S/MIME is insecure, outdated, depreciated, and should be discontinued; yet people don’t want to adapt or grow or change.

Because some organizations do use S/MIME; all email software is required to implement it, that is if they want to be adopted and used by said influential organizations.

OpenPGP and PGP in general is secure but suffers from usability issues and is often wrongly painted as user-unfriendly. (it’s really no worse than S/MIME, installing and managing keys is exactly the same hassle as it is with S/MIME.) The main issue is that some people are too lazy or resistant to change to adapt to it.

Lack of detailed audits…only in this case specifically…does not imply lack of security and/or privacy.

The protocol that Signal uses, which is in fact firmly audited with no major problematic findings, plus the fact the client is OSS is generally enough to lower any concerns.

The server side software in production for Signal.org is not OSS. It will not be. You are required to trust the server to use Signal; because the protocol and the client renders it factually impossible for the server to spy on your messages. The server cannot read messages; or even connect who is messaging who if the correct client settings are used. (Sealed Sender).

Non-OS stats software in general is not automatically lacking in privacy or security, particularly not in this case where the affected software does interact only with software that is verifiably open-source and trustworthy in general due to the protocols and how they are implemented correctly in a verifiable manner.

E2EE is, theoretically, secure. It certainly prevents a government from hoovering up your data when they casually cast too wide of a dragnet while “chasing a criminal”. …At least, when it is implemented honestly and correctly.

Now if governments wanted to properly backdoor some E2EE implementation; all they really need to do is compromise one end of the conversation. Of course, they want to be able to do it auto-magically; through delivering a court order to a single point; and not through busting down the door, or capturing the user of, one end or another of the conversation and compromising the device.

The question therein lies; do you as a person want the government to be forced to bust down a door? Some people think they should be forced to break doors and others do not feel that it is necessary. There are many diverse stances on this question; all with unique reasons.

It’s clear to me that E2EE works properly…the governments would not be trying to “end Encryption” if it did not work. Therefore it stands to reason that E2EE is not compromised, if a government is forced to pass a law in order to compromise the encryption or turn it off entirely. That proves it works.

I just logically proved Encryption works, without even taking a stance on the matter. For the record however; I do support Encryption. I think this law undermining it is a massive governmental overreach that will quickly lead to that same government finding out how critical Encryption actually is to their people. Just give it time.

It’s like playing Uno; but with reverse cards only.

So we have:

• Ad Blockers
• ‘Ad Blocker’ blockers
• ‘‘Ad blocker’ blocker’ blockers
• ‘’‘Ad Blocker’ blocker’ blocker’ blockers
• ‘’‘‘Ad Blocker’ blocker’ blocker’ blocker’ blockers
• ‘’‘’‘Ad Blocker’ blocker’ blocker’ blocker’ blockers’ blockers; and finally;
• ‘’‘’‘‘Ad Blocker’ blocker’ blocker’ blocker’ blockers’ blocker’ blockers; with;
• ‘’‘’‘’‘Ad Blocker’ blocker’ blocker’ blocker’ blockers’ blocker’ blocker’ blockers

in development.

I’d even recommend talking about this with her one to one as quickly as is reasonably and respectfully possible. It will be better if she is not allowed to emotionally stew in this revelation to arrive at the mentioned conclusion.

She needs to know it won’t go away and it changes literally nothing about the marriage or feelings

…Assuming the flash drive isn’t loaded to the gills with malware alongside of every game it offers to install…that sounds fair.

But let’s be real; No legitimate company stands a chance of doing this without getting sued into oblivion. Unfortunately that means the risk of getting viruses and malware with your purchase, likely ransomware or cryptominer droppers, is really high.

…but let’s assume you’re technical enough that you can disarm all the malware on the USB stick and clean the cruft out of it. Then; yeah…maybe you’ll get your value’s worth.

I should point out that pellet guns do not have a ‘Day-Glo Safety Orange/Red’ tip.

As they do eject actually harmful projectiles; they look much like other guns until you get close to them. Reasonable parenting would have included making sure the child understood that under no circumstances do you point that at people.

That doesn’t make this less of a tragedy, but it does provide some context to the situation. Cops are, sadly, trained out of necessity not to try to discern when on the receiving end of any gun barrel. While it’s difficult to expect a child to know not to point weapons at police; doing so is in fact dangerous.

HAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAAA

No.

This actually doesn’t surprise me. Valve is getting greedy.

But; to be clear; by using these tools, to unlock the DLC without paying for it, you are cheating in the game. That’s a mere fact; and not a moral judgement of anyone choosing to do so.

Personally, I don’t judge anyone for doing so; and would use these tools myself if I thought a DLC were too predatory, expensive or otherwise unfair to not have it available.

That’s not saying it’s fair or right for Valve to do so; nor is it saying the VAC bans or account suspensions are deserved. If you get hit by this; you absolutely should pirate every title you already own/purchased via Steam right away, and pirate anything else you want in the future.

The only way to make them regret doing things like this is voting with your wallet; and asking others to do the same. Stop spending money on Valve. Once their earnings fall they’ll be forced to hear people’s concerns.

I’m going to be boldly honest; I think this is pretty likely to get resistance from some people.

For certain people, in certain limited contexts, for casual inter-personal interactions between the user of these pronouns and a person who is aware of the pronouns speaking to them; yeah…I could see where your arguments hold water.

I don’t personally condone misgendering anyone; particularly not when it’s done knowingly and in spite or hate.

In a broader context; I think people attempting to use these pronouns might be confused by others for being something that will likely not be accepted, particularly not accepted by those who might have any particularly rigid religious mindsets. You, the reader of course, may choose not to care about this fact; but you have been warned.

Personally; I don’t plan on using such pronouns myself, nor would I advise anyone else to use them unless they wish to invite additional resistance in the acceptance of their identity.

However; if these pronouns really do fit you, and they make you feel good; be aware of the possible misconceptions that can and will spring up around them. You will have to be vocal in debunking them, and they will likely be very absurd sounding to you…but from those with certain perspectives, may make sense, even if they are not logical or reasonable.

I genuinely hope people are careful and mindful; stay safe out there and if you DO use pronouns like these, I would encourage you to also be accepting of an additional standard set of pronouns as well.