what's it like to be poor in a rich country? the libertarian party supported his reelection bid and by support Ross he garnered more of their votes. this couldn't be more obvious. he did the same for crypto.
according to Trump: "A promise made is a promise kept", he is keeping his promise to his constituents.
So that's the interesting thing about it; he gets the votes from it, so apparently many people agree with him? Only in public nobody seems to agree with him? How is that possible?
Most of his voters have no idea what his campaign or promises are, and that's intentional, see mexican voters apparently surprised by his anti-mexican stance now.
> see mexican voters apparently surprised by his anti-mexican stance now.
Source?
And it seems people don't particularly like Trump, but vote on him because he seems to be the only one that wants to do something about illegal immigrants:
And I understand that it's even frustrating for legal immigrants, who waited for years to get citizenship, that illegal immigrants don't have to do anything and get it right away.
So yeah, we can argue about the details, but it is clear that during Biden's administration it was way too easy for illegal immigrants to get into the US, which is unfair for the legal immigrants that went through much more trouble to get there.
Aside from that, the constant flow of illegal immigrants also caused a lot of issues in the states near the borders, and obviously for the country as a whole.
> Sorry I really don't like YouTube for political content. Any text summaries of how they get citizenship quickly after crossing illegally?
Sorry, I looked for it but it seems it's not easy to find mainstream newspaper articles about this. It seems this topic is heavily being censored. Which is interesting in it's own right. But it does also mean that I can't deliver all this information on a golden plate for you, and you'll have to do a little bit of research and analyzing and personal thinking, instead of just reading the headlines that the media is feeding you.
Watch the video, it really gives you might insight into the complexity of the situation, or at least how it was.
And how else would you explain that first the borders were constantly flooded with illegal immigrants, and now not anymore? Something must have changed that has made the illegal path less interesting than the legal one.
> And how else would you explain that first the borders were constantly flooded with illegal immigrants, and now not anymore?
It could just be the news coverage. Maybe they wanted people scared before the election. Do you have sources with actual numbers? What is the percentage decrease?
> It seems this topic is heavily being censored
Then how are the illegal migrants "easily" getting citizenship finding out about it?
> Then how are the illegal migrants "easily" getting citizenship finding out about it?
They hear it from each other. They know, it's a whole business, with coach busses taking immigrants to the border where they continue a common path take daily by many people. It's all in that video.
This is representative of the dichotomy we face within society, in that we rarely associate with people who have different opinions than us, even when we think that we do regularly. It is the paradox of our social circles that overlap but never interact.
The trick is inside or brains. We’re having trouble dealing with detailed percentage breakdowns and differentiating between groups of people.
Instead we think of “the average person” and project that on everyone.
You looked at the small libertarian interest group, and based on that projected how everyone is. Now you look at hacker news and you’re projecting how everyone is. This projection is where our reasoning fails.
Yeah but to be honest, most mainstream media channels that I see criticize Trump a lot. And the media that praises him is often seen als radical / extreme / whatever right.
So, either the old government is in power of the mainstream media, or people are secretly on the right and don't speak out about it. Or maybe a combination of the two.
It’s the selection of media that you see. Try watching Fox. Try listening to Joe Rogan. Try going on a clean YouTube account and watching random videos for a week. It’s there.
You made a false dichotomy, but I’m sure you can figure that one on your own.
There’s also the other aspect where you align your views to the views of your group.
There are places in the US, where being a Republican is absolutely the core of what you are, and you will adopt and genuinely love any candidate from that party.
Trump yesterday: “I like both sides of the argument, but I also like very competent people coming into our country, even if that involves them training and helping other people that may not have the qualifications they do. I don't want to stop…”
"We want competent people coming into our country. And H-1B, I know the programme very well. I use the programme. Maître d', wine experts, even waiters, high-quality waiters, you've got to get the best people. People like Larry, he needs engineers, NASA also needs... engineers like nobody's ever needed them"
have used it at 2 different enterprises internally, the issue is price more than anything. enterprises definitely do want to self host, but for frontier tech they want frontier models for solving complicated unsolved problems or building efficiencies in complicated workflows. one company had to rip it out for a time due to price, I no longer work there anymore though so can't speak on if it was reintegrated.
this is more or less my take too. if tomorrow all Claude and ChatGPT became $200/month I would still pay. The value they provide me with far, far exceeds that. so many cynics in this thread.
the newer generations of AirPods absolutely trigger tinnitus for me. The gen 1 AirPod Pros are the best. I really have to crank the volume to trigger it. The Gen 2 AirPod Pros are the worst. Even low volumes rip apart my ears. Constant ringing all of the time. The USB-C Airpod Pros Gen 2 are ok at low to mid volumes, can't use them at high volumes what so ever though, they also let in a terrible amount of wind noise for outdoor activity which makes them unusable since turning up the volume to mute the wind noise causes tinnitus for me.
The AirPod Pro Max also get too loud, they are ok at low to mid volumes, high volumes = extreme tinnitus.
HomePods are similar, I can only have them on at volume levels I appreciate for short periods of time or I get tinnitus.
Compare this with my old sennheisers and audeze headphones, 0 tinnitus even at extreme volumes. Similar for my in ear Mochi headphones.
Or compare the HomePods to my Panasonic Surround Sound Speakers for my TV from 12 years ago that I still use, I can make the walls shake with no tinnitus. If I turn up my homepods to a volume close to that my ears will be ringing for hours or days after. It really bums me out, I wish I understood what is changing about the technology. Like are they going from Analog to Digital and is digital more harsh or something? I don't know.
What do you do when that piece starts and you remember you don’t really care about anything anymore and you just need some of that energy shot into your brain at the highest volume possible even if it hurts?
I don't have tinnitus on most of my devices at medium to high volumes. only apple devices and more recently built wireless in ear monitors. victim blaming is great though.
I personally like to pick apart all of the layers of music and hear all of the nuance/production. At low volume this is generally not possible. Not all of us have audiophile tendencies though I suppose.
I think the point the parent was trying to make was that when using ANC you likely listen to things using a lower volume setting--reducing the chance you'll develop tinnitus. Without ANC what you're listening to competes with what's around you and you're likely going to keep the volume higher. I immediately noticed I was using a lower volume when I first used some headphones with ANC.
I've head some people suggest using AirPods Pro with ANC as a form of hearing protection at concerts--I think Apple might have even mentioned that in today's presentation.
Yeah, they should lower the noise floor and allow same dynamic range at lower volume, just like Apple touts here for the new AI noise cancellation (which also mentions they use eartips for part of the reduction).
"triggered" tinnitus from in-ear headphones or normal headphones is not necessarily from the sound level. Try to massage ears (pull earlobes forward, back, up down, and massage muscles around ears) head and jaw muscles. Stretch your neck muscles.
If you do it from time to time and tinnitus eases even a little, it might come from how the AirPods or headphones press your ear or head causing tensions.
Watch his interview with Tucker Carlson and you’ll see. He doesn’t acquiesce to government requests for moderation control, censorship, and sharing private user data so they target him. He refuses to implement backdoors as well. In stark contrast to western social media companies.
When an authoritarian govt is calling for the release of someone who runs a "private" messenger, it suggests they have a back door. Otherwise they tend to oppose all private messaging.
No, there is no logical link between the two events. Russian govt can protest that for propaganda reasons: to make a point that Western governments are restricting freedom of speech.
They're hitting that Uno Reverse card. Tbf, the US does a LOT of the stuff that we openly criticize Russia and China for. Which, I would hope that people have enough insight to recognize that this is a bad thing across the board. The only people who get hurt and face consequences from this kind of a thing are the citizens.
This is a key perspective people fail to take into account. We've been conditioned by movies, books etc to think everyone fits into these black and white "good and bad" categories.
Most western countries do horrific things we do not find acceptable, but when we do find out we hand wave it away because they're the "good guys".
They don't tend to care until large enough quantities of people start listening despite whatever filters (i.e. de-ranking social media posts) and countermeasures (i.e. cable news assets) are put in place before it gets to that point. Then they very likely have the ability to label it as misinformation and find a legal reason to prosecute under a number of broad categories: https://www.thefederalcriminalattorneys.com/false-informatio...
It came very close to this during Covid, and maybe once or twice since then.
You're free to say what you want, and everyone is free to ignore you if what you say doesn't jive with "common sense".
No. What would be illogical is to assume that because Russia might be motivated to protest for the sake of propaganda, that it is not also, or instead, motivated by not wanting to lose access to a hypothetical backdoor.
I don't completely buy the fact that he was arrested because he didn't cooperate with authorities. World Police forces have an history of infiltrating criminal groups and gaining their trust; planting backdoors isn't the only way they can investigate people.
Also, this way they're yelling loud to these people "hurry! pick another platform!".
And then, he is also on Putin's wanted list; his arrest could one day turn him into a valuable bargaining chip.
Also now they have added “because people watch football matches illegally on Telegram”. So they are going to throw everything at kitchen sink at Durov, probably also national security issues because anti-French political groups use Telegram in Africa.
It is still not backdoor, sorry, you are completely mistaken.
They came - tried to come - in the front door openly (the expression of back door means completely different, just look it up and you will see) to catch criminals, doing well known and prominent criminal activity, but the Telegram decided to protect the criminals instead. You can try to smear in whatever imaginative reasons behind when the reason are in the front of your face, like it or not, it does not matter if you like it or not! Also how much people like the Telegram because 'it is soo user friendly and pretty', not in pair with serious crimes committed and aided there, completely not!
Also it is still the investigative phase but the suspicion is warranted completely.
I seriously do not understand low moral people shielding those helping criminals, do you really not knowing what are you doing, seriously, just because there is a - misleadingly presented - popular service there? Really? Very worrying the moral state of social media user masses.
Telegram publishes open-source clients that can run on open-source platforms. Signal does not offer any client that doesn't depend on proprietary code (either iOS or Google Play Services) and is aggressive about taking down third-party builds that remove that dependency. I'd say there's a lot more reason to assume Telegram is not wilfully backdoored than Signal (though I'd trust Wire or Matrix ahead of either of them).
We have no real way to check for backdoors in Signal either. Signal is not transparent about what code their servers are running, and you are not allowed to start your own server with a known version. They do not allow for independent distribution of reproducible builds on F-droid, or any other application store that does not identify you. They will take steps to lock out any independent implementations of the client from their servers. That the code for their client is released is good, but not good enough.
Huh, I was going to point out that the Signal server isn't Free Software either, since for a while it wasn't being published, but it seems they have gotten back into publishing it.
while it's amazing for them to keep maintaining it, as the person mentioned down the thread, it's hard to know what they are actually running, right? and it's not a lot of work to patch this or clone/branch as necessary before deploying. Oh well, i already resigned that a part of my life will be run by someone else by now.
Publishing server code provides no assurance of anything (although it is still nice, for other reasons) since nobody can know if what they (for any "they") run in production is the same as the public source.
Open client code and documented protoccols are much more important. If you can compile your own client from open source code and it works fine, then you can know for sure what you're sending to the server.
If you bothered to look, you would find that both of the examples given are open-source servers. You might then deduce that you misunderstood the comment to which you replied.
You cannot audit the system/service logs for those servers, neither can you audit the hardware running those servers, nor the internet providers who can snoop on the traffic et al... That's the argument behind "Open source server" in case it wasn't clear.
This might be where the misunderstanding is. This software is indeed server software that anyone can run, and the global network consists of servers run by many independent entities, in many cases with full control of the hardware. One of these entities can be you, and it is completely possible to run from home.
The integrity of your conversation with someone would then depend on both your endpoints, clients, and the respective server.
Just like email, but for chat. There is no single gatekeeper who is allowed to use the network.
No misunderstanding at all. The argument is very clear.
> global network consists of servers run by many independent entities
This is not the case for all the popular chat apps including Signal which uses centralized servers which they run themselves. They clearly see little benefit from this distributed independent server model.
And even that doesn't mean the server is open source.
As I explained earlier if you cannot audit the physical server you are connected to, claiming it's open source is useless. FYI that's literally how the term open source was used in this context!
> The integrity of your conversation with someone would then depend on both your endpoints, clients, and the respective server.
Client to client verification simply works and eliminates the need to also "verify" the server which if compromised introduces an even higher risk of contamination in the trust model (too many co-dependent functions are delegated to the server), not to mention collusion in establishing integrity of yet another device that we need to trust.
Not sure what part of my comment amused you so much.
An IM platform server can be open sourced. Just like any kind of software.
It's just a matter of publishing your code and, preferably making it possible to verify that the service your users are connecting to is build using the same published code.
How could you possibly verify what code they are running server-side?
Typically, the way it goes is that you implement e2ee such that even a fully compromised server cannot read the clients messages, publish the client's source code, and build it yourself or use reproducible builds. That ladt part is where you can criticize Signal. Whether they publish the server code is mostly irrelevant unless you want to run a separate messenger infrastructure.
> unless you want to run a separate messenger infrastructure.
Or if you S2S federate with the upstream server. Which is a core differentiator of XMPP and Matrix. Signal server(s) notably supported proper federation during their initial growth-phase but famously closed it off ("The ecosystem is moving").
Similar story as Google [Chat/Talk/Hangouts], which did federate over XMPP before they closed that down years ago.
Which government? There has been a lot of mysterious deanons of protesters in Belarus in 2020. You know, the kind of deanon where armed people break down you door and you're going to be beaten and tortured for several days in the very least.
In practice it is very easy to deanon using social engineering.
It is enough to open a shared link to expose your IP. A lot of people would click something like "Belorussian protestors got deanonized" or "10 ways to keep you safe" in a group chat. Just get it a catchy title. And this link is specially crafted to lead to the exposer server.
Who would watch an interview being held by a crazy person and take it at face value? Anyone with half a brain would avoid watching or listening to Tucker Carlson like the plague.
Total compensation means $700K, some of it being cash, some of it being stock. Company cars are pretty rare in the US, since basically everyone has a car already.
Company cars are really common in some industries, very rare in others. Ive never heard of it in tech, but I know people in sales that its just part of the gig.
I've not owned a car in 7 years thanks to my engineering gig coming with a work truck for getting around construction sites. Quite enjoy that aspect of it.
Roblox will not be issuing stock options now and likely stopped doing so for 4+ years already. The equity component of compensation now will be actual stock (shares) and not options.
Another commenter mentioned that cash/equity now has a 33/67 split meaning $700k tc would likely be $230k cash and $470k stocks
Total Compensation is the sum of all the different ways you are paid monetarily. This includes, but is not limited to: Base salary, Bonus, Equity (stock) compensation, Benefits
It is released by both OpenAI and Anthropic each to one of their key partners(large hedge fund) with exclusive access. I have inside sources at both that have told me as much.
