Somebody mentioned Douglas Adams over on Bluesky, and before the day was out found I had to re-watch the South Bank Show episode about him for the first time in many years.
It completely holds up, still brilliant, a lesser-known and absolutely worthy part of the DNA canon. There's no credit given for the original writing present in it, but it seems pretty obviously his own.
ChatGPT actually has permalinks; "Shared links" they call it. I can't wait to start seeing them used as citations in Wikipedia.
ChatGPT actually has permalinks; "Shared links" they call it. I can't wait to start seeing them used as citations in Wikipedia.
Happy Fourth, everybody
https://www.theverge.com/policy/697301/trump-supreme-court-founding-fathers-july-4
@bruces In Britain they exsanguinate themselves and then walk across the street to the park, like civilized people.
@Fife4Europe i'm baffled that they still have sales to slump. What idiot is still buying a Tesla?
If the experience of previous NK troops on the Ukrainian front is anything to go by, it's not a good way to do anything but radicalize NK troops against the Russians.
@merleeperle.bsky.social
You seem like a self-promoter, looking to make a name with things you don't understand. Good luck with that.
I don't think this conversation is going to be constructive, I can only hope that third parties reading it understand that you're recommending tradeoffs that you haven't --- and I'm sorry if this is rude -- competently evaluated. The alternatives you've suggested exist under a different jurisdiction, and that seems to be your sole basis for recommending them. I don't have time to go into all of the ways in which that's spectacularly insufficient.
I would suggest to anyone still following this conversation to take the advice of recognized independent and not-for-profit privacy experts.
You don't seem to be aware what "end-to-end" refers to.
If I may suggest: learn first, then evangelize. Otherwise you may end up misinforming people rather than informing them. End-to-end encryption is a well-understood and widely documented topic, and you should not find researching it difficult. I'm not going to attempt to replicate that in the form of a reply, for lots of good reasons, some of which should be obvious.
Here's a primer from the Electronic Frontier Foundation: it starts out basic and then goes into considerable detail. (Also, near the start there's a link to their page about Signal.)
https://ssd.eff.org/module/deep-dive-end-end-encryption-how-do-public-key-encryption-systems-work.
The crucial concept is in the first paragraph:
"End-to-end encryption tools make messages unreadable to eavesdroppers on the network, as well as to service providers themselves."
I repeat. End-to-end. Open source server code is practically irrelevant, as it is not provably possible to independently verify that the servers are really running it.
The end-to-end trust model makes that, of necessity, irrelevant. That is the entire point of it.
Can you explain why, if signal has true end-to-end encryption, independently verified through open source, and is never in possession of your data or metadata, why it matters which country the company is based in?
Software Engineer, mostly in the Pacific Northwest of late
Medical Informatics - Carrier-Grade Network Video Distribution - Real Time Clinical Telemetry
Formerly: Motorola, Tektronix, Intel, HP, Qualcomm, Nintendo; others you're less likely to have heard of.
Will code for pie.