I mean, where you sign up says something about you, right?

Yarr.

I had the same experience. Nano is great if you’re used to notepad or a generic, limited text editor.

Once you learn a terminal editor like eMacs or vim, why go back? So much less hand motion going to mouse, arrows, and back.

The food thing seems like the real winner here.

There are dozens of us. Dozens!

Often, yes. Some places list on both sites.

Anybody got a link for a good explanation of this for someone whose knowledge of micro bio is 12 years out of date?

In short, I don’t write formal documents often in my role as a software engineer.

There are any number of ways that an opt-out message could be too ambiguous to be legally interpreted. For example, if you just send the message saying “no thanks, I don’t want to use arbitration”, but forget to identify yourself in a way that is meaningful to the other party, it may not hold up in any proceedings.

For example, either your legal name or username may be required, or both, depending on whether you need to prove you are/were a user at the time of opt-out.

Specifying the confirmation is helpful as well in a normal document that someone reads.

Several other companies have made opt outs that you have to send paper mail for as a way to raise the barrier of rejection.

People are lazy. I am lazy. I asked a resource to do it for me and shared the results to help others like me. This helps reduce the barrier to people who would like to opt out but can’t be bothered to figure out how to write that email.

I see this as both a win and a potential problem for the app’s reputation:

As soon as you take away a hard link to a real-life identifier, the sketchy people come out of the woodwork and trade images/video of child exploitation.

Signal has not had this problem like some platforms (e.g. Kik), and I suspect two reasons:

1. Lack of searchable chat rooms
2. Concrete link to a phone number that anyone who contacts you must know (and make it easy to identify you to authorities)

Up until now signal has been an excellent secure replacement for text messaging between parties that know each other. I hope they don’t go the “chat groups” route, though I doubt they will. But I suspect this change will make it a preferred way for abusers to exchange images and videos nearly anonymously

I see this as both a win and a problem:

As soon as you take away a hard link to a real-life identifier, the sketchy people come out of the woodwork and spread images of child exploitation.

Signal has not had this problem like some platforms (e.g. Kik), and I suspect two reasons:

1. Lack of searchable chat rooms
2. Concrete link to a phone number that anyone who contacts you must know (and make it easy to identify you to authorities)

Up until now signal has been an excellent secure replacement for text messaging between parties that know each other. I hope they don’t go the “chat groups” route, though I doubt they will. But I suspect this change will make it a preferred way for abusers to exchange images and videos nearly anonymously.

Uh, I might be wrong here, but isn’t the whole purpose of split tunneling to allow you to send only necessary traffic through a given tunnel? Then the rest of your traffic goes whatever the default path is?

This seems more like a feature than a CVE. Maybe I’m missing something.

Unless you’re getting used datacenter grade hardware for next to free, I doubt this. You need 130 gb of VRAM on your GPUs

“Privacy-focused” OS from a Chinese company? Really? The same company that’s been accused of stealing secrets from its android phone users and automatically blocks content unfavorable to the Chinese government no matter what country you’re in???

I don’t believe you.