Stevia is the worst, IMO. It’s got a strange mouth feel.
You know how eating tortilla chips will cut up your mouth a little? They irritate the tongue and throat, making them feel a little gritty? Anything with stevia gives me that “tortilla chip mouth” sensation, even when I haven’t been eating tortilla chips.
Every other artificial sweetener tastes like cancer. Stevia tastes like sand.
9.9999%
Does anyone else pronounce it “Ass Part o’ Me”?
AI;DR
Think bigger.
Pretty sure the nuclear plant will provide significantly more heat. I mean, those giant cooling towers are specifically designed to unload heat into the atmosphere.
That’s what I’m asking: what would that law look like? Securities fraud?
Could current anti-trust laws be applied? This could be construed as anti-competitive practices.
What laws are going to attack circular funding?
40? The oldest millenials are turning 45 this year.
Invasion of privacy can be a good teaching moment.
Don’t wait until they’ve embarrassed themselves: take them through their browser history before they’ve even thought about porn. Show them router logs before they include pornhub entries. Show them their tracking history while they were far away from you, out with grandma. Explain that you don’t look at these things, but that this sort of information is available. That if they use their school’s wifi it’s available to their teachers. If they use their friend’s wifi, it’s available to their friend’s dad.
Do it while the information isn’t embarrassing, and they will learn to protect themselves, rather than be upset about your “invasion”.
Access to the Internet is not something that the parents are actually capable of restricting. As soon as one kid in the has a phone, their entire peer group is exposed.
The question isn’t about restriction. It’s about who will be teaching these kids about the Internet. The first kid learns from their parents; every other kid learns (mostly) from other kids.
If your kid is the last in their class to have a phone, everything they know about the Internet they will have learned from their peers. They sure as hell aren’t going to tell you they already know about all the things you’ve been trying to hide from them.
Economic.
Where it takes a young couple 80 hours of paid labor per week just to maintain a lower-middle class lifestyle, kids become an unaffordable luxury in a traditional family. When 40 hours of paid labor can comfortably support a family, that couple starts having kids.
UBI corrects the problem in multiple ways. It meets the basic needs of the family, so that their own income is immediately gainful.
UBI removes “starvation” as a motivation for labor. A drowning man will drag his wife, kids, and even his rescuers underwater with him, just for one more breath of air in his lungs. The desperate laborer will accept whatever pittance he is offered for his time, because that pittance is better than foregoing medical coverage, or the roof over his head, or enough food. In accepting that pittance, this desperate worker establishes the market value of labor, and drags down the compensation of everyone around him. A UBI relieves the majority of his desperation, and frees him to walk away from exploitative employers. That skinflint employer is forced to either offer a reasonable wage, or go out of business.
A UBI is a “Citizenship Dividend” - a payment for the use of Democratically-derived political powers. It is payment for the individual’s (compulsory) investment in his or her government, allowing that government to provide services to and collect taxes and fees from non-person, corporate entities on our behalf.
There is no indication that they can actually acquire the clear text of an E2EE communicatiom. without one of the ends being complicit in the process. There is no evidence of the fraud you refer to.
That doesn’t mean they are telling the truth, merely that they haven’t been proven to have lied. They could release their source code tomorrow. That code could prove you are correct and they are liars. That code could prove that they are correct, and you were wrong.
We don’t have to resort to unfounded claims to justify criticism here. Proving their claims to be unverifiable is more damning than failing to prove they are committing fraud.
Only if that light escapes through a window. Otherwise, it is heat.
Technically true.
However, doing so would be perpetrating a fraud. If they denied the capability you’re talking about in response to a warrant or subpoena, someone would be in contempt.
I don’t know if any corpo actually cares about such things, but I know that if you or I were to do this, we’d quickly find ourselves broke and possibly in prison.
It would be away from the stove. The normal flames are blue. Moving toward the stove would blueshift them to violet; away would redshift them to green.
That means there’s a software switch that dumps a plaintext copy of a supposedly encrypted message when flipped.
Kinda, sorta, but no, not really. What’s happening is that the recipient is decrypting the message. When you report the message, you include a cleartext copy with your report.
The “switch” you are talking about is in the same app that is doing the decryption. For the bad actor to toggle that “switch”, they would have to control the app.
That’s a little disingenuous…
When you send a message, no E2EE scheme can prevent your recipient from forwarding the decrypted message to a third party.
The parents have determined that it’s not needed. They’ve determined that trying to strictly regulate exactly what Little Johnny can and can’t see online does him far more harm than porn ever could. This hyper-authoritarian nonsense needs to die in a fire.