Donald Trump put up a video of President Barack Obama being arrested by the FBI in the Oval Office as you can see in the screen grab. Trump is exceedingly happy about it, of course.
The video starts with Obama and a number of Democrats all saying "No One Is Above The Law," then a clown picture, and then the video of the FBI grabbing Obama. Then, Obama is in prison orange jumpsuit in a prison hallway, and then finally in a jail cell.
It's really a small screen video, and the soundtrack sounds like something from the Village People.
This is also up on Trump's Truth Social.
Samantha Power was Obama's Ambassador to the United Nations. Under Joe Biden, she was the Administrator of the United States Agency for International Developmen. USAID.
Western aggression against Iran is a gross violation of international law and a failure of Western containment strategy. Modern geopolitics increasingly
“This is not Israel’s war against Iran because Israel—a tiny country—would never have attacked Iran without the full support of the West. Israel would have been immediately destroyed if it acted alone.”
Negates the story Washington thinking bibs is a rabid dog for attacking Syria. But evil talkies are liars.
The future of Iran-Kuwait relations is likely to be largely influenced by pragmatic engagement focused on areas of mutual benefit, sustainable economic
TEHRAN, Jul. 20 (MNA) – The Iranian foreign minister has said that the three European participants to the 2015 Iran nuclear deal should be able to abuse the Resolution 2231 to trigger the snapback mechanism against Iran.
I am getting so sick of your shit. Start doing better. Seriously, your memes are inaccurate, and frankly just bad. You are obviously either brainwashed or a plant. Fucking do better.
When you look at the world through the empire mandated lens, maybe it looks like that. If you open your mind and leave that censorship ridden right-wing instance, you will learn what the empire truly does to manipulate you
I hate how capcut has gotten to. Ive tried davcihi resolve but i find it isint as easy as capcut. I want to try a open source video editor for my linux mint laptop that is really free and so easy even a child could learn it.
I recently tried KDENlive for the first time and had a ton of stability issues. Multiple segfaults, corrupted saves, etc. Is that par for the course of the tool? Seems like it might have core issues with the implementation if a brand new user can crash it.
Which version did you try? I used the 24.12.something version earlier this year for some rather complicated project and it was very stable.
I know they had stability issues before but not with that version. Disclaimer: I did not do video editing since, so I cannot say if the stability issues are back.
I have version 25.04.2, was just doing a simple edit trying to overlay annotations on a screen recording so nothing crazy effects-wise. Guess I should go read the patch notes.
They're not helpful. OP asked specifically for editors similar to CapCut that are "so easy even a child could learn it." None of those fit that usecase.
OpenShot is an award-winning free and open-source video editor for Linux, Mac, and Windows. Create videos with exciting video effects, titles, audio tracks, and animations.
There is nothing like CapCut for Linux. There's Resolve, LightWorks, Shotcut, Kdenlive and the less evolved, Openshot. That's it, all the other editors found online or suggested here are nowhere near completion. Also, none of them have the feel of Capcut with its AI and advanced automatic features. If you want to go open source, I'd suggest you learn to use kdenlive. It's good enough with manual workarounds, as long as you don't shoot in 10bit or in RAW or need complex color grading. If you really require automatic AI stuff like in Capcut, stay with Windows/Mac or a tablet. That's the reality.
I think good, truly easy video editors are a dying breed. I loved Windows Live Movie Maker - rest in peace.
These days, I think it’s worth it just to learn a video editor. A lot of the skills transfer; I haven’t used DaVinci before, but I’ve used other major proprietary professional video editors like Adobe Premiere and Final Cut Pro - the skills transfer. Just search how to do a thing you want to do a few times, and you’ll find it gets easier.
As others have said, I think KDEnlive is quite good; I haven’t had a huge amount of stability issues. From what I remember (granted, I may be out of date), OpenShot felt really jank in general; I used Shotcut for a while but had stability issues and UI annoyances. Comparatively, I enjoy KDEnlive.
I you want open-source then your best choice is either Shotcut or Kdenlive.
Shotcut is one of the simplest editor I've ever used...but only if you have simple edits to do, the more you wanna do something less simple the worst it gets.
Kdenlive on the other hand is fine to use in most use cases, but can be a bit tricky to understand at first.
So I always suggest Shotctut if you're sure you won't do crazy edits, Kdenlive otherwise, or to just use both if you are unsure.
Western intelligence agencies have stepped up their attempts to recruit Russian diplomats after the beginning of the special military operation, Russian Ambassador to Romania Vladimir Lipayev has said in an interview with Sputnik.
It has always bothered me that privacy has no unified symbol. Every community has their own take on how privacy should be visualized. I want to unify the privacy community across the internet. It is my belief that, with a universal symbol for privacy, we will grow stronger. We will have a symbol to represent us. We will have a flag to fly.
Icon
The icon is a clipart created by librarian Gordon Dylan Johnson which can be found here. The size of the icon is large enough to still fit if the flag is cropped to a square/circular aspect ratio.
Dimensions
The size of the flag is 140 by 90 centimeters. These dimensions are chosen because of the dimensions of a Tor Browser window (1400x900 pixels).
Use this flag for group chats, communities, profiles, stickers, patches, articles, wallpapers, real flags, anything you want to! Spread it around so it becomes a global icon for privacy. Even put it on the Wikipedia page for privacy if you can!
Yeah, I mean it looks like some edgy Dark Brotherhood shit from an Elder Scrolls game, not something with a respectable message such as the right to privacy.
Those are some fucked up palm lines. Heart line is okay ish, strong. Head and life lines are... I don't event know if those have a boilerplate reading they are so unnatural. This pirate might be headed for the love of their life or an early, traumatic death. Godspeed.
On a more serious note, I would suggest you consider simplifying the hand to a solid hand. The hand as-is would be very difficult to reproduce and draws attention from the overall flag design.
As I mentioned in the post, the icon was created by Gordon Dylan Johnson. The way I interpret it is that the eye represents surveillance, and you are holding up your hand, which is the body language for "stop."
Going to be an unpopular opinion here. But i think the mixing of sharp curves, with very pixelish, textured hand is not really playing well together. Mixing these two styles are not easy and I have tried and failed several times. So I don't think I can help much. But this really needs some rework IMO. I know this is not your artwork, so I'm just expressing what I felt.
first thought that came across my mind is the Black Hand of the Brotherhood of Nod
I guess it's nice that it follows the principles of design for flags, but it still looks off somehow. the minimalism of the eye vs the more detailed hand print seemed at odds.
A simpler less detailed hand print IMO would look better. Like the Black Hand of Nod. also less detailed Hand print = less/no fingerprinting across internet
Yeah the hand is way too complicated and hard to identify from far away. Also, proper identification requires some amount of wind, which is not the kind of dependency you want to integrate into your flag design. That’s why stripes are so common.
Controversial opinion: those guidelines are poorly defined and ill advised made by a particular group of heavily anglo-american centric people and promoted by a few YTers and shouldn't be taken like fucking gospel
I really like the idea of a flag to unify the privacy community but I'm going to go with the consensus with the hand: it's probably a bit too complex. I think a flag should be easily made into a vector format that is easy to draw and replicate.
Say if someone wanted to draw a protest board with this on it. It would be really difficult to accurately draw the hand without good drawing skills.
First off, we're against being seen. Why would we want a big creepy eye as the definition of success? Did Pirate flags show shackles and gallows? Of course not.
What are common pictograms associated with privacy? Shields. Locks. Locks on shields. Privacy is about defense and control.
Second, the blue gives me BSOD vibes. I get the EU reference, but black is super obvious here. Black it out. Redacted. Blind. All right there.
My suggestions? A shield or lock with dove at its center. Because the mass surveillance state is one of fear, not freedom or peace. Black field with blue and white stripes, white representing freedom, blue as you have it, and I guess giving a nod to Estonia's leadership in EU tech. Not that we need to rep Estonia, but I also liked their Eurovision entry this year.
Not sure about an icon or flag to depict the idea of announcing Hey I'm For Privacy!! Feels like it goes against the whole principle. It's along the same lines of stickers on a vehicle, stick family tells (most times) exactly how many people and animals w/types are within the household, gun logos indicate a high probability of an abundance of weaponry, a privacy flag may promote someone to look deeper into you with the premise well they want privacy so they must have something to hide, mentality. I'm private I don't need to draw attention to me being private. But you do you. Just my opinion.
I get your point and idea. And I agree, there should be a symbol. But in a world full of symbols, where there is lot of symbols that overlap or mean the same thing, it's not a great thing to ad more symbols.
This logo stand for rights and freedom, which is not in opposition to anything, but for something. Article 8 in the Human Rights, are about the right to privacy:
You are a dreamer, and this is exactly what we need. Two hands up for that.
But before designing a flag, we first need to agree on the symbolism.
There are two types of symbols. Anti symbols and pro symbols.
Anti symbols are easier to make, because they comes from reaction. Its easy to see whats wrong. "anarchism is order" and "stop war" stickers are anti symbols.
But pro symbols are harder because they require us to understand what we are fighting for. The rainbow flag and the aboriginal flag are pro flags, because they show what they are fighting for. The rainbow flag fights for diversity, while the aboriginal flag establishes a connection between people, land and the sun.
In short, I believe that a pro symbol would be better for gleedening people into the struggle.
With this in mind, I think we should fundamenrally understand why privacy matters, and make symbols out of that.
While i like the idea, this flag gives instant super-creepy vibes, i would NOT like to use it unless it's for a bad guys faction in a game or story or something like that
I like it, but a slightly more stylized hand would suit my tastes better. Either way though it's good to have. I also think yellow and black would be better to symbolize the importance and danger of privacy decay.
Idea is good, execution needs some work imho. As many have pointed out this is not a good combination of symbols. I showed this to 5 different people too and none of them were able to guess its meaning. I'm all for a symbol to show engagement towards the privacy movement, such as the privacy manifesto. Just not quite like this.
I would dsy the end of the European front doubled the life expectancy. Kinda weird to attribute that to a single person. The Soviets were instrumental in the defeat of the Nazis, no doubt. But saying they doubled the life expectancy of all of Europe as their claim is like saying Churchill was a good person.
Can we please just pay a cent or half a cent for each page we vist. Its like 50x what the website would get from our view with ads and its not much. I'm sure it would encourage others to start their own website as well if you could get $1 from 100 page views.
There are so many things like this news article where they want to charge me a few dollars. Bro I cant afford to pay $5 a month for every single platform that would close me 1000s.
Don't you already pay to use the Internet? Why does anybody have to make record profits every quarter, fuck all ads. The Internet was much better when corporations were not involved.
Idc about corporations but the internet costs and you cant get away from that. Servers and the infrastructure around them has to be paid for. And I'm happy to pay my share when I vist someones website. My issue is that my share is a few cents not a few dollars like a lot of these newpapers try and charge.
I wish I could take you back 10 years further. It's like a national forest that someone build a parking lot and strip mall over, and everyone cheers because they finally tore the mall down and put up a giant fence water park with cameras everywhere.
Yes things were different back then. It wasnt a national forest, it was forest in a world where no cities existed anywhere. Nothing had been built on the internet back then. You didnt have websites that served userbases in the 100s of millions. You didnt have to serve images, videos, live streams and other dynamic content. You didnt have the same security overhead now required. If the internet were only text chat over irc I wouldnt be sitting here worrying about internet funding.
I dont go to the cbd of my city and think "I wish they replaced this with a forest" because I know there are plenty of forests outside the city, and people choose to live in the city over the forest. Same for the internet and so we need to think about solving the problem instead of wishing to tear everything down.
You mean in the current state of human society we could never accomplish that. It's a nice dream that we could have a star trek future but I only see mad max as humanity's fate. Oh well thanks for all the fish.
I think websites should be paid for by the person or organization that owns them, personally. I don't want to be subsidizing businesses that I have no role in or control over, or paying for other people to engage in their hobbies.
Can you explain this "I don’t want to be subsidizing businesses that I have no role in or control over, or paying for other people to engage in their hobbies."
I dont get why you are against giving money to companies you dont control only on the web, you surely do it a ton in everyday life. In regards to the hobby, how do you know its their hobby and even if it was its not your place to decide if they should be paid for their time. If they're making something thats good enough for you to want to consume it then you should pay them for it.
First of all, prices already go up for things like netflix. This isnt aimed at subscription sites like netflix its more for pages where you browse for free at the cost of viewing ads like blogs, youtube, substack, lemmy etc. Yes prices would go up over time no doubt but the idea is that the users providing the money should lower the cost. 1000 humans visting your site should be willing to pay more than an advertiser is to show an ad to those 1000 people. Google generally pays around 5cents to 30cents for 1000 views. I dont know about you but I can split 30 cents between 1000 people, hell i'll even double it cause im generous. I think if 1000 people are viewing your website you should get paid for providing something interesting enough for 1000 people to enjoy. If everyone gave 1cent thats $100, if everyone paid double what the ad was they'd be paying $0.0003 each.
I dont want people who write a blog that is read by many people to need to subject their readers to ads all only to get a check from google saying heres a few cents bud. We can do better, and I dont think the answer is asking people to pay a $5 a month.
Just realized a whole generation of kids will have ai links to the web, so if they look for something theyll get the one sanitized link, think the whole skill of searching and sifting through links will be lost (it was thought in schools when I was a kid)
lol. You're not wrong that it'll be way easier to rely on AI to do the sorting for you, but you're implying Google didn't sanitize information and only give you results they approve of...
There's way more to the internet than you can find on search engines.
Yeah the search engines are filled with ways to access the dark web
google "dark web search engine" and google isnt hiding sht
Better off using tor? Reddits a bigger issue here they had heaps of guides and wikis related to it, they banned all that sht before lemmy became a thing`
And that was back when hosting, storage, and bandwidth were expensive. Those are basically free for text-based content now, and getting cheaper for audio and video. Nowadays, anything made by amateurs shouldn't really need a "business model" at all, and anything made by professionals could be damned cheap, if there were no middlemen taking the majority of the cut.
"AI is going to fix everything, so we need a new way to make money."
1) AI is nothing but a delusional and unwanted waste of energy. 3) The web doesn't need a business model, period. Money-grubbing billionaires are the only ones who need a business model.
Not op, but I pay for my own server, domain and IP (though it is not a static one). And I've donated to some of the fediverse platforms that I use, like lemmy.world. I'm not sure what you are trying to get at?
So what's your public facing site address and we'll see how we'll it can hold against the onslaught on the net. You gonna pay to host all the YouTube videos too. Do you host instances for thousands of others to mess with. What SaaS offerings does your site present. If you're not sure what my point is you're not informed enough to present a legitimate argument.
I'm a bit baffled by his hostile response. All I said is that I host and pay for my own server. Nowhere did I claim that I host YouTube videos on that server, or that it is open to the public. I host that server for personal use, and for me and a few friends of mine. At most there is going to be two people connecting to it at once.
I have looked into hosting a peertube instance, but I've not really gotten around to figuring out how to set that all up.
I did consider them. And they're false. It's a simple concept. Remove that which pays for everything and everything will go away. This isn't difficult.
We already pay for this through the time theft and involuntary brainwashing known as "ads". It's a very dumb and wasteful way to pay for a shitty product. But that's capitalism as usual.
What SaaS offerings does your site present.
lol. The internet doesn't run on marketing buzzwords. Grow up.
The premise of a web business model is that websites must make a profit - either directly or indirectly.
That's utter bullshit. Some of us are old enough to remember when the web (or for that matter, the pre-web internet) was there for sharing of information, social interaction, and community. Schools, the government, and nonprofits provided hosting for free.
Later on, ISPs started to add hosting as part of their internet service - along with usenet access and an email address. The cost to them was negligible, especially vs. the benefits of being able to say "switch to us and create your own website!"
Nowadays you can run a site from your home PC in a VM, punch a hole through your firewall, and pay a modicum for DDNS to a custom domain for under a hundred bucks a year. If you're a bigger site with more traffic, maybe you spin it up on AWS and pay ten or twenty bucks a month.
The very idea that "The Web" is a homogeneous, for-profit entity is a profound and fundamental mistake that is made by every money-obsessed organization around - not just the financial rags like Forbes and The Economist, but essentially corporations as well. Take a look at the support site for your favourite product and try to convince yourself that they didn't just put the minimum required effort in to send customers into the arms of their competitors.
I never heard of an ISP offering a free website to host, the free mail address I do remember sadly.
A lot of what is wrong with the web is the result of governments lacking the ability to stop companies from growing too much. It doesn't help either that the best country for startups is as corrupt as fuck and has been for decades, including from before the start of the internet.
We all should chose to use parts of the web we want to use, like Lemmy and actual non-profit organisations like Ecosia, Proton and what not.
Nobody ever offered free web hosting. They put ads on your shit or you paid for it. You became the product. You're talking about shit that very few these days even know how to do. And no those costs weren't negligible which is why geo cities and all those other "free" pages disappeared. Same with all the couple dozen different chat programs that sprung up. Free shit works partially at small scale but can't handle any kind of serious activity. People can barely navigate Salesforce there's no way they're setting up their own hooks or poking holes in their routers or setting up external dns.
Don't pull that age bullshit on me. Im nearly 50. I was there in the muds, in the bbs, on icq, watched Napster sutdown. Been configuring this shit since 3.1 and wordperfect in dos.
Kagi’s model is working well for them. A traditional search engine where AI results are limited and optional, and they actively try to filter away slop, images, clickbait, and other low quality results.
I’ve been paying for 3 months and I’ll never go back. I hope they increase their market share as others ratchet up their enshittification cranks.
I despise subscriptions a lot, I also believe that the use of a search engine shouldn't be something that is run for profit, see where it got us with Google? I also dislike Kagi (and other sites) who refuse to comply with the rules and regulations we have in Europe surrounding prices on sites. They are American iirc which doesn't help for that and that also means they barely have to make any financial figures public.
I prefer Ecosia (or Qwant), which are making their own search engine together and while they are still funded by ads, it wouldn't surprise me if in the future (if not already) they get money from the governments. I also prefer actual non-profits (not those American non-profit statuses that can be bough) compared to for profit businesses.
Amusingly enough, The Economist illustrates what I believe to be the new business model that's already waiting in the wings for the internet.
With admittedly no direct evidence to support it, my theory at the moment is that the "AI" players plan to consolidate and to continue to expand their reach and continue to gain users who rely on the "AI" for information rather than following links to the originals, then, once the "AI"s have killed enough clicks to collapse the ad model and drive the websites out of business (and give them the opportunity to buy up the remains of the businesses, and more importantly, their databases), they'll put all of the information of which they're now in sole possession behind paywalls.
Broadly, the goal is to apply the most lucrative if least popular business model to information ,- to monopolize ownership of it in order to sit back and collect money as rent-seeking parasites.
See, that's a reasonable take I agree with for the most part, but I think it'll play out a bit differently. Because these AIbro Technofascist dipshit Billionaires are so fucking stupid, instead of just pulling the plug on AI and sitting on the wealth of information like metaphorical dragons, they'll continue pumping billions into larger and more complex models to try and "automate everything", all the while fighting each other viciously, until they all run out of money when their AI-Powered techno-utopia where autonomous robots run everything never comes to pass.
Meanwhile, instead of paying for the information hoards of the TechnoFascist Elites, people will begin self-hosting again, like with the Fediverse, because it's just simply cheaper and more effective at letting people learn as groups and connect with each other.
Considering most of those technofascists are American's who cannot even have proper payment platforms and proper bank connections I doubt they will actually succeed.
If it is only just them doing this AI movement (spoiler they aren't), they would also stop at the US borders, because just like a huge part of the American businesses, they don't care about anybody else
For as long as I live, I will never forget that the whole world watched Israel starve 2 million innocent people in Gaza, killing children on a daily basis and did nothing to stop it, even worse, punished those trying to end it and helped, funded, protected and armed the genocidal regime of Netanyahu.
Free Free Palestine! A space for activists and Palestinians to connect and amplify their efforts for the liberation of Palestine. Promote Palestinian solidarity events, or document and share here.
For as long as I live, I will never forget that the whole world watched Israel starve 2 million innocent people in Gaza, killing children on a daily basis and did nothing to stop it, even worse, punished those trying to end it and helped, funded, protected and armed the genocidal regime of Netanyahu.
Dude, the person you're replying to has lost the fucking plot. What a baffling Lemmy history. It's like the linked shit take was grown in a lab to be optimally shit: any less and it's less shit, any more and it's less plausible someone believes this, making it less shit.
We have the Scofield Bible to blame. Remember that Christians did the whole Spanish Inquisition thing and Martin Luther called for the expulsion of Jews from Europe. If supporting Israel because Jews exist there was theologically consistent with Christianity then neither of those things would have happened. But the Scofield bible rewrote parts of the Bible to promote Christian Zionism and was popularized particularly in the United States. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scofield…
Israeli spokesmen responsible for messaging the United States still quote it. Bibi says: "God will bless those who bless us [Zionist Israel]." In reality the Bible used the non-plural you referring to Abraham the individual person, who was alive 4000 years ago.
Meanwhile Jesus himself said to modern Israel's progenitors, who were also political zionists, "Say not that you are sons of Abraham, for if you were you would do the works of your father. But you do the works of your father, who is Satan."
Basically if you are a modern Christian who supports Israel you are a fucking retard who can't read. The clergy of older Christianity could read. That's why they didn't think their post-judiaism religion demanded they worship any Jews with the exception of Jesus.
All the English translations are wrong, because Greeks and Romans translated wrong, sometimes by honest mistake, often for political reasons, whether institutional or governmental, often both in tandem.
Well that's an extremely fair point to make. Point is the Bible was re-written again, (maybe you have a better idea of the total rewrite count), to spread Zionist propaganda and was propagated through the US in particular.
Fun fact. Even Isaac Newton was able to find ways in which the Bible was surreptitiously altered. So this is a bit of a problem in general. People have been altering the Bible to meet political ends for a while.
In the case of the bit we have Bibi quoting we have the Jewish version to reference and their own version uses a singular you, but Bibi found the Scofield version to be convenient. Crazy how this guy knows more about translation variance in Christian versions of the Old Testament better than most Christians do. It's almost like this guy made it his job to communicate to Christians and get them to support him.
Zionism didn't exist during Constantine's time. The father of Zionism, Herzl, was an antisemitic atheist. But Balfour signed the Agreement and Truman recognized Israel.
Yes to meet political ends. If there was one man who was literal Jesus, rather than legendary or an amalgamation of men, then he was crucified for being a threat to a rather comfortable occupation of Israel by the Romans, on trumped up religious charges. Same as chattel slaves and abolitionists. The modern global West is using both methods, Europe and the UK by criminalizing condemnation of illegal occupation and genocide, US with that coupled with discrimination against Christians. But only certain ones.
Nathaniel Hawthorne wrote about it in The Scarlet Letter, and Young Goodman Brown. Not that his ideas were perfect, but were rather advanced for his time.
Disclaimer: The article linked is from a single source with a single perspective. Make sure to cross-check information against multiple sources to get a comprehensive view on the situation.
Laser printers are the best. You sacrifice the quality of dense pictures, but gain incomparable speed and reliability. It's especially worth it if you print less often, because the ink dries up if you don't print every once in a while and you end up buying new ink even though the cartridge is full, but the toner just sits there indefinitely.
i started a (very niche) private messaging protocol & little CLI app demo. i’m no security expert, so any feedback or questions would be appreciated.
the gist is an ephemeral message exchange without identities. the goal is ultimate deniability.
the interesting (and weird) part is that messages are encrypted but not authenticated. this means an imposter could show up if they know the shared secret. otoh this means you can deny anything you say.
interesting point! i chose symmetric shared key because it means you can’t prove who sent what message.
the shared secret does add some authentication, which i think is necessary. the goal is it only creates enough to be practical (a random person can’t eavesdrop), but not enough to prove things. messages themselves still aren’t authenticated by any one person.
you’re not wrong, but that’s just the trade off that has to be made, i think. it’s the only way i can think to do it, at least. need -some- authentication for practical usability.
your gpg example removes the deniability since it proves who wrote the message.
Couldn't you use HMAC with shared secret key to authenticate messages while keeping plausible deniability? Since the key is only supposed to be known to the 2 parties, the recipient can deduce that a message was actually sent by the sender if he did not create it himself. I think that's what OTR was using.
ooh, i’ll have to think through it, but it sounds like that’d add message integrity without sacrificing deniability. also wouldn’t be much to add. appreciate the feedback!
during or after a conversation, anyone with the keys can create fake transcripts by creating messages with the same metadata, same nonce, different content.
because of this, no transcript can be proven to be the correct transcript. the trade-off is you don’t get forward secrecy on the per-message level, but you get it per-conversation.
another detail is that there is no identity, so all the above aside, there’s also no way to prove who sent which message.
Disclaimer: The article linked is from a single source with a single perspective. Make sure to cross-check information against multiple sources to get a comprehensive view on the situation.
Disclaimer: The article linked is from a single source with a single perspective. Make sure to cross-check information against multiple sources to get a comprehensive view on the situation.
Disclaimer: The article linked is from a single source with a single perspective. Make sure to cross-check information against multiple sources to get a comprehensive view on the situation.
The UN agency for Palestinian refugees (UNRWA) on Sunday once again accused Israeli authorities of using starvation as a weapon of war against the civilian population of Gaza, Anadolu reports.
Disclaimer: The article linked is from a single source with a single perspective. Make sure to cross-check information against multiple sources to get a comprehensive view on the situation.
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Friday announced the revocation of US visas for eight of Brazil’s 11 Supreme Court justices, in what officials described as part of a broader effort to support former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro, who is currently fighting prosecution for his alleged attempt to overturn the 2022 election.
Disclaimer: The article linked is from a single source with a single perspective. Make sure to cross-check information against multiple sources to get a comprehensive view on the situation.
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Friday announced the revocation of US visas for eight of Brazil’s 11 Supreme Court justices, in what officials described as part of a broader effort to support for...
US chip giant Intel has launched a major downsizing campaign in Israel, slashing jobs and scaling back operations at its flagship manufacturing site in the southern city of Kiryat Gat, in a move signaling deeper structural challenges facing the company both locally and globally, Anadolu reports.
Ex-federal prosecutors say a Justice Department request to unseal grand jury transcripts in the prosecution of chronic sexual abuser Jeffrey Epstein and his former girlfriend is unlikely to produce much, if anything, to satisfy the public's appetite for new revelations about the financier's crimes.
Disclaimer: The article linked is from a single source with a single perspective. Make sure to cross-check information against multiple sources to get a comprehensive view on the situation.
This August, Path of Exile 2 will once again be going to Gamescom in Cologne, Germany! This time, we wanted to do something a bit special, so we are now introducing the Path of Exile 2 Boss Rush Event. Kill as many bosses as you can in 20 minutes, and win some cool prizes.
In the past all our demos at events have been playing slices of the game, but since we are in Early Access now, we knew we wanted to make something that existing players would also enjoy trying out, and that is where the idea for the Boss Rush was born.
Choose between 7 preconstructed character builds, one for each class, then see how many bosses you can kill. Before each boss are a few packs of monsters so you can test out your skills, before getting to the main event. Then throw yourself at the boss for as many attempts as it takes to bring it down.
After you kill the boss, a portal will open up to the next arena, and the level of all subsequent bosses will increase. There are 15 bosses in all, many of which have not appeared in the game yet. We highly doubt you can kill them all!
Above the booth will be a live leaderboard featuring the top Exiles able to kill the most bosses in the shortest period of time.
If you're planning to attend the exhibition, make sure to check out our booth! All visitors will have the chance to earn Path of Exile 2 merchandise prizes depending on how many bosses you can kill.
Reminds me of when I threw Debian Trixie on my freshly decommissioned high school Chromebook - with Bcachefs. Luckily, it wasn’t a daily driver, just a toy; the thing had an AMD Stoney Ridge APU that you had to use special compiler flags on to get working.
Another day, another complaint about Microsoft from LibreOffice. This time, LibreOffice accuses Microsoft of intentionally using overly complex XML to define documents and lock in users.
Maeve
in reply to jackeroni • • •Negates the story Washington thinking bibs is a rabid dog for attacking Syria. But evil talkies are liars.