Phone number and trust-on-first-use for most people, with out-of-band fingerprint verification for the paranoid. It really depends on the threat model and the security practices/awareness of your colleagues, but a link shared on some social media or lower-security chat network is more vulnerable to a man-in-the-middle attack than a phone number for your average Joe. There are a lot of ways a person could get a manipulated invite link.

Either he was arrested with no record of the arrest (i.e “disappeared”) which is a new line for the administration to cross, or he disappeared for another reason (by himself, or with help or coercion by a foreign entity like the CCP), and the FBI is investigating.

I hope journalists keep on this because the first option would be a huge problem that everyone needs to know about, but without more information, the second is also a possibility. The CCP is known to have agents in western countries that manipulate and pressure ex-pats to return to China. Keeping an open mind now will also strengthen the argument if evidence for the former comes to light.

Might be easiest to just drill out the mic and camera, and use a usb headset for calls. I also suggest specific threat modelling and learning about opsec as that may help you feel more in control. After that, please look after your mental well-being. We all should.

This is signal detection theory combined with an arms race that keeps the problem hard. You cannot block scrapers without blocking people, and you cannot inconvenience bots without also inconveniencing readers. You might figure something clever out temporarily, but eventually this truism will resurface. Excuse me while I solve a few more captchas.

Exactly, never assume silence is because they have changed their minds. They only just discovered it doesn’t play well in polling and are avoiding the topic. Unless they actively say they have changed their mind, they haven’t (and even then be skeptical). Ontario learned this the hard way several times in a row.

Out of band key exchange is great -as long as people can physically meet and exchange QR codes. In reality, they are often sent via less secure means. As always, the humans are the weakest security link.

It does, I tried it. Though, that may have been an addition since the attacks started.

Though, in that specific case - Russian agents conducting espionage via targeted individuals - it’s very likely they surveil their targets long enough to catch their device PIN before they nab the phone and return it. In the end, there is very little recourse to defend against this type of Evil Maid attack. Signal is really better at protecting against mass surveillance, but for individuals directly targeted by state espionage? You would need serious opsec, using air-gapped computers kept in safes or guarded by humans 24x7 and other crazy stuff. They have rules about what can be physically done with devices containing top secret information for a good reason.

The exact reason why it’s bad for top secret communications is why individuals should use it or something like it. That is government auditability.

It was Kitchener

4 countries that manipulate opinion through subterfuge and bots all over various media and social media sites. One country that just straight-up owns both and doesn’t need to bother with that kind of thing.

Watch some of the stuff Segall has done in the past decade. He gets winded standing up. Or rather don’t -he’s basically Rogan in 10-20 years, physically and mentally.

Minority governments are unstable, unpredictable, and result from very close-call elections. They may be okay-ish at getting progressive domestic policies passed, but the priority should be strong foreign policy for the near term. A majority is at least stable and consistent.

[ ] Climate change isn’t real. [ ] Climate change is part of a natural cycle and not related to humans. [x] Climate change is caused by humans, but we can’t do anything about it for whatever reasons. Note how all 3 lead to the same actual behaviour, and that benefits the very same people, but the first one works on conservatives and the third one works on liberals. You’ve fallen for the same gambit. There’s a big-ass sliding scale between “fuck it” and “techno utopia” both on climate mitigation and adaptation. The next 100 years are going to be hard, yeah, but those 3 propoganda tacts are designed to just make some rich twits richer before we all hit the wall.

This nihilist doomer shit is both highly speculative, and just as bad as denialism for why we can’t have nice things. In fact, they are just 2 stages of the exact same mentality. It’s not real, it’s not human caused, and we can’t do anything about it anyway. All the same picture; all the same motivation.

This is the only question that really matters. If it’s overpriced? meh, it’s a cheap alternative to a NUC. But if it’s going to be stuck on obsolete software forever, run.

Add to this that he was suspended (not jailed) and the country’s major public broadcaster posted this very article questioning the appropriateness of his suspension. He has a voice in the public media and also an opportunity to avail himself of the court system and seek damages. Are we still a democracy? Yeah, sounds like it to me.

“We’re not middle and lower class, we’re all working class”

Most home owners, if they cash out their home, and either rent or downsize, will still absolutely need to work to eat, and if they don’t they will find themselves homeless before long.

For that small portion that could actually live on the equity from downsizing their housing, yeah, they are upper class, but there are a lot fewer of those than you would think. For a single person, a million in equity (50k a year) might get you by, but not luxuriously and not safely, and most houses are owned by couples though (so cut that in half), and many have dependents.

It’s the least painful, most economically efficient way to encourage those things and other transitions. When it comes to transportation, higher gas prices have historically resulted in a market for more fuel efficiency (and inflation-adjusted low gas prices have lead to oversizing of vehicles). Unlike the 70s, this time, the carbon tax is brought in slowly and smoothly over many years to encourage conservation (including the things you mention), drive demand for more fuel efficiency, and in the long term, encourage the electrification of the remaining fleet.

The vast majority of Canadians want the government to do something serious about climate change, but they don’t know what that thing is. Economists said a carbon tax and rebate was the most efficient, but public support isn’t driven by economic papers, but by propaganda machines. It’s just too easy to blame the carbon tax for everyone’s problems. It’s the perfect boogeyman for inflation. Heavy handed regulation of industrial emitters would probably be the most supported by the public, but it would have a terrible impact on Canadian industry, and actually be limited in it’s effectiveness, as most of Canada’s emissions would still be “free.”

She dug her heels in because she’s jockying to move up to the provincial legislature. Getting fired is part of building her reputation as a conservative culture warrior. The board really did not want to fire her.

I don’t think it’s just Canada: https://duckduckgo.com/?q=usa+building+a+new+home&t=ffab&iar=images&iax=images&ia=images