He just wants to be wanted by somebody. He was wanted for stealing a vehicle, so logically he stole another one so they would want him even more.

Tsk, everyone knows you shouldn’t use magnets to hold floppy disks. Just staple them into your lever arch file.

Not morons, just not educated enough about them to understand exactly what the implications of that action are.

Use cheap, low density wax and it’ll slowly melt under the studio lights over to course of the program, which would be hilarious.

Look, I’m not attacking them over this, as you rightly said, it has plenty of other drawbacks and concerns, I’m just emphasising that Google do have a large degree of influence over them. For instance, Chromium is dropping manifest v2 support, so Brave pretty much has to do the same. They’ve said that, as Chromium has a switch to keep it enabled until June (iirc) they’ve enabled that, but after Chromium drops manifest v2 the most they can do is try to support a subset of it as best they can. The Brave devs may not want to drop support, but Google have decreed it will be dropped, so they end up dropping it and having to put in extra work to keep even a subset working for some period of time.

If Brave gets even a moderate market share, Google will continue to mess them around like this as they really don’t like people not seeing their adverts.

Ultimately it’s software, so the Brave devs can do pretty much whatever they want, limited by the available time and money. Google’s influence extends to making that either easier or harder, it much the same way as they influence the Android ecosystem.

Both Brave and Chrome are built on the open-source Chromium browser engine

That’s from the Brave website: https://brave.com/compare/chrome-vs-brave/

Yes there are plenty of changes, but it’s built on it, and shaped by it, and Chromium is heavily influenced by Google. If chromium doesn’t support v2 manifests it is unlikely that Brave will. In this particular case it may be that Brave’s ad blocking and privacy features are equivalent to uBO, but it’s still underpinned by an engine that Google has strong influence over, so it can’t completely shake their influence.

So, you’re repeatedly performing the same task at the command of a computer. Are you certain you are a cephalopod, airborne or otherwise, and not, in fact, a robot? ;)

NATO’s having a presence in a member state is protection. It reduces the chance of opportunists like Putin invading.

Putin tried to call NATO’s bluff, using Ukraine as a bargaining chip. NATO didn’t blink, and so he started a war. He doesn’t get to do the abuser thing of saying “see what you made me do”. This is on him, and him alone.

He can demand that NATO withdraw all he likes, and I’d have some sympathy for that if it didn’t involve invading another country as leverage. Note, I say some sympathy, not that NATO should actually do it, especially as Putin’s regieme has threatened other countries already.

So, you’re saying that Putin sent demands to NATO, saying they either bend to his will by removing their protection from a large portion of their member states or he’d start a war, and by not signing it NATO are responsible for starting the war? I just want to fully understand your position on this.

The movie “Brewster’s Millions” is based on that premis.

They may well be looking at how much the EU holds in Saudi assets, seeing those at potential risk of being seized and deciding tge write-down on dumping the bonds would be worth it. Long term, I don’t think it would have an effect on prices, but short term it may well do, depending on how concentrated their holdings are.

From what I can see, normal trading volume in bonds is about 500% per year, or about 2% per day assuming 250 trading days per year. If the 130bn you mention is spread across all government bonds across the EU then it accounts for about 4% of the total, or about two days of normal trade. Dump all of that in one go and it’d definitely have a short term effect. If their holdings are more concentrated they could have an even bigger effect on the bonds they hold.

Bonds tend to be issued on a regular basis, so even a short term drop in price could be timed to affect an auction. That has the twin effect of reducing the amount the government in question raises, and also tying them into effectively higher interest rates, potentially for decades to come.

I’m no expert trader either, so I could be barking up the wrong tree, but I assume that they would have a clear expectation of the results before making that threat, and I can’t really see any other effects it could be expected to have.

Absolutely. If they’re killed during their crime they should be completely anonymous. No names, no ‘manifestos’, no reference to the sorts of communities they were part of online, no last words, just, ‘they were a vile stain on humanity’ and then forgotten. Obviously, if they live more will come out as they’re prosecuted, but that should be minimized and once they’re jailed they can be forgotten by all but those tasked with keeping them alive to serve their sentence.

The price moves with supply and demand on the secondary market. Normally, yes, that’ll tend to vary to balance yield with the prevailing interest rates, however, the threat seems to be to dump bonds onto the secondary market, presumably without a minimum price. The glut would mean buyers could purchase them below that balance price, giving them a better yield. This would have (at least) two knock on effects, firstly it would make it harder for governments yo raise funds through bond issues as they’d effectively be competing with the cheaper ‘dumped’ bonds and so would need to offer an equivalently high yield, and secondly may allow ‘undesirable’ governments or groups to amass significant amounts of European debt, which potentially gives them more political leverage than European governments might like.

There’s a fair chance he knew that and wanted to die while killing as many as possible.

As you said, good riddance.

Taxes don’t work like that. It’s only the portion above a level that’s taxed at that level.

If you’re talking about being able to regain access with no local backups (even just a USB key sewn into your clothing) your going to need to think carefully about the implications if someone else gets hold of your phone, or hijacks your number. Anything you can do to recover from the scenario is a way an attacker can gain access. Attempting to secure this via SMS is going to ne woefully insecure.

That being said, there are a couple of approaches you could consider. One option is to put an encrypted backup on an sftp server or similar and remember the login and passwords, another would be to have a trusted party, say a family member or very close friend, hold the emergency codes for access to your authentication account or backup site.

Storing a backup somewhere is a reasonable approach if you are careful about how you secure it and consider if it meets your threat model. The backup doesn’t need to contain all your credentials, just enough to regain access to your actual password vault, so it doesn’t need to be updated often, unless that access changes. I would suggest either an export from your authentication app, a copy of the emergency codes, or a text file with the relevant details. Encrypt this with gpg symmetric encryption so you don’t have to worry about a key file, and use a long, complex, but reconstructable passphrase. By this I mean a passphrase you remember how to derive, rather than trying to remember a high entropy string directly, so something like the second letter of each word of a phrase that means something to you, a series of digits that are relevant to you, maybe the digits from your first friend’s address or something similarly pseudo random, then another phrase. The result is long enough to have enough entropy to be secure, and you’ll remember how to generate it more readily than remembering the phrase itself. It needs to be strong as once an adversary has a copy of the file they jave as long as they want to decrypt it. Once encrypted, upload it to a reliable storage location that you can access with just a username and password. Now you need to memorize the storage location, username, password and decryption passphrase generator, but you can recover even to a new phone.

The second option is to generate the emergency, or backup, codes to your authentication account, or the storage you sync it to, and have someone you trust keep them, only to be revealed if you contact them and they’re sure it’s you. To be more secure, split each code into two halves and have each held by a different person.

I was more suggesting that it might be a bit eldritch, but sometimes humor doesn’t come across quite right/

The linked paper is focused on studying the ‘perforation-type anchor’ they use to hold the tissue to the mold as it grows, rather than keeping it alive afterwards. During growth the tissue and mold were submerged, or partially submerged, in a suitable medium to keep the cells healthy, and it was only when the resulting models were tested that they were removed (although one test did seem to involve letting it dry out to see if the anchors held). Growing the various layers of cells seems to be a solved problem, and I suspect that includes keeping them supplied with nutrients and such, so the authors aren’t examining that. What’s not solved is how to keep the tissue attached to a robot, which is what the authors were studying.

Do you really want to know? There are some things that the human mind is not meant to contemplate.

It looks like AssDB uses a weird SQL syntax? Is it worth upgrading to, I hear it’s great at pulling information out of unstructured and even imaginary data sources?

Ah, memories. That was me on a Spectrum. It’s all fun and games until you forget to save (to tape) and your code hangs the machine, losing everything.