The entire web is built on standardized e2e encryption schemes fought for by techie nerds so that we don't have these problems there.

Definitely no shady VPNs run by white westerners though. Theyve all got impeccable morals through ans through. Glad you cleared that up.

I doubt you'll hear any docs about failures. I think that's what this article is about? I.e. a lack of transparency?

I think that is what they're saying? I.e. "let Taiwan fight for themselves and stay out of it western nations"?

Reading this new CEOs job history on linkedin is kinda infuriating. She goes from intern to head of consumer products at Skype in less than a year. Just... Frustrating to read that while I am and manage really good people who struggle for decades in the trenches to get even paltry job opportunities.

But she got her MBA from Stanford so nepotism ahoy I guess.

It's 2024 and congress still wants people to come in to the office to raise their hand.

These people will literally apply the death penalty for jaywalkers as long as the jaywalker is "them* (i.e. non white l, male, or just someone they slightly disagree with) and then scream online about how theyre protected from censorship by the first amendment.

To be fair, the supreme court has made the same argument when granting themselves absolute immunity. But it was just as stupid then (and still theoretically only applies when executing their job).

"We could never do anything if we had to worry about lawsuits all the time" yes, that's how life works for everyone who makes decisions.

Immunity isn't in the constitution for anyone. The supreme court just made it up at one point to try and keep themselves from being sued. I assume that's what they're appealing with here. No one knows how it works because, again, they just made it up.

Their entire party is built around making their constituents angry at other people. Earnst us trying to enrage people because she's ameyeing a national positikn.

I think it's time to just call them on it. Everyone believes in feeding kids. It's not controversial. It's the ethical right thing to do. There is no disagreement between parties here. She's just doing this to try and stir up anger at "them/"others" because she thinks it will make a subset of people vote for her.

They've taken things yo faster before when there is a time imperative to do so. There is here. They're breaking their own precedent.

I was in dehi recently. Poverty is kinda nuts there, but I noticed everyone had phones, even people who obviously had no home. I assume kinda shitty phones, but it makes you realize a bit how important access is. If someone releases an iOS only app with no web version, they're basically saying fuck you to all those people.

Same same for this though. Googles saying "as long as you use our stuff you'll be fine, and why wouldn't you use our stuff because it's free! (Sometimes kinda sorta). And if you're stuck with something else for some reason, fuck you."