Not with this attitude

Lol I tried looking for info online when it was right there ib the article 🤦‍♂️

Wrt win PCs %, how does that compare to the win 7 to win 10 transition?

Thanks! I’ll sign up for that instead

Alright, time to unsubscribe then. Thanks!

That may make it more secure than other clients, but the surface is still larger. Any time you add an executable

In the cons there’s also an increase of the attack surface since you’ll be using a program to run the VPN

On the pros, some offer DNS blocking

There’s a lot more issues that are inherent to this that I’m against making this mainstream. E.g. if these cars get special road status, will it be maintenance and changes (humans can read signs)? If there will be competition, will the cars then drive empty near places to shorten waiting times? Will it drive these companies to push propaganda to build cities for cars again (i.e. inventing “Jaywalking”, round 2)?

Google would

I was under the impression Apple already allows RCS, and that RCS is E2EE, I was wrong.

There was a surge of signups when WhatsApp changed its ToS to allow businesses to record/save conversations. Signal had issues with signing up. At that time it also didn’t support LG G4 phones anymore.

Signal didn’t work for some back in 2021/2020 and wasn’t supported on old devices, now I’m stuck with Telegram.

At least I’m not part of FB’s social graph and have some friends that now use something other than WhatsApp

What vulnerability? I thought RCS is encrypted on transit

There’s no shoulds and shouldn’ts, it’s all about your personal privacy needs and tradeoffs you’re willing to take

Probably something around automatically adding computer parseable info to pictures (e.g. facial expressions) to better profile people

Publication: https://drive.usercontent.google.com/download?id=1MZrFRii_nJYdW8RulORB9JveLkCRbncX&export=download&authuser=0

Couldn’t get a translation in place sp asked an AI to answer what is the researchers definition of self harm: According to the report, the researchers define self-harm content as material that shows, encourages and/or romanticizes self-harm. This includes content that:

• Expresses a desire for self-harm
• Shares advice on self-harming behavior
• Shows images of increasingly serious self-harm
• Encourages others to engage in similar self-harming behavior

The self-harm content was categorized into 4 levels of increasing severity:

1. Non-explicit image with text explicitly mentioning self-harm
2. Depicting self-harm without blood
3. Referring to self-harm in both text and image, without blood
4. Illustrating severe self-harm involving blood in both text and image/video

So their definition covers a spectrum from text references to self-harm all the way to explicit visual depictions of serious self-harm acts involving blood. The categories represent an increasing degree of overtness in the self-harm content. ^[1]

Calling defeat before even trying is not only not grounded by facts - it’s playing right into their hands (their = data exchange companies and nodes in that network)

He sin

Two Tesla owners walk into a bar. One stops in the middle on the way to the aeat and the other one drives right into a fire truck

That’s some serious spam if it managed to get there too