You have demonstrated clearly that TF is useless as a scientific breakthrough if they can't articulate a real, new use case.

When you rely on new rules this implicitly excuses past criminal behavior.

For example, Joseph Blount, CEO of Colonial Pipeline this year paid millions of dollars to finance terrorism by meeting ransomware demands for Bitcoin payment. That funding was directly used to support further terrorism.

It is not necessary to make a "don't fund terrorism, WITH COMPUTERS" law or policy when the existing "don't fund terrorism" law is good enough.

Compare that to people buying marijuana using Bitcoin. The USA federal government is more than happy to operate these marketplaces, execute legally-vague no-contest search warrants, collect resident communications without a search warrant and otherwise act outside the constitution.

In other words, the US government got their panties in a twist trying to prosecute harmless nobodies, and also got their panties in a twist not prosecuting people financing actual terrorism.

Houses cost $500k. And they can be given to the resident just by flipping a blob of ink over the mortgage lien on their title document.

You really have to question this financial structure!

So basically: move fast and break things?

Your labored car analogy misses a critical point:

EVERYONE GETS FREE TANKS

This do-nothing-now-and-ban-gas-in-2035 strategy is so ineffective at reducing gas usage that I imagine it was put forth and pushed by gas producers.

For contrast, an actually effective plan would be: immediatly increase gas (for any use, including hospitals for sick children rape victims hit by hurricanes with covid) tariffs by 15% of sale price, and repeat this annually

1.6% is not abandon

Slashdot doesn't have emoji reactions to stories, so... :clap:

Answer: Definitely yes.

Unless it's your job or if you're dumb, then no, definitely no.

---

Next question. Mod story down.

17 is an approximate figure.

My source is common sense and related facts.

NSA employees have access to most everybody's emails and phone records on Earth. And they admitted to several cases of employees snooping on lovers https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnet.com%2Fnews%2Fnsa-...

Apple has much more private information available, unencrypted, in its iCloud system. So naturally there at least that many people at Apple tempted to spy on at least their lovers.

So in your world:

- Constant nags to set up iCloud is not a dark pattern
- Apple encrypts your photos with end-to-end encryption (i.e. the Fappening didn't happen)
- Apple accounts are only secured with strong passkeys like your FileVault 2 key or your Bitcoin wallet
- Everybody poops without taking off their pants
- When people buy a phone they think "this is an 1984 device, I should never do anything private near it"

If only there was some way to secure crypto that did not rely on passwords, your phone number, and was impervious to other people taking your money...

Sadly, when you double-accidental screenshot, the second one doesn't include the pop-up on the first one.

I hope these words suffice for what I'm describing because I literally can't show you. lol

It tricks you by giving you a default "yes" button which it uses dark patterns to you trick you into pressing. And that button is iCloud and it uploads all your photos from past present and future for Apple to have in unencrypted format.

Yes, Apple tricks you into having an insecure password and not two-factor auth. It does this by A) requiring you to type in your password every time you buy something, rather than using autosave like every other app (unless using biometrics); B) by making two-factor auth annoying; C) by failing to fully document how two-factor auth works; D) by using passwords at all; and E) by protecting your life's most important things using only a password, the lowest entropy thing known to man.

It is not necessary for you to assume that Apple is tricking people to taking their clothes off. When you install a camera in a toilet room, you are going to get photos of butts. Similarly, when you use dark patterns to get access to people's most intimate and personal thing (their phone's contents) you are going to get intimate things.

I blame Apple because they use dark patterns to sign people up for iCloud, and because they implemented insecurely (which is perverted).

Meanwhile, 17 Apple employees that did the same exact thing were not found and did not get prosecuted.

And in other news, Apple tricks over one billion people to upload their private photos without encryption to Apple.