pull down to refresh
21 sats \ 1 reply \ @SwearyDoctor 4 Jan \ on: Why it's hard to trust software, but you mostly have to anyway devs
code signing and verification is useless when you think the danger is the software company, like Microsoft. It'll have the surveillance crap in the checksum anyway.
Microsoft scares me a lot more than any virus scammer.
excellent!
"I went to the American University in Cairo!" Only is missing "I got my accent from my CIA handler!" :D
and this from a South African guy whose family are unrepentant segregationists from the apartheid days and made their fortune exploiting people in emerald mines...
important to note that switzerland always had a bunker culture and has always been a bit... obsessive about that. The majority of houses have bunkers, and at least until recently, it was illegal to not maintain them, keep them stocked, etc.
Someone I know who moved there shared this experience once: their neighbor saw that they, not being Swiss and not being all that concerned with all that, wasn't sticking the bunker. They told them, "don't you expect to get into ours".
Now, that was in the 90s, where expectations of cataclysms were at a low point...
yeah, it's because getting the money out on the other side is a hassle, declaring it on tax statements is a hassle, and the banks and the bureaucracies will label you a suspicious figure. Lightning is fine, it's everything around it that is doing all it can to stop that
It is. This setup makes sure that there's little to no critical thinking in academia; the reviewers will stop it ("this is not the state of the science"), the editors will stop it (by giving it to reviewers they know will say what they want them to say), the publishers will reject it if it's too controversial.
If you write something that pisses on an established orthodoxy, the reviewers will tear you apart. If you write something that tries to combine two things, they'll give it to two reviewers from these different sides, and each will tear up the part of the other.
So academia encourages people to run with what they usually run with, and PhD candidates and students have to kiss up to these same professors, who ill control them in just the same way. Those are fiefdoms, quite literally, and success comes through fealty to the prince(s).
oh no, papers are 0 revenue. Papers, you do dark magic rituals and sell your kidney just to get them accepted and printed. Academic journals rely on free labor from editors (no pay usually), authors (0 pay, always), reviewers (0 pay, sometimes a discount coupon from the publisher). And then they charge uni libraries literal thousands for subscriptions.
excellent, yes.
What's missing is that copyright is also theft and extortion.
I wrote a number of books, around 15 or so, as part of being an academic. The academic publishing houses retain the copyright to earn off of these works, not me.
They make contracts that often times CHARGE authors for printing their work, never paying them anything; this happens to young scholars. With time, I got "nothing for the first 400 sold copies, 10 cents per copy afterwards" contracts - still nothing, academic works don't sell a million copies. I made maybe 50 a year with that, if that. The publisher bagged all the income.
They can do this because a) they know academics need to publish to get their careers off the ground, b) universities pay them (badly), so no need to live off of book income c) the academic world, inexplicably, equates known publishing houses with status and truth-value. Yes, you can obviously self-publish; but that comes with a shadow cast on it. What, the publishers didn't want you? (In fact, it means you got to circumvent the content control publishers impose, which is one of many processes that make academia so obedient).
It's similar in other industries, where the creative parts aren't actually the people that profit off of copyright; it's corporations gobbling up the rights to in turn "make you visible", "give you access" and, in turn, exercise control your content.
Kill copyright.
to watch the US and the UK blackmail the EU and hide behind the hapless satellite whose salaries are paid for by the EU* (fixed it)
this... already happaned.
Pharma companies don't want to lose their "lifelong subscription disease management" gig with cascading side-effects to also manage until your place gets taken by another unfortunate costumer.
Hence whatever new thing they can come up with, it won't be a "cure", it'll be a management, or it'll be memory-holed/declared unsafe/etc
or Yemen managed to do it, and they're covering it up because it doesn't fit the media picture they paint of Yemen as this backwards sand country.
he is not a "muslim fundamentalist". an atheist who had renounced islam and was shilling for zionists. go look at his tweets, he wanted mass murder in Gaza and brought it to a christmas market
if you enjoy large-story comedy shows, The Good Place is rather good, and it's a continuing story and not at all episodic
given the source, I 100% expected something like "different people encountered this alien that sort of looked like it had a beard..:"
"market-based account" is part of the wider German plan to shift pensions to stock market pensions. That, in turn, is part of the political cover for their true voters, the stock market companies. This 10-Euro-plan gives a first inkling of pumping money to pump the money of these kids to the super rich, and if after that they do it to the entire pension fund, it all gets pumped to the super-rich.
great! so copy it over into your SN post. takes a literal second and makes the link no longer clickbait, as I then don't have to click on it to know if this is interesting.
Sorry to be anal about this, but it really is a bit of an epidemic here, the posts with a link and nothing else, which really do look like you're trying to get an easy sat.