In the last six months, yes. It suggests short cuts that can create long delays. Shorter by miles, but often worse in the end.

I probably wouldn’t describe them as flawed, because the goal wasn’t and couldn’t ever be perfection, so then everything is flawed, but then is it really a flaw? It sounds like more of an issue of what’s useful in what type of situation.

Far.

deleted by creator

You’re talking about the wrong thing. The Mozilla Foundation is and has been acting a fool in recent years. Firefox, the open source program, is doing mostly OK. Obviously the two are closely connected, but they’re definitely not the same thing, and this matters when discussing policy.

Now now. If Mozilla is breaking the law here, of course someone would report them for it. There’s no need to shoot the messenger when everything was predictable.

I appreciate your apprehension. Fortunately, you don’t need to speculate. Go try it and find out.

This was your deck. Now it’s your new cat’s deck.

Stop buying the cheap ones. :-)

Lots of options available. YT is slowly cracking down on them. That’s OK, just keep your medium run media consumption plans flexible.

The point is that the post title was false (or intentionally very misleading, if you insist on creatively parsing it). Accuracy in post titles is important.

For the most part? That’s an empirical claim. Any evidence? My gut disagrees with you, but my gut also has no evidence.

I might help people because it makes me feel good, sure. But I might also do it because those are my values, long since established, and I try to live by said values. So it’s about what following a self-imposed expectation, not about getting something. For some people, some of the time.

Similarly, the argument that “being selfless is selfish” is not useful and provably false. Just go ask people, and they’ll tell you why they did things and how they felt. Then you have to argue that many of them are either lying or mistaken, which doesn’t seem like a winnable argument.

I feel like you’re ignoring a lot of background, but let’s run with your argument. Let’s assume that we have to have some elected politicians and some appointed or elected bureaucrats, and either we should try to have a capitalist system or a communist system of some kind.

Let’s try to keep things as equal as possible, knowing that we really can’t, but just for the sake of argument. Which system is more likely to be corrupted? Remember, the express goal of capitalism is to throw wealth at the capitalists. If the regular person gets screwed, that’s not corruption, that’s a feature of the system… Oh, wait a second, I guess we already have an answer to our hypothetical, don’t we.

But you did raise a good point. Any government, if it’s to function somewhat reasonably, needs to be one that has a lot of transparency, oversight, and accountability. If you don’t have those, it doesn’t matter how you start off because it’s going to end badly. So I agree with you, we shouldn’t be trusting politicians.

Disneyland is so creepy and depressing.

When the mice eat it, you gotta change the roll out for a new one. That’s my policy. Also, the cardboard hurts; don’t use it.

One thing that struck me as an adult is that I grew up learning about some ancient civilizations, but in school I never learned that Mesopotamia is a location in present day Iraq. It just feels weird that we could study about ancient cultures and not learn where they are on the globe today.

If you want to start on a philosophical question, try to define the word “exists”. Write down a bunch of definitions, whichever are your favorite, and then see if the expression “God exists.” has meaning.

The potential for timing attacks has been known since the beginning of Tor. In other words, more than a decade. But that doesn’t mean you can’t defend against it. One way to defend against it is by having more nodes. Another way is to write clients that take into account the potential for timing attacks. Both of these were specifically mentioned in the article.

Based on what was in the article and what’s in the history books, I’m not sure how to interpret your comment in a constructive way. Is there anything more specific you meant, that isn’t contradicted by what’s in the article?

He’s such a bad liar. Immigrants who come over and have visas but not citizenship are not going to risk their immigration status by screwing with the cops. On the other hand, cops who want to mess around would and do target immigrants.

And then he’s worried about officers being doxxed. These are people with experience and training and firearms, who are more than capable of protecting themselves. I’m not too worried about their safety. But as they say, all cops are paranoid.