Does your theory pass the sniff test? How reasonable is it to believe that Greenpeace's "defamation" cost the company hundreds of millions of dollars? Why is $345 the correct three-digit number of millions for the reputation damage Greenpeace caused?
Estimates put the number of people killed due to the American invasion between half a million and a million. Saddam's brutality paled in comparison to the carnage the US invasion caused.
Fleeing is seen as dishonorable in many parts of the Arab world. Remember the Israeli lies about how Yahya Sinwar dressed in women's clothes and were trying to cross the border to Egypt? In reality he was out in the field with his men killing Israeli soldiers. He died a brave death and Khamenei will now have died one too.
No. The other poster already did a fine job about pointing out that Islamic terror groups typically use guerilla warfare which frequently involves fleeing, not wearing a uniform, hiding among civilians, etc.
Oh, please. If you think the majority of all Iranians are in favor of US-Israeli bombings of their home country, you're seriously smoking some potent propaganda.
Most Iranians outside Iran fled from the current regimes terror, they are happy with this. My country took in a lot of Iranians when the current regime took over in the 70s and those are very happy about this. They are out on the street celebrating the attacks on Iranian leaders, not protesting against them.
That's the implication of "At some point you have to decide: if my country ..." since "you" can't refer to anyone other than the Iranians. They have not "decided" to get bombed by Zionists.
> I used to live next to a large river for about 35 years. As a kid, it was forbidden to swim in it, and if you did, you had weird oily chemicals on your skin that felt unhealthy (burn, itching etc).
That's almost exactly how my dad and many of his siblings got permanently disabling muscular dystonia. The old times were fucking bad and we don't want them back.
> So, if the US wants production industry again
It should be noted that the VALUE of US industrial output is many times higher than it was 20 years ago, even if the VOLUME is lower.
The good old coal? Have a look at the life expectancy of a coal worker, and maybe a ct scan of a coal workers lung.
Good old nuclear? Will you accept the nuclear waste getting store in your neighborhood? No? What about your neighbors neighbor? No? Keep asking until you get a yes. See you again after having asked 341.8 Million people.
There are reasons we moved on from this and de-industrialized. Because the industries we got rid of simply weren't actually that great. Go visit a Foxconn factory in Shenzhen/China. I have done it a couple of times. The part of electronics production that is not done by machines is painful and exhausting work. Your back will hurt. Your eyes will hurt.
I really wonder what people are thinking how these jobs look like. Nobody would want them. The only ones in the US who would accept those jobs would be immigrants who have seen far worse and therefore view these jobs as an upgrade. But the US doesn't want those immigrants. So why try to build industries creating jobs only the kind of people would accept that you do not want in the country?
Hyphenization is language and content-dependent. You need different rules for English and French text, for example. Moreover, it doesn't fit the "short paragraph style" most non-academic text is written in these days.
I prefer archive.today because the Internet Archive’s Wayback Machine allows retrospective removals of archived pages. If a URL has already been crawled and archived, the site owner can later add that URL to robots.txt and request a re-crawl. Once the crawler detects the updated robots.txt, previously stored snapshots of that page can become inaccessible, even if they were captured before the rule was added.
Unfortunately this happens more often than one would expect.
I found this out when I preserved my very first homepage I made as a child on a free hosting service. I archived it on archive.org, and thought it would stay there forever. Then, in 2017 the free host changed the robots.txt, closed all services, and my treasured memory was forever gone from the internet. ;(
Any idea when that changed? I've been unable to access historical sites in the past because someone parked the domain and had a very restrictive robots.txt on it.
If you end up, for some reason, being one of those unlucky individuals whose Google account gets banned and all your other accounts are behind Google login, then you truly have been owned.
You mean when using "sign in with" and then using a shitty password for your social media account?
If you use e-mail and password with a good password manager, that runs locally on your device and generate good random passwords, it is unlikely you will end up on haveibeenpwned, and even if one website does shit, the blast radius is only one account on one website.
You'll still have your e-mail address exposed, which you may not want if it is to some random porn site. Moreover, password managers do not work if you use multiple devices for log in, which most people actually do.
I assume they're thinking about the 'offline' style where one would shuffle a database file and probably resolve conflicts. There's an app/extensions nowadays, man!
I don't even bother with a VPN, just occasionally push a 'sync' button on the roaming devices [when they return to LAN]. DB transactions [new credentials] averages ~0 per month... but there's plenty of capacity. Works extremely well.
The truth is that even with KeePassXC, I just really do not notice stale passwords across devices.
It's just really not a huge deal for me personally. Maybe it is for normal people.
I sync my databases maybe once a year if I'm lucky.
Right, that's what I was trying to emphasize. Rare syncs are totally fine here, too. I try to keep a routine but tend to slip. If not 'with my usual device' there's a tiny number of accounts I even need. They rarely change so the 'cache' is usually suitable. If not, the restriction is always short-lived.
I am not sure, whether you are trying to get at something specific, but will interpret the question in good faith:
A classical password manager reads an encrypted database. In theory, you could upload your password database (usually just one file) anywhere, and wouldn't need to worry, assuming, that you chose a sufficiently long password for decryption, and assuming, that the encryption does not have weaknesses, which would allow an attacker to decrypt it without the password. In practice, of course you still wouldn't upload your password file to a public place, to reduce risks in the future. But anyway, the idea is, that only you know the master password for the encrypted database and so no one else can read your passwords.
Are you saying that you reuse the same password everywhere, but a different email address every time, and you feel confident that having your password leaked won't have repercussions?
I am genuinely confused. Sounds like holding a gun from the wrong end and feeling protected by it.
You don't even need a password manager, browsers autogenerate secure passwords for you, and they sync between computers/mobile devices.
(I'm saying this from the perspective of "regular people don't want to be inconvenienced like that, obviously you should use an external password manager for security)
> Before inevitable "what if your password manager is hacked
My passwords are encrypted with a security key. I think it is more likely for my computer to get compromised than for my password manager to leak the passwords.
Admittedly, if I lose all the security keys at the same time, I lose all of my passwords.
Sign-on with the external identity provider doesn't help if data related to your account like the billing information, your government ID info etc. are released in the breach, that's the sore point.
People will know that my password was y!2TvM8h3dpvw4 for one particular website at some point. What do I lose here? Google/Apple incurs much greater risk that is entirely out of your control.
I read the "hit piece". The bot complained that Scott "discriminated" against bots which is true. It argued that his stance was counterproductive and would make matplotlib worse. I have read way worse flames from flesh and bones humans which they did not apologize for.
reply