Who decides what is disinformation? The best defense against incorrect ideas is better ideas backed by better data. Otherwise we replace science with a new kind of religion.

+1

Even if you think the information being shared by Sky News is inaccurate, why not share more accurate information? Why should we applaud removing information we disagree with from the internet? Why is authoritarianism more important than the pursuit of knowledge, or even founding principles like free speech? Censorship is one of the greatest evils of our day.

The best antidote to bad speech is good speech, not censorship.

"Censoring the facts turns our children into idiots
They claim it's for our safety, I'll tell you what it really is
Removing information that empowers all the citizens
The truth doesn't damage points of view that are legitimate"

https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonpost.com%2Fopinions%2F2021%2F02%2F05%2Fcoronavirus-origins-mystery-china%2F

The wet market hypothesis is not as likely as the research lab hypothesis.

A local biometric alone wouldn't help. However if you have key material on the phone, where the public exponent of that key material is enrolled for their account, and the private exponent is unlocked with the local biometric, that would work.

It's really amusing and frustrating to hear WebAuthN described as "Sign-In with your thumb". It's a cryptographic signing of the challenge request that is validated server side; the biometric is a local (to the device) challenge.

While I do some modest reading while walking from car to work, the vast majority of the time, I'm sitting/stationary when I use my phone. Any authentication challenge that requires me to get up and walk around is not something I'd be a fan of :).

Surely you misunderstood what I wrote? I'm simply saying that if an item costs more than your perceived value derived from that item, you might opt to not purchase that item.

Now substitute item for labor costs, and you for a company. In the model proposed by Sanders, the cost of hiring or allowing certain part time workers to remain on staff may push the total cost to employ that person past the value generated. If that happens, the company may simply opt to not hire that person.

This is not speculation, this is simply rational.

This legislation will in many cases make the total cost of an employee more than the value the employee brings to the company. When ever this situation occurs, jobs are eliminated. You might be able to legally force a company to increase wages for hired workers, but you can't force a company to keep someone on staff that costs more than the the value they bring to the company.

Likely next steps: elimination of many part time jobs, increased "gig economy" workers, and expedited investments in automation. Net outcome: more dependence on government assistance.

https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thepiratebay.org%2Fsearch%2Fdefcad%2F0%2F99%2F0
https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fmaduce%2Ffosscad-repo%2Farchive%2Fmaster.zip

OpenBSD is still DAC. Not really directly comparable to SE Linux (MAC).

Read this for an idea of an OS designed with security in mind.
http://www.commoncriteriaportal.org/files/epfiles/solaris10ext-sec-e.pdf