🍽️🔪 THEY ARE EATING THE DOGS 😼

the commercials that have already been paid to the company are still showing, so that ad revenue is still being capitalized.

That’s not how it works though. You are not accounted for watching the ads over a pirate stream…

Also people regularly spend more than they can afford.

When you think about it the fact that you can quite easily borrow money you clearly will not reimburse which is kind of an infinite money Glitch for capitalism.

Thanks ! That’s exactly how I think it could be implemented but that confirms that this is certainly not something you can find commonly where I live.

That confirms the fact that if you use the same wifi and everyone has entered the same encryption key then there is no real client isolation…

It’s cool that wifi keeps evolving. It comes a long way from the WEP beginnings.

Do you have any documentation on how this work ? Is there a name to this special protocol? Is it a recent addition to the wifi standard ?

Again a wifi AP doesn’t send data to a specific client. So how does an AP can enforce that one client can’t read a frame for someone else that is properly authenticated? How would an AP prevent someone spoofing mac addresses from receiving that data ?

I’m really confused by this feature I never heard of even when I was playing with aircrack and so on. Yes sometimes your mac address can get filtered but even that is not really difficult to avoid.

Sorry I have so many questions but I honestly did quite some “tinkering” with wifi years ago and none of this sounds familiar.

I have no idea what this client separation is.

As far as I know there isn’t really any client separation on wifi. It’s a shared medium.

At least I don’t see anything preventing you from reading someone else traffic. So anything unencrypted on a wifi is also accessible to any other clients.

I had tools more than 10 years ago that could automatically hijack session cookies on wifi for anybody connected and not using https.

Edit: I know, I shouldn’t give a shit. But writing a fairly long comment to share my knowledge on this only to see it immediately downvoted without any explanation kind of sucks. So I’m removing this comment and will not interact here anymore.

* in 360p.

All images are unavailable for me on this image share host…

Just want to point out that the allergic person seemed to have taken every precautions possible to avoid this. She asked the waiter and the chef multiple times to verify that the allergen wouldn’t be there and they repeatedly said it was the case.

I think there were 4 times where they confirmed that the meal was safe. It wasn’t at all.

So it looked like a really really bad mistake from the restaurant staff.

They are the best cables!

A soft layer outside then some crunchy shielding and then another soft layer and crunchy core. This is clearly a snack.

I’m not a cat (nor a lawyer).

But discrediting someone’s opinion by just posting this meme is NOT toxic ?

So it’s toxic to assume someone might be a Russian bot but it is not toxic to disregard the opinion of everybody that said that ? You know there are bots online. Maybe not much here but there was definitely many on Reddit. So bots are real but someone that points out a bot must be wrong.

This is weird.

Removed by mod

So yeah, it appears we shouldn’t trust what Putin says publicly.

Obviously, he could say he prefers Biden and then pull every trolling ressources available to make Trump wins.

This statement from Putin doesn’t have any value whatsoever.

He would say openly the opposite it would still be extremely unreliable information.

So basically:

Russian bots do exist but they are “not that bad”. Also if someone from Russia they are not necessarily a bot because they have a different opinion…

That’s all fine to have that position but who are you to tell other people if they encountered a bot or a real human being ?

Do you have any idea how prevalent Russian bots are ? What are their latest strategy?

I cannot answer these questions and you shouldn’t either.

The people you are bashing for pointing at “Russian bots” could be completely right. Their perception of internet is not the same as yours.

If anything it’s good that people are suspicious of any Russian information on the internet. It’s much better in my opinion than your alternative which seems to be built on contempt for people falling for bots and a very prominent ego yourself for thinking nobody ever got you.

I follow closely what is happening in the US from France because even though we have a very different culture I still think US politics is a preview of what’s to come here.

Right now I consider we are at the step where our media are crumbling and becoming unable to properly inform us. A step that has been reached a couple of years ago in the US in my opinion.

The next step will probably be our own coup attempt in a few years and a steady increase in the division of the country and far right movements.

I want the same thing I just don’t think taking what is inherited is the way to do it.

I would much rather see the ultra-rich pay properly their taxes when they are alive.

It’s not like taking inheritance money is the only way to finance things. I don’t see the reasoning.

I can totally understand why someone with huge revenue would pay more taxes but I don’t see why someone who inherits has to pay taxes at that exact moment.

In any case, I think you are missing the point and answering the question “for what purpose?”. Instead of “why?”.

I want to know why it’s more logical to pay taxes when you die rather than paying them in the first place when you got the revenue.

Obviously, the money collected is useful I just don’t see why it has to be collected when it is a time of sorrow for a family.

Also where I live it’s like 50% of the inheritance that is taxed. It is not just significant, it is 50% of the work of a life that goes in one shot to the state when someone dies.

Since when does wealth be shared when someone dies ?

No, the money will go to their descendants who will try to get even richer than their parents. A large part of that money will also be taken by the state because ?? and ??.

Nothing would change.

Maybe people didn’t frequently have weird hobbies before.

The way I see it internet widened enormously the diversity of knowledge we get to check. And that’s these weird rabbit holes online that create the similarly weird new hobbyist.

My instance tried to disable downvotes and it was a fiasco.

So yeah a lot of people are keen to remove user feedback in any way possible in the hope to lessen toxicity until they notice that it’s a double edged sword. People can’t dislike stuff just to troll or for bad reasons. But people couldn’t even downvote a spam bot and you essentially are at the mercy of anybody if a mod is not close by ready to act. Likes and dislikes are a way to outsource moderation to the users. So either X has a secret army of moderators or that will just result in a lot more trash being on the foreground.

No likes on X means that the spammers, racists, stalker will essentially be at the same level of visibility than any other user.

I’m sure that will go just fine…