above was added to my copy... Get fecked FT, this is well within fair use
But to evade the new rules, a growing number of people in the UK are turning to tools more often used by citizens in authoritarian regimes to get around internet censorship.
This should say something like the following to explicitly call out the UK goberment for their shit
"But to evade the new rules, a growing number of people in the UK are turning to tools to bypass an authoritarian regime and to get around internet censorship."
Prominent backbench MP Sarah Champion launched a campaign against VPNs previously, saying: “My new clause 54 would require the Secretary of State to publish, within six months of the Bill’s passage, a report on the effect of VPN use on Ofcom’s ability to enforce the requirements under clause 112.
"If VPNs cause significant issues, the Government must identify those issues and find solutions, rather than avoiding difficult problems.” And the Labour Party said there were “gaps” in the bill that needed to be amended.
It's not just remote work. All our manufacturing sites use to VPN connections data centres. It would cripple manufacturing on an epic scale if they were instabanned.
How many small businesses can afford such permit? Hell, I'd argue that even bigger companies will have a problem paying for that.
Also, what if I just connect to a vps overseas and set my exit point there? Will they ban vps too? This is gonna be so much fun to see from the outside
How many small businesses can afford such permit? Hell, I'd argue that even bigger companies will have a problem paying for that.
Feature, not a bug.
They want people back in offices to help landlords and property prices. This way they can say that remote work is not banned and it's just companies choosing not to buy a permit and offer it.
I work from office and i regularly use a vpn at work to connect remotely to devices that are not physically with me. Not to talk about companies that provide remote assistance and use them to connect to their customers devices.
Remote work is just a byproduct of vpns, but not the real reason why you use them at work.
Absolutely not, of course. I'm just hoping they try to enforce this so a shitstorm of proportions only seen in the brexit will ensue.
One thing we must acknowledge to these idiots is how much effort they put on showing the world the consequences of extremely stupid acts so the rest don't have to do it.
I could definitely see myself setting up a Wireguard VPN only allowing connections to a bunch of porn sites here on my home fiber in Sweden. Should make a nice little side profit.
It's something russia has been doing for a decade and got pretty good at.
A long term blanket vpn ban is not compatible with a modern digital infrastructure, but with certain protocols (openvpn, wireguard) they can detect their usage and filter them out when necessary.
It does require a lot of expensive DPI (deep packet inspection) hardware I'm not sure UK has, so building a Great Firewall of Britain (Hadrian's Firewall?) will take some time.
In my English textbook, ca. 2007 there was a comic of a child in a cage hanging outside the house. The father told the neighbor something like "This way they get out of the house, but stay off the streets."
I think that hit quite well, what many consider parenting in the UK.
Just to fast-forward this dumb cat-and-mouse thing, the next step is people go back to torrenting their porn and deeper down the rabbit hole of garbage "free" websites skirting the rules.
As always, the UK is useful on the international stage because sometimes you need to be able to point at some idiot trying dumb stuff to explain to people why dumb stuff is dumb.
It does feel that way. UK bureaucracy is just one giant guinea pig stunting it's own commonwealth.
Next someone will try enforcing paper umbrellas as a solution for climate action. We'll all say, "That won't work". They'll still do it; it won't work. We'll say, "We told you so", and it won't get reversed because they're already aiming at the next foot to shoot.
Neoliberal political class implementing fascist surveillance capitalism laws — masquerading as child protection — because they are owned by a fascist oligarchy.
It's probably true that a few anti-porn people exist somewhere in the world. It's certainly true that fascists love adding in new tools to keep the general population from using the internet freely.
I am pretty sure they would consider tor as using a VPN.
Probably they would demand ISPs to run lists of known VPN addresses and if you connect to them, they will forward the information to the anti-terrorism unit and you will get SWATed.
Don't the people in those countries use a proxy to access tor first? probably that means cycling through the proxies regularly as they become known. I have no doubt that it is impossible to prevent truly tech savvy people from access. Also Russia, Iran and China all run state sanctioned hackers, so the governments have a vested interest in allowing these groups to obscure where they are coming from.
But i am not sure how much that transpires to a broader public.
That's what things like snowflake and bridges are for. Because, at least with snowflake, it just looks like a webRTC phone call. But it's actually tor traffic. And snowflake proxies are ephemeral, since you can just run them in your browser and help anyone connect.
I believe China can stop any kind of access at any time, they just choose to allow a certain percentage of folks to get through above a certain bar of sophistication and need.
Come on UK, just skip all the boring parts and make unremovable collars for everyone fitted with GPS, cameras and miniature bombs that can be remotely detonated. After all, that's the only way to make sure nobody is doing bad, very bad illegal stuff and to PROTECT THE CHILDREN, isn't it? Fucking hell, these fucks really are trying to create a bloody dystopia...
Profitez des vidéos et de la musique que vous aimez, mettez en ligne des contenus originaux, et partagez-les avec vos amis, vos proches et le monde entier.
Will the next step be banning VPS then? Because that's what will happen: if you ban VPNs (good luck with that lol), people will just connect to a VPS in a less stupid country and exit from there.
I hope they start looking at TOR too, that should be really fun.
Show me a ban that didn’t came with 10x problems. People have their needs even the filthy ones. Especially the filthy ones. Hence will find a way to fulfill it. If there’s no legal way to do so the demand will create an alternative market for it to match the demand…more trouble on the way if that’s the lane the UK choose
Hey now, that's a lot of animosity for a statement that doesn't do much to make a good point.
The original question was
Show me a ban that didn’t came with 10x problems
I posited a conjecture based guess with some basic reasoning and as i said , it was opinion more than provable fact.
By "worked out" i meant the overall situation is better after the ban, despite the negative consequences.
It seems that was lost on you, but now you know.
So let's address your reasoning, such as it is.
People died from tainted drugs before the ban, probably a lot from tainted drugs of the type in the ban.
Unless you have any evidence those numbers changed significantly after the ban, I'll chalk that up to your opinion.
Not a very reasonable one to my eyes, but such are angry people on the internet.
I was not aware i needed to provide an example of a ban that resulted in everything being completely fixed after the fact (mainly because that's not how the question was worded) but if that was, in fact, the requirement, my bad.
If I'm a monster (in your opinion) because i think the reduction in access to terribly addictive drugs might have overall brought down fatalities and other negative consequences, then i can live with that.
What would be defined as a VPN and even then there are other options to get access to content as if you where in a different country or ways to bypass the age restriction. A lot of companies and governments also use VPN's to get people to work on their servers, so how would the UK function.
It always baffles me that they try shit like that.
Edit: heck proper sex education is a way better solution to reduce unhealthy sex habits
Maybe it and maybe it isn't, but kicking against it trying to change won't help because there is a certain amount of the population who believes that it isn't for control, but it is actually for sex or protecting the children or what not.
If you want to get those people over to change their behaviour, you want to work on compromises or in this case you want to deflect them into fixing something else.
Trust me, I have a lot of right and even some mildly right people around me and with going hard against them you will just confirm their bias.
That sounds a bit like fear mongering from Reform: a VPN is safety 101 when using public networks, and most businesses make use of VPNs to secure their data. They are also a key component if WFH (you use the company VPN).
If Labour are stupid enough to go after VPN usage, I suspect it would guarantee their loss at the next election.
Eh, I dunno. The vast majority have no idea what a VPN is. If a VPN ban benefits Rupert fucking Murdoch then the tabloids will wang on about how they're used by paedophiles and people smugglers and that'll be that.
It has always been the main aim of legislation like this to nobble VPNs, they just needed the "child" "violent pornography" etc. excuse to do so. UK government already monitors all of the internet traffic for the UK, except for MPs who are exempt, VPNs are a blocker for this.
Obviously, not even the UK government would expect a private VPN ban (work VPNs would likely need an Ofcom license) to stop everybody from using a VPN or suitable alternative, its not the aim. The aim is to stop the majority from doing so and criminalize the minority who do still bypass the block as it gives them the power to seize equipment, ask for your logins (its illegal punishable with jail time to not supply this in the UK), request ISP logs etc. to deep dive into your life.
Yeah that's the point of the license from Ofcom, to approve the endpoint address used for the VPN. Most work places don't use some random IP address but a small pool of known DNS entries for their endpoint. Just because you are using a VPN doesn't mean nobody can see which endpoint you using.
If this comes to anything I'm moving to somewhere in the EU and pursuing citizenship there. This is clearly not about protecting the children anymore (not that it ever was).
Proton, the Geneva-based encrypted email provider founded 11 years ago by three scientist who met at CERN, will freeze its investments in Switzerland, its chief executive Andy Yen told Le Temps on Wed
I saw this news and I guess it’s good that privacy is being discussed somewhat soberly over there in the wake of this investment decision.
Personally I have recently been exiting out of the UK, a much more invasive country, so Switzerland for now does seem like an improvement for me. Norway is further out geographically and has less Mullvad servers, would seem like the less favorable option for me unless the proposed laws actually pass.
The UK government doth protest too much about protecting the kids. It’s obvious that this whole thing is just an attempt to increase the surveillance of the UK population.
For starters, the whole "Progressive" thing is an American concept born out of the American environment (with its very deep religious moralistic strain amongst a large fraction of the population) and does not really applicable to Britain because, at least until recently, they didn't really have regressive tendencies.
Beyond that Labour hasn't been Leftwing since Tony Blair took over in the 80s and started talking about it being New Labour - they're Neoliberals and quite strongly so, so pretty rightwing.
What they did was performative Identity Politics like in the US: theatrics in the Moral space to make them seem different from the other mainstream party, rather than actually having genuine Liberal Principles.
Of late they even ditched that and seem to be trying to outfascist the Fascists.
All it takes is one big brother/sister that knows how to access a free or paid VPN and their 5 year old little sibling and all their friends will have it also. Despite the difficulty teaching them math or history, they DO learn very quickly and are fast to figure out new things that interest them.
Do you know what's smarter and more talented the the UK government?
I started using a VPN after my friends/classmates told me about them in my Sophomore year of HS, mostly to get around the Wifi banning us from accessing certain apps (social media). Now, like all the other dumb kids, I used whatever they recommended, which was some shitty "Free" VPN that was probably stalking my data. But by Senior year, I smartened up and learned about online privacy and got myself a Proton VPN subscription after using the free version for a bit.
So yeah, I could totally believe middle-school and up are using VPNs, cause that's what we literally did.
Were you never a child? I formatted my family pc and reinstalled windows xp in 5th grade, and used a proxy to circumvent the schools online filter in 7th grade.
Children are not as stupid as you seem to think
VPNs also accept many anonymous payment methods that happen to be easily accessible to children, like gift cards. And free VPNs exist
Couldn't people just hire a VPS in another country and VPN with that using Wireguard etc, or even use RDP etc to it? Is it even a VPN if you're remotely operating a computer in another country?
WireGuard would be illegal. ISPs would monitor for encrypted traffic streams. All remote workers must now come back to the office. ofcom can see any and all traffic. Your loyalty to the king shall be examined. You choices of media will be scrutinized. The threat of losing your children will be used to force compliance. Welcome to the machine.
Pretty much every single website uses HTTPS these days which means all traffic is encrypted anyway. Instead of a VPN you could use an encrypted proxy that connects over HTTPS. I doubt the UK is just going to completely cut itself off from the rest of the world’s internet (because all it takes is one path out).
I remember in Cory Doctorow's Little Brother (Great read, Free e-book here.) they had an insider at the ISP who just encrypted all the traffic that came through, so it just became the "new normal".
Work based VPNs would likely have to obtain a license from Ofcom, it would be highly unlikely to block them completely. Probably be requesting a back door into the work VPNs at the same time just like they have for other encryption, lol.
Refer to other comment. They don't see "VPN traffic", they see encrypted tunnels between two ports to some offshore vps. At best, they see a header saying "openvpn". The article is alluding to the country effectively wanting to crack down on encrypted tunnels (because you cannot discriminate VPNs from them). At best, maybe they're just christofascist idiots.
I don't think it's that centralized. Just some elite somewhere pushes through what elites everywhere would want, and they try to do the same around it.
Like spread of a disease.
I think the way to fight it is similar. Unions, customer associations, parties (not for election, but for having as many people as possible for mutual aid and actions ; it might even be counterproductive to get into government, since that breeds expectations which are not delivered upon, which hurts the party ; better to do volunteer projects without using state power as much as possible).
apparently having a functioning brain isn't a requirement of being an mp
but of course we knew that when she did this in 2019:
On 16 July 2019, Champion stated: "If my party comes out as a remain party rather than trying to find a deal or >rather than trying to exit, I can't support that, it goes against democracy". She said she would rather support a "no-deal Brexit" than remain in the EU, as she believed Labour had to deliver the result of the 2016 referendum.
I’d email my MP to ask why this Labour Government is using the BBC to promote Reform talking points and implementing brain dead Reform policies, but I don’t expect anything other than the blandest party line response.
All this pandering to Reform voters is completely useless, people will still vote for the original rather than a shitty knockoff. Despicable behaviour from Labour.
When encryption is legal, they can't know what is going on between two points. They going to make is so we can only have encryption to nodes they trust?
It is dangerously technologically illiterate to wage war on encryption.
Easy enough to do when it's mega corps. They don't really care about anything but money. If everyone had self hosted services with e2e, be far harder. Encryption is everywhere now.
So they will go after the end points. Which again, is a battle they can't win. All very Cory Doctorow's "Unauthorized Bread".
There will be others too, those are just in my head's cache.
Some how we need to get governments to listen to us serfs instead mega corps and authoritarian police/spooks.
The world they want is not only terrible for digital and political freedom, but competition, thus functioning markets. It's terrible for making developers and makers instead of dumb consumers, which in turn, is terrible for technology and progress.
The Collective Shout Out must feel envious of such power... Think about all what they could ban, you know, for you and your children protection of course.
I mean anyone can rent a server in Europe and install OpenVPN themselves. Hell, it doesn't even need to open OpenVPN, Wireguard works just as well and is basically undetectable.
Eat shit, UK government, for real. Idiots think that by speaking the same language as US fascists they can have similarly dumb ideas.
To be honest, I've found WireGuard's performance is harmed more by replay attacks than OpenVPN. Least that is what I put it down to when I tried them both from a VPN provider that offered both.
What's a reply attack? Do you have people activity MITM-ing your connection? Personally I've found Wireguard performance to be significantly better, especially on spotty mobile Internet
Man in the middle can be part of it. It's just basically recording and sending stuff back. Generally I use WireGuard, but on unhygienic networks, were OpenVPN is warning about possible replay attacks, WireGuard doesn't work as well. Could be something else of course, but I've got one end. It's not constant or always.
Oh replay attacks, that makes a bit more sense. Honestly I've never been on such a poor network to run into that. I don't know your situation, but I'd be doing anything I could to get away from that ISP if they're actively manipulating your traffic
It's doesn't fall over, it just slows down. Or appears to much more than OpenVPN. There could be something else going on, but for what ever the problem was, OpenVPN was coping better and just spitting out errors about a possible replay attack and continuing like nothing was wrong. I've not looked again as OpenVPN is working fine. For everything else, I'm using WireGuard.
It would have been my go to. But they can detect openvpn and other protocols. I would just use a ssh tunnel with squid proxy. The squid wont cache ssh traffic unless you run your own cert and set up the squid that way. It will however seamlessly allow you to connect through a ssh tunnel with one port forward.
I've certainly happily used SSH tunnels --- on Linux it's great in that it's readily available wherever you already have OpenSSH installed --- but one downside of OpenSSH as a general-purpose tool for tunneling is that it is intrinsically TCP and thus forces packet ordering across multiple tunneled connections, which may not be necessary for whatever you're doing and can have performance impact. Part of the reason mosh exists is to deal with that (not for the SSH-as-a-tunneling-protocol case, but rather for the "SSH-as-a-remote-shell" case).
Wireguard is UDP, and OpenVPN can use either TCP or UDP, depending upon how it's configured.
If we were going to move the world to a single "tunneling" protocol, SSH wouldn't be my first choice, even though it's awfully handy as a quick-and-dirty way to tunnel data.
I used putty for tunnels on windows machines. As for mosh I forgot it exist. I use wireguard now. But if they ban VPN it will be harder for them to prove the SSH is being used for the purpose evading their stupid law. The high bandwidth usage could be a lot of things... right?
While in the hospital ten years ago I did get a visit from the IT dept. They didn't have any qos on ssh and I was moving a lot of data through it. They just asked me to limit my high usage to late night.
Just adopt a CCP style social credit system already. Why all of this pussyfooting around being a totalitarian, censorship focused, surveillance state? Just do it. Give the good people of UK a solid reason to be a little bit more French again.
There has been a widespread misconception that China operates a nationwide and unitary social credit "score" based on individuals' behavior, leading to punishments if the score is too low. Media reports in the West have sometimes exaggerated or inaccurately described this concept.[4][5][6] In 2019, the central government voiced dissatisfaction with pilot cities experimenting with social credit scores. It issued guidelines clarifying that citizens could not be punished for having low scores and that punishments should only be limited to legally defined crimes and civil infractions. As a result, pilot cities either discontinued their point-based systems or restricted them to voluntary participation with no major consequences for having low scores.
People can be banned from airlines but they get banned for the same reasons they do in the US, like getting drunk on the plane and punching someone. Or like how the US bans people who owe child support from getting a passport, judges in China are allowed to ban people with unpaid child support or big enough unpaid fines from state owned airlines until they pay.
As an American, it always made me laugh when we made fun of China's "Social Credit Score" when we literally have one already that determines whether we can buy houses/cars/etc lol
Twitter had genuinely been forced to censor all coverage around anti-asylum seeker protests behind age verification requirements, which has riled up a lot of right-wing politicians here. The reason for these protests is that the previous (Conservative) government had been paying exorbitant amounts of money to house asylum seekers in hotels, effectively lining the pockets of hotel chain executives - all while we deal with a massive housing and cost of living crisis.
This was meant to be a measure to give asylum seekers temporary accommodation which was put in place at the start of COVID, but has been government policy since 2020 with no end in sight.
Labour have also done jack-shit to resolve our skyrocketed (legal) immigration levels since they got into power, except for scrapping the Rwanda Deal which would have deported any illegal migrants to a third country for processing (which as the name obviously suggests, is the East African state of Rwanda.)
Britain is now a country which you can enter illegally without ID, but need photo ID to watch a protest against people entering without ID.
Let that sink in.
Labour have fucked up so catastrophically hard with how they've handled this legislation, that they've straight-up generated bipartisan sympathy for the leaders of a right-wing populist party - who are the only political force that have vowed to repeal the legislation because it is being used for mass surveillance and censorship.
If Labour don't get rid of Keir Starmer, do a full cabinet reshuffle and reverse course, we are going to see a Reform landslide in the next election...
It would have been smarter for the UK to mandate that every ISP must provide a family filter for free as part of their service. Something that is optional and can be turned on or off by the account holder but allows parents to set filters (and curfews) if they want. They could even require that ISPs require new signups to affirm if they want it on or off by default so people with families are more likely to start with it enabled.
The new Christian nationalist orders are not so patient. Even Charles X of France rolled back rights too speedily, sparking public outcry resulting in Parisian haircuts. (a bit off the top 🪟🔪)
SCOTUS used to be sneakier, carving out sections of fourth- and fifth-amendment protections, but since Dobbs the Federalist Society Six have tossed subtlety and reason to the wind and now adjudicate away rights based on vibe and conservative rhetoric grievance.
Hopefully the US and UK both will recognize why the French public was swift to act when manarchists took shears to the Napoleonic Code.
The problem is that content filters don't work all that well in the age of https everywhere. I mean, you can block the pornhub.com domain, that's fairly straightforward ... but what about reddit.com which has porn content but also legitimately non-porn content. Or closer to home: any lemmy instance.
I think it would be better if politicians stopped pearl clutching and realized that porn perhaps isn't the worst problem in the world. Tiktok and influencer brainrot, incel and manosphere stuff, rage baiting social media, etc. are all much worse things for the psyche of young people, and they're doing exactly jack shit about that.
They know. The "think of the children" angle is just cover to enrage the tabloid readers and to be used as a straw man against anyone criticisng the law ("you're a pedophile"). The real purpose is "let's enumerate the IDs of everyone who uses the internet for anything we don't like" and "let's censor anything we don't like starting with LGBTQ content"
Crazy because every (isp provided) router I have used has these options. They probably aren't 100% correct all the time, but it would be good enough for children (even though you shouldn't rely soley on filters to replace watching your kid).
Enterprises will love that. A perfect excuse to end wfh. However, this will cripple business travelers. I'm sure there'll be some exception for corporations where they can exercise maximum control over their employees while still being allowed to generate capital.
Ive got a few UK coworkers that will be out of the job if anything disables VPNs. They voted for that mess now they can sleep in their 1/3 salary local jobs too.
They couldn't switch off VPNs for businesses. I work in a hospital and we use VPNs to create secure tunnels to other third party health care companies as well as NHS adjacent health services amongst other things. This is to protect patient sensitive data amongst other things. This would cripple our service and go against NHS england and government requirements for the secure transfer and sharing of data.
This would have to be public VPNs only. Despite the fact that it would be complete bullshit either way.
If they outlaw VPNs then all internet-connected businesses will flee and everyone will just move to the dark net. Then you’ve got a whole other problem.
Damn near every business uses VPN technology. They literally cannot exist in the modern world without it. It would be incredibly expensive and impractical to do without.
VPNs are one of the core security measures of all large companies.
VPNs aren't just a "hide your IP" tool, they're a way of giving someone access to an organisation's internal network. Sensitive servers such as databases, wikis, scheduling tools etc don't have publicly exposed IPs, they only have connections that are accessible from inside that VPN. See also en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense_…
Not only that, but they are crucial for network security. VPNs allow all network traffic (with a few necessary exceptions) to be routed through the company's network and benefit from its security measures, mainly monitoring traffic for suspicious and malicious behaviour. Without it, finding compromised PCs is much harder and enforcing company policies regarding web use would be impossible outside the office.
it's both hilarious and sad how this is coming from a "please think of the children!!" perspective meanwhile gender affirming care for trans kids got banned pretty recently
"If VPNs cause significant issues, the Government must identify those issues and find solutions, rather than avoiding difficult problems.”
When I was a kid, Reddit and general public Internet access weren't things, but I sure managed to get my hands on pornography. I'm pretty confident that even entirely killing Internet access isn't going to stop kids who want to get ahold of porn from getting ahold of it.
They can come and pry TOR from my cold dead hands lmfao
this law can eat shit. i ain't gonna dox myself and feed my personal info to companies. maybe they should take this as a hint that most people care about their privacy
if you don't want kids seeing NSFW stuff be an actual parent and don't raise your kids on the internet??
Yeah I'm Australia we have just decided to ban all social media for people under 16, i think it's great honestly because screw from insta etc but I don't think it's the government ls job to prevent kids from using social media.
I really think it's a way to force adults to register their id to accounts not about protecting kids.
Parents should monitor what their kids are doing not the government
I agree that it should primarily be a parents responsibility to keep kids off social media. But the big problem with social media is that a large proportion of young children don't want to be on social media and recognise the detrimental impact it has on them, but the fear of missing out or being excluded is what keeps them on it. it then becomes a collective action problem, to get them off it you need to get a lot of their peers off it as well. There are movements where groups of parents try to do this, but reaching the critical mass necessary to do it is difficult.
Hopefully the ban keeps a large number off to reduce the pressure on kids to be on it and at the same time the parents can do their bit as well.
Parents should monitor what their kids are doing not the government
While I agree wholeheartedly with this, it's often not that easy.
Back in the days of 28.8 modems my parents found my little bro's downloaded porn stash. It was in a Zip disk in his underwear drawer. They then locked down both of our AOL accounts so we couldn't see that stuff.
I thought this was bullshit because I kept my Zip disk full of porn next to all the other ones and labeled it "Homework." Why should I get punished if I didn't get caught?
So I downloaded a keylogger, stole my dad's password, and unlocked my account and continued to download porn.
However, I don't think government regulation would have worked in my case.
Someone should start a bussiness near the border of Republic of Ireland and get two antennas pointed at each other across the border, with the RoI side having connected to the free internet, then the UK Northern Ireland side connected to the Intra-net. You pay a "Club Membership Fee" to get access to the proxy network.
Its not a VPN, its a Nerd Techie Club, just with a free proxy service as part of the club membership 😉
Possible? Yes. Probable? No. LTE would work wonderfully for such usecase, but the firmware to it is never shared. Wifi would work theoretically, but the distance would get in a way. Bandwidth would go down all the way to a rounding error.
just do what the chinese do to get around thier great wall. use proxies and anti-detect browsers, its the next step after VPN.. you might want to look around how to set these up.
Proxy is a step below VPN since it doesn't tunnelise data.
Anti-detect browsers. Do you mean Tor? It's a decent solution, albeit the slowest one.
What people use to bypass the great Chinese firewall is VPN with VLESS protocols. Unlike usual VPN protocols, those are specifically made to bypass censorship.
I'm looking forward to the next UK election where the headline will be: Labour has lost the election in a landslide that left them with dozens of votes total
Every single person who didn't think this would affect them who watches porn in any capacity is very likely highly pissed off and will continue to be for as long as this draconian bullshit is enabled.
I don't think it's even possible to get rid of VPNs without outright banning encryption. If I set up a VPN that uses an obscure port and the traffic is encrypted, how are they going to know it's even a VPN?
They're going to know it's VPN fairly easily because it's fairly obvious what you're doing when all or most of your traffic is encrypted and is directed at one or two addresses. Even more obvious if those one or two addresses happen to belong to known VPN or VPS providers or something.
The linked story has been updated. The headline now reads:
Labour rules out VPN ban in UK but issues warning to UK households
Labour won't ban the use of Virtual Private Networks
And the story begins:
Labour has ruled out a possible VPN ban after reports thousands of UK households were at risk following the Online Safety Act kicking in under the government. Labour Party Tech Secretary Peter Kyle has revealed that the Government is "not considering a VPN ban" - after reports in Guido Fawkes suggested it was possible.
Most conventional VPNs, e.g. OpenVPN, WireGuard, AnyConnect, PPTP/L2TP, IKEv2/IPsec, etc., actually don't work in China. Technology-wise GFW is quite sophisticated and conventional VPNs are not designed for censorship circumvention anyway.
You'll have to use things like Shadowsocks or V2Ray, which is out of the reach of most people.
This makes me feel like they were in a bind here. The so called "online safety bill" was a tory concoction that took years to pass through the courts because of how invasive it is and how anyone could easily bypass it.
If labour want to stop it, they'll be accused of not wanting to protect children.
Whatever anyone thinks of labour, I'd ask people to ask themselves, if you were in that position, what option do they have other than to let it play out as the spectacular failure it was always going to be and making sure everyone knows who's fault that was afterwards?
Picture this: it’s January 19th, 2038, at exactly 03:14:07 UTC. Somewhere in a data center, a Unix system quietly ticks over its internal clock counter one more time. But instead of moving fo…
I don’t understand why people always say that. Pentium Pro could handle 64 GB even though it was a 32 bit CPU. It had a 36 bit address bus. Later models are the same.
People say it because it was a Windows limitation, not a computing limitation. Windows Server had support for more, but for consumers, it wasn't easily doable. I believe there's modern workarounds though. The real limit is how much memory a single application can address at any given time.
What does a 64-bit system and 4GB RAM have to do with using 64bit timestamps?
32bit systems can use 64bit values without issue. In fact, even an 8bit system can handle 256bit values or even longer ones without issue.
The bittiness of a CPU and its address space have nothing to do with the length of usable data unless you end up with data longer than the RAM volume (and even then there's swap).
There is also the fact that during Y2K, we didn’t have as much reliance on computers.
And we still shouldn't.
Uniting the reliance upon long-range electric connectivity (radio, PSTN - but that now depends on computers too), the reliance upon computers (like mainframes), the reliance upon microcontrollers, the reliance upon personal computers (like Amiga 500), the reliance upon fast encryption helped by computers, the reliance upon computers used for mining cryptocoins or some beefy LLMs, the reliance upon computers capable of running Elite Dangerous, and the reliance upon computers capable of running devops clusters with hundreds of containers, - it's wrong, these are all different.
An analog PSTN switching station shouldn't care about dates. A transceiver generally shouldn't too. A microcontroller doesn't care which year it is, generally.
With an Amiga 500 one can find solutions, and it's not too bad if you don't.
The rest is honestly too architecturally fragile anyway and shouldn't be relied upon as some perpetual service.
I was at Pepsi for Y2K. In 98, we started with MSMail, W95, and Netware2. We had to also replace all 40k desktops. We worked like dogs for those 2 years and only barely had everything ready in time. Without that work, we would not have been able to continue any business operations. Nothing about it was overhyped.
It only depends whether the app and its OS/kernel interface use a 32-bit value to store the time information.
32-bit architecture or OS has nothing to do with this bug, for example 16-bit architectures must've used 32-bit time, too (otherwise they'd be able to only count up to 32-65 seconds).
It's a problem with the internal represensation of a C/C++ type alias called time_t, mostly. That's the thing that holds the number of elapsed seconds since midnight on Jan. 1, 1970, which is the most common low-level representation of date and time on computers. In theory, time_t could point to a 32-bit type even on a 64-bit system, but I don't think anyone's actually dumb enough to do that. It affects more than C/C++ code because most programming languages end up calling C libraries once you go down enough levels.
In other words, there's no way you can tell whether a given application is affected or not unless you're aware of the code details, regardless of the bitness of the program and the processor it's running on.
Y2K wasn’t overhyped. It was just successfully planned for. This reeks of the paradox of IT. “Everything is broken, what do you even do” vs “nothing is broken, what do you even do?”
Linux kernel has had support for 64 bit time for years. On Debian, packages for the upcoming release were updated to 64 bit time earlier this year. I'm fairly sure the other distributions have done or are doing the same. So basically you now have 2 years to upgrade your OS and to pester the vendors of commercial software to do the same.
Like someone else said, it will be 2 very busy years, but we can survive this.
Yeah it only felt like it wasn’t a big deal because it became a big deal early enough for there to be plans made. And because good people doing hard work to prevent a problem wasn’t newsworthy after the fact.
It's mostly just 2 or 3 MAGA zealots trying to pretend to be a, "disinterested third-party denizen that doesn't believe the mainstream, so they can't make a solid judgment on Trump or his actions until they have a dinner conversation with him in private."
Fun fact! I'm studying for my amateur radio technician license and learned that ham came from calling amateur telegraph operators' sloppy work 'ham-fisted'. The amateur radio community decided to lean into it, and thus the ham radio operator was born
Fun fact! I'm studying for my amateur radio technician license and learned that ham came from calling amateur telegraph operators' sloppy work 'ham-fisted'. The amateur radio community decided to lean into it, and thus the ham radio operator was born
I'll assume FCC Technician license; it's a fun hobby. I have had a General license since the 1990s when the FCC still required a proficiency in morris code. At a cost of $35 to renew and the ability to have a cellphone alternative while traveling long distance by car, it's worth keeping.
Have fun, find your Ham niche and enjoy it for the rest of your life!
That's the one, and thanks! My son and I got into Meshtastic as a hobby, and I guess ham radio was the next logical direction for our interest. It's fun learning the science behind how it works.
Come previsto, il kernel Linux 6.16 è stato promosso a stabile. Linux 6.16 ora accoglie il mondo con diversi miglioramenti delle prestazioni, il supporto per i driver GPU open source NVIDIA Hopper e Blackwell in Nouveau, la preparazione per Intel Advanced Performance Extensions (APX) e molti altri interessanti miglioramenti.
Bummer. I'll hop on a redeye Amtrak train tonight and bark at the moon in his honor. Silliness aside, he always seemed like a genuine good guy. Hope he's able to find peace and his family solace in the kind words that will be spoke of him in the coming days. If nothing else I'll always really enjoy his hits when they come up in my playlists.
He was the guest and performer at a final concert just weeks ago. Anyone connected to the metal scene in any way knew about it. They raised almost 200 million for charities.
It already was the metal concert of the decade, now with his passing just weeks after, this will be remembered as a once in a century event in the metal world, how I wish I could have been there !
Lost any ounce of respect I might have had left for him (which really wasn't much) and his wife when they started pushing Genocide propaganda for Israel.
Nothing says "rock and roll" like supporting Israels right to genocide I guess.
True rock and roll would be pissing on his grave. Maybe Kneecap can do the honors.
Sharon Osbourne denied a deepfake video of Ozzy Osbourne suggesting he was going to die soon and also disputed her mother's statements about assisted suicide.
I woke up with a bad feeling. I knew exactly one thing. And it reminded me of December 26th 2015. Remember the year of death that was 2016? Celebrities were dropping like flies and our entire childhoods' were going into graveyards?
That started December 2015, the day after Christmas. That was the day that Lemmy of Motorhead died. His death ripped a hole in the universe. Two weeks later David Bowie died. And after that famous people kept dying for a year. Reality TV star Donald Trump would be elected into office by people that kept saying celebrities had no role in politics. 2016 was the first year of the world we know today. And trying to describe the world before 2015 to someone who never witnessed life before that would become difficult.
I loved Black Sabbath. I didn't care for Ozzy Osbourne. I didn't care for a Black Sabbath without Ozzy. It was that combination of the two that I liked. I used to tell people this and they would shrug and then I would tell people this after the Osbornes show came out and people would react the same way as when I told them I didn't like cake. It meant I wasn't human. Who can trust somebody who doesn't like cake or like Ozzy Osbourne?
But I had to be honest with myself and them. I didn't like Ozzy Osbourne and no amount of crazy antics was going to solve that.
But this morning I woke up knowing exactly one thing. Ozzy Osbourne was dead. He can't create chaos with his death like Lemmy did because the chaos is already here. But maybe he can fix it. Maybe Ozzy's death well mend the hole in reality. This agent of chaos, with his passing, might be able to restore sanity. A sacrifice. For Satan. Who so loved the world he gave his only avatar so that everyone, believer or not, could have peace everlasting. We should know in two weeks if he is the herald of a brighter new future.
Profitez des vidéos et de la musique que vous aimez, mettez en ligne des contenus originaux, et partagez-les avec vos amis, vos proches et le monde entier.
WOW. Ozzy is a Rock legend. The world will not be the same without him. People can say what they want about him, but he was an artist. He and Black Sabbath were the epitome of Rock & Roll.
Honestly, that he lived this long, given his drugs and party lifestyle for many years, is pretty impressive. Now Keith Richards, on the other hand, will likely live to be 200 years old just because he's indestructible.
I got to see Ozzy once at Ozzfest. I'm glad for that.
Music sharing platform Bandwagon adds the ability for artists to sell albums, create paid channels for exclusive content, and announces upcoming premium subscription tier for artists
@Bonfire Social is getting close to release, and team already working on other features as well
some good articles on what its like to be a moderator, and the impact of LLMs on small communities on the fediverse
Bandwagon is a fediverse platform for artists to share their music, similar to platforms like Bandcamp. Artists can now use Bandwagon to sell their music albums with the latest update. Bandwagon has added support for Stripe, and does not charge a payment fee for albums sold via the platform. Selling albums via Bandwagon will not be completely free however: once Bandwagon Premier launches at the end of the year, selling albums will only be available for this premium subscription tier of $10/month. Bandwagon promises the platform will always be available for free for artists to upload and share their albums. Another new feature for Bandwagon is Circles, which allows users to share content with specific people. When you add accounts to a circle, you can create content that will only be visible to people within that circle, similar to how Bonfire’s boundaries system works. What is different about Bandwagon’s circles is that access to a circle can be put behind a paywall, where people can pay a monthly subscription fee for continued inclusion in that circle and to see exclusive content by the artist.
The upcoming premium subscription will give paying members the ability to sell albums, sell access to circles/memberships, and get higher quality streaming. Some further thoughts:
With circles, Bandwagon is placing itself in competition with Patreon. It is not the first project to try to put fediverse content behind a paywall: sub.club tried to make this work last year and had to shut down due to a limited uptake. Sub.club focused on microblogging and Mastodon, will targeting the music sector make a difference for Bandwagon?
Platforms on the fediverse has historically struggled with becoming financially sustainable, with most relying on donations, grants and volunteer labour. Bandwagon has a clear story on how it plans to become a financially sustainable platform. The big question is: can they pull it off?
One of the major challenges in building a new social network is in getting critical mass on the community size to made sure there is enough interesting content to keep users interested in visiting. Projects like Radio Free Fedi show that the fediverse has a dedicated community of musicians and other artists on the fediverse. Bandwagon also already has over 200 artists who are sharing their music on the platform. It indicates that music and artists might be a worthwhile direction to look for when building critical mass in communities.
How much will the connection to the fediverse matter for artists on Bandwagon? Bandwagon is open-source and encourages self-hosting, and that it uses ActivityPub provides clear value for creating a network of interoperable Bandwagon servers. But will people use the native connections with the rest of the fediverse as well? For artists, having a wider reach is beneficial, especially if they are selling albums. But will people use the interoperability of microblogging platforms like Mastodon to follow artists on Bandcamp, or will these interoperable networks stay mostly separate in practice?
Bonfire is an upcoming modular social networking platofrm that the team is working on getting ready for an official release. In the launch version (‘Bonfire Social’) the platform focuses on features that are more familiar to microblogging and long-form writing, but the platform is highly extendable and customisable: Bonfire is also experimenting with adding geodata and Mosaic, a bridge to connect other datasets to the platform. Bonfire also reported that they have their first organisation that will build their community on Bonfire: CrowdInBlue is a platform that wants to “connect water projects with funding sources”, and they will build this platform using Bonfire.
The Links
“The upside is that moderation gives me some control. Watching a fascist autocracy unfold before your eyes is terrifying. Everything is collapsing on a massive scale in myriad ways. It’s enough to make a person feel helpless. While it’s not monumental, I do get to curb some of that fascism through moderation. I get to push buttons with labels that read “delete post” and “suspend.” When some ignorant sociopath is harassing people, I get to wave a magic wand and make them disappear. At least from our corner of Mastodon. That’s empowering. And meaningful. It does make a difference because I get to silence them. I can’t begin to describe how good that feels. Just a little tiny bit of justice.”
An excellent writeup of what it’s like to be a moderator for Mastodon. It explains what the day-to-day experience of being a moderator on Mastodon is like, and what some of the main challenges are, such as dealing with targeted harassment and getting exposed to traumatic content. The quote above highlights why people put up with these challenges, and indicates the value of a social network that gives people agency.
“I don’t know how to run a community forum in this future. I do not have the time or emotional energy to screen out regular attacks by Large Language Models, with the knowledge that making the wrong decision costs a real human being their connection to a niche community. I do not know how to determine whether someone’s post about their new bicycle is genuine enthusiasm or automated astroturf. I don’t know how to foster trust and genuine interaction in a world of widespread text and image synthesis—in a world where, as one friend related this week, newbies can ask an LLM for advice on exploring their kinks, and the machine tells them to try solo breath play. In this world I think woof.group, and many forums like it, will collapse.“
A worrying account of how LLMs make the current systems of keeping spam out of closed social networks unfeasible. There are communities who need some form of anonymity of their members to function, such as the queer kink community woof.group. These communities ask for some form of applications by new members. The ability of LLMs to cheaply generate bullshit on a grand scale is being used spammers to join these private communities and use it for spam. There is a clear need for new ways to build and maintain communities while keeping spammers out, and it is currently unclear how such a system would look like.
“My goals now are more modest: planting seeds in people’s minds that another way to interact online is possible. And when people ARE READY and willing, help them set up an account on the Fediverse software best suited for their needs, helping them out and acclimatizing them to the culture of this place.“
Elena Rossini writes about how her thoughts on the fediverse and growth have shifted, and her plans for the next year of her blog. It echoes a trend I wrote recently about as well: the previous conceptualisation of growth for the new social networks does not hold up anymore, and we need new stories on how these networks can be used to build new communication structures.
Kim caught up with Andy, Mastodon's new comms lead, for a chat about the Fediverse's poster child. Find out more about the future of the project, how they feel about Bluesky, and how you can get involved.
Bandwagon Premier launches at the end of the year, selling albums will only be available for this premium subscription tier of $10/month.
This is kinda stupid? I don't see anyone wanting to use this. If you don't sell anything, you still have to pay. Also, as time passes, your older releases are sold less. If you don't release anything new in a while, it makes little sense to keep being subscribed until your next release. Fees are way better, especially for small / little known artists. I think it makes more sense to host some free stuff here for advertisement, and then post a link to your Bandcamp in your profile to let people buy there, because their model is better.
Yeah... I'm not sure that's a good monetization model... I feel like even the standard taking a small cut of every transaction is a better idea than that :/
It feels really overly punishing for small artists while being very reasonable for established larger artists, which sucks
Profitez des vidéos et de la musique que vous aimez, mettez en ligne des contenus originaux, et partagez-les avec vos amis, vos proches et le monde entier.
In 2025, USAID cut funding for a rainwater harvesting initiative designed to improve water access at cyclone evacuation centers in one of the country’s most remote, drought-prone provinces, said Vomboe Shem, climate lead for Save the Children Vanuatu. The materials had already been shipped and distributed, but the project was halted.
Someone told me that “the global elites” wanted to chase a policy of reducing the worlds population (vaccines came up as one way) as part of environmental policies and that was why they needed to support Trump (neither of us has any material attachment to the USA, naturally).
It’s ironic, because that’s actually what Trump is doing. painfully ironic, as people are being hurt and killed by the policies. Not to say that a different president wouldn’t move in their own interest.
Makes no sense on the face of it. Depopulation causes economic depression. Guess you could say they were reaching for environmental action, and fewer bodies would be the main fix, but if they're such environmentalists there are easier ways to fix this shit if you're rich and powerful.
Is this supposed to sway eco conscious genocide supporters? "Think of the environmental harms!" Rather than focusing on the immediate horrors currently being inflicted by Israel on the Palestinian population
Is this supposed to sway eco conscious genocide supporters?
This is not the way I understood this article. It seems to me it is one more argument for the case of continuous ethnic cleansing for so many decades.
If we agree that
most frequently, however, the aim of ethnic cleansing is to expel the despised ethnic group through either indirect coercion or direct force, and to ensure that return is impossible,
then by bombing all buildings, homes and infrastructure, they force people to go somewhere else and in the same time restrict them from coming back, since there is nothing to come back to.
So in this study, they actually measure the not coming back for decades part
At this point, clearing it and re-building will have to happen regardless of the outcome of the genocide, so what point are they trying to make here? The only green choice is to leave Gaza a destroyed wasteland?
It needs to be cleared, re-built, and returned to the Palestinians. Ideally funded by the Israelis.
The point of this study, to my understanding, is to calculates some of the aftermath of this ongoing genocide, concerning debris, carbon emissions, time frames, and implications for rebuilding. No?
Well, sure, recovery from incredible devastation will take decades and the energy required to clear and replace all the structures will not be environmentally friendly, that should all be obvious to anyone who knows anything about construction projects:
"To create Portland cement, limestone undergoes a calcination process, which releases large amounts of CO2 from the chemical reaction. This is the concrete industry’s dirtiest activity, releasing up to 50 per cent of the cement industry’s carbon emissions.
Additionally, to transform raw materials into clinker, cement's intermediate product, large amounts of energy are required to heat, mix and cool the ingredients in giant kilns.
It is estimated that, in traditional kilns, one tonne of cement produces one tonne of carbon dioxide, although modernised factories have found ways to reduce these emissions.
Water Use
Cement creation is also highly water intensive, particularly during cooling after materials are baked at extremely high temperatures.
Nature Magazine estimates the concrete industry is responsible for nine per cent of all water withdrawals from the sector. Approximately 16.6 km squared of water is used annually for concrete production, and this figure is expected to soar as the demand for concrete continues to rise."
So, again, what are they trying to argue here? The only environmentally responsible option is to leave Gaza destroyed?
So, again, what are they trying to argue here? The only environmentally responsible option is to leave Gaza destroyed?
From the study itself (4. Discussion & 5. Concluding remarks), this is not what I got. On the contrary, it seems to me like they try to make some calculations/estimations/evaluations so that this is something that takes place.
The Fediverse is something that you should know about! (P.S: I am not an expert) If you want to break free of traditional social media in control of big tech companies and people you don't trust, t...
vegeta
in reply to vegeta • • •