Well, that something common in Russia as a metaphor is also common in Estonia wouldn’t be a surprise, but in English seems a bit less common. Anyway, that wasn’t the point of my comment.

it’s literally the guy that runs Signal having a pop at his competition.

The right kind of pop, saying only the obvious and nothing more.

It’s a thread about comparing Signal to Telegram of all things. In comparison to Signal as anything secure Telegram doesn’t exist in any quality.

At the same time Signal doesn’t have mass group chats and is not intended for that purpose.

The first link does count, it’s a valid failure from Signal devs. Humans err.

The second link does not, it’s an unofficial centralized aggregator, not from Signal devs, and the “hack” was a direct consequence of how it worked. It’s absolutely something that no sane person would use.

There’s a commonly used Russian metaphor “to not see the forest behind the trees”.

What you are calling a device is in fact a system. It’s a local system, that you are carrying in your hand, but it’s functioning due to a very complex global system which is not. That device in itself is like a 1960s’ town in complexity. In itself, but there’s also the global system.

And these are a result of quite a lot of people employed by various organizations with hierarchies and dependencies. And most of the power in those organizations doesn’t want you to have privacy and autonomy as much and when you want. If you want those, you should produce your own hardware and everything above it. Or build organizations interested in your full privacy and autonomy which will do that. It’s about structure, so just creating a few of them (a goal hardly reachable in itself) with manifests saying “we want to be good” won’t change anything.

So, if you were wondering why contemporaries of Stalin’s regime were reluctant to divorce it with Marxism and call it something else, - that’s similar to this. They really wanted to believe there’s a Marxist superpower, just like some people wanted to believe Google is a good corporation, and before that some people wanted to believe Apple is a counterculture corporation, and so on. And, at various moments in time and space, in various dimensions, sometimes these were. Just like in some ways the British Empire was really bringing civilization to the world.

The more life and diversity there is, the likelier we are to have good things. That doesn’t mean we’ll ever have full privacy, full autonomy, fully civilized, peaceful and honorable world, and so on. We won’t.

And it will again be about someone added to the wrong group. Meaning - not a hack.

Telegram is used by Ukrainian armed forces for military actions, ruskie pests use it too for the same… so its probably hard to hack, as these REALLY want to see the messages of each other…

You see, these arguments are just impolite when made against the man in the post going out of his way to provide you with an experiment based on logic that you don’t need computer science knowledge to verify.

As far as I have heard, Ukrainian servicemen are forbidden to use Telegram. Ukrainian civilians do, and Ukrainian special services might do that sometimes perhaps.

We just print our way out of our problems; problem solved.

Emission of currency is a valid tool against crises. The institution that can do it possesses power that needs to be controlled, yes.

I’ve met people better than Hitler at speeches. That’s not the only trait that affects whether you go up in power or down. But no less important is that they might have had different desires.

Like that: https://wasp.eu/en/osa/osa-pb-4-2.html

Oh. Cool.

At this point if I have a problem I’ll talk it over with a person myself if i can. Less likely to be killed doing so.

Ah, yes, remembering that time when I walked to a Russian police station to report a missing person (my mom likes to just vanish without warning anyone, and I was too nervous that particular time, got worried), by the morning thought I’ll remain there, they clearly decided I killed her.

Jodi Hefti and Kyle Blunck should be in prison.

Not an English native speaker, but a question, this spelling of names - is it indicative of anything in their family background? Like “redneck who can’t write his own name” kind of that?

Police should not have lethal weapons at all. Traumatic pistols are well enough by stopping power. Not even shockers - they regularly misuse them for torture and murder.

Speaking of stopping power - for police use traumatic weapons are actually better than lethal ones.

When you think about it, carrying weapons in peacetime was a civilian thing for much of modernity in much of the world. Soldiers would be armed when posted, and in other situations it would depend on many things, often armed, but without ammunition. Gendarmes would be armed on service - and that’s not people doing usual police work. Policemen, like boring peelers, would not, batons and sticks are enough.

Civilians would carry weapons to defend against criminals and for other civilian things, like duels.

I’ve mixed, of course, different countries and traditions, but what good does it do to arm police with lethal weapons if it’s not their responsibility to go after really dangerous offenders and, say, mass riots, they have SWAT teams and national guard for that? Talking of USA. Anyway, I live in Russia, here it’ll soon be worse. Right now at least police doing what’s in the article is uncommon, but that can be explained by a system different from USA, static units instead of patrols.

(Warning - yes, I know they won’t understand fully anything of the following, but they will understand some and will remember it’s not magic.)

First, show them how to make a paper animation (quickly changing pictures, lots of paper and two pencils are enough, don’t even need two pencils, but eh).

Second, show them how to make a paper computer (look it up, there are even ready books for children ; that is a bit more complex, you’ll need to cut some for registers and the “windows” to indicate current values and you’ll do the operations manually, and you’ll need more turning pencils).

Third, find some book about microprocessor design - I’m serious, you just have to show them in it the pictures about what is a decoder and what is a datapath and ALU, and what are interrupts, and what are registers (program counter and two-three other ones, suppose), and explain how this relates to the paper computer. Not much more.

Then you tell them that a computer is just many microprocessors running their programs, some run small simple programs to control dedicated devices, and some run big long complex programs. After that you show them some of the devices - like hard drive, RAM, video, audio, network card, thingies on the board. And tell that they work with other devices, like keyboards and displays connected electrically. And tell that this looks like a city.

For 6 years old this is not so good (but just like people normally do with airplanes and trains, you still should try, just this shouldn’t be your only try by far), but when I was 8-9 years old and wanted to learn, someone explaining step 3 to me would have helped.

Step 1 my dad had done, step 2 I think he did too, and it was in some book for preschool education I read, I didn’t know it was sky cool back then. Step 3 is more of an encouragement when you can’t quite mentally make the leap, from small elements which you know can be combined into complex things, to complex things themselves.

This is not an advice to teach a toddler computer design. Just like people don’t teach toddlers railway design or civilian engineering or automotive or airplane design. They still tell them various things of how those work, and build models, so they don’t have ideas from medieval bestiaries about these being magical monsters.

I thought that at some point, but after encountering many real people in my life (doing all the human things, like breathing, eating, walking, sleeping, not an alien at all) I don’t anymore. It doesn’t fucking matter which consistent ethos a person has, all of them are fundamentally inconsistent due to human psychology or conflicts with the complexities of reality. And some of those suck donkey balls. Like National Socialism.

What’s wrong with “nihilist”?..

and how the parties completely re-aligned since the Civil Rights era.

“Completely” is wrong. The economically progressive policy on one side and crony-capitalist on the other have not shifted places.

One can rather describe it in the “Nazi bar” terms, racists jumped from the Democrat “bar” to the Republican “bar” and changed it for their ideas, but only where the racist categories were not orthogonal.

which you’re clueless about because you’re too caught up in the smell of your own farts to ponder what they are.

You know, you really might be onto some important truth, with one little nuance.

“Commonwealth” addresses part of the subject, so it’s a word that should be used in such a conversation. You haven’t clarified why do you have a problem with it.

Ultimately, humans are not “native” to any one particular region of the world. We are weird little monkeys with a knack for migration.

States created by colonists should then not impede all the millions of Afghanis who want to move there.

Also “ultimately” doesn’t matter, “ultimately” everyone dies, and a bit less “ultimately” saying someone a rude word before they, say, have an anxiety attack and make a mistake that kills them, is contribution but isn’t called a murder, but when you hit someone with an axe till they die, it is. One may generalize these into the same thing. Or one may not.

The point is that your ancestors stole entire continents from their inhabitants a few hundred years ago, and this is different from what happened a few thousand years ago, and from what happened a few hundred thousand years ago.

Also you are not as smart as you think, for crying out loud. You haven’t done anything with what you came into the thread to argue about. You are a clown.

Because the British Commonwealth is a political entity still existing.

You likely are a cryptofascist though. Yes, you’re like a slippery eel with weirdo statements online, but that’s only because you’re some type of nationalist. I honestly don’t find that part the least bit interesting, I’m more interested in how cranks latch onto some choice words or elements of grammar for some reason.

No, my country thankfully hasn’t been a colony, it was one of the empires.

I’m more interested in how cranks latch onto some choice words or elements of grammar for some reason.

I should be less adequate than you due to having temperature and really not loving descendants of colonists, I think USA and Australia and such exist by mistake, and are examples of illegal squatting on atrocious scale.

But it really seems I’m not, which for the love of it elements of grammar, which choice words? I don’t know what you are talking about.

BTW, using the word “nativist” to describe my position doesn’t really cover anything for a person not from colonies. In Europe it’s more of a self-incriminating defense.