Child diagnosed after breathing air? Causality! Money now please!
zea_64
joined 2 years ago
"Bazinga"
So the government MitMing you can know it's from you? I don't think that changes anything. There's still nothing stopping a MitM from just changing the key shown at the bottom of the page and then reading whatever you send.
I'm pretty sure that's a key for encrypting a message to the publisher, not decrypting a message from the publisher, so you can't verify via decryption. However, you can verify the key via the physical print, which is the point of it.
Governments could bribe or steal from certificate authorities (CAs) to host a copy of the website while your device still says it's encrypted and secured. Then they can change that key (random looking characters) on the website, which is used for encrypting information so that only the journalists can decrypt what you sent for confidentiality, but if the government changes it to their own key then they can decrypt it and catch you. Having it physically printed means now they'd have to change that too somehow, which is much harder and especially hard to target only to specific people so nobody finds out they were trying to spy.
Hyperflexible person here. Get a better wrist :p
A null pointer exception is technically memory safe, you can get equivalent behavior with .unwrap() on an Option in Rust.
And network effects would ensure 95% of users stay on TikTok/YouTube/Instagram/...
Promise?
Biology, such as how much the body responds to hormones and how that destroys the idea of binary sex.
I get colder more easily now but my heat tolerance hasn't changed :(
A guide for US government employees for the next 4 years, the CIA's Simple Sabotage Field Manual
Some more ideas:
I've seen many people take absolutists stances and throw accusations or insults at others who don't. While I applaud that they recognized serious problems, I want everyone to understand why I might take actions that seem to ignore or even worsen those problems: I only have so much power and so many options, none of which are ideal, so I do the best I can with what I have. I might prioritize stopping one bad thing over stopping another; that's not me excusing the other bad thing, that's me playing the cards I have to get the least bad outcome.
Personally, I base my moral decisions on expected outcomes. I would pull the lever in the trolley problem. I understand some people think me a monster for that, and I certainly wouldn't feel good pulling it, but I see it as me net saving people. I disagree with people that wouldn't pull it, but I see where they're coming from and I'm not mad at them (disappointed, maybe). Of course, as well as pulling the lever, there may be options to try helping the one person on the tracks, and we should definitely attempt such a rescue.
This whole topic can be applied to the do-i-vote-for-biden thing that this community seems divided over, but it's much more broadly applicable too.
Anyway, this is just me saying that I don't think the absolutist all-or-nothing approach some people take is a good idea, and I also don't like when some of them call me a bad person for not doing the same.
A diagram of a "bottom meson" (composed of an unknown quark "q" and an antibottom quark) with an arrow labeled ":3" pointing to a "double bottom Baryon" (composed of an unknown quark "q" and 2 bottom quarks).
Image taken from figure 1 of this article
Two (presumably) girls lying in bed holding hands and looking at each other. The one on the left, labeled "Me" has shoulder-length hair, an uncomfortable :| expression, and is wearing a black hoodie, grey jeans, and sneakers. The one on the right, labeled "Also me" has longer hair, a subtle smile, a blush, and is wearing a dress and high heels.
Edited from this post, on which I commented "I wanna be both".
Half Life 2: Episode 1, Direct Intervention
λ
view more: next ›
If it's paid, you're actually still the product