What I’ve learned over the last few years:

• Only academics, commentators and researchers truly care about collective security, where the whole world gains because certain technology and is commonly agreed to be off-the-table
• Everyone else (that is, corporations including government and private enterprise) only cares about zero-sum security - your insecurity is my security gain - but they pretend in their messaging to care about collective security. It explains why nation states continue to demand purpose-built backdoors into hardware and encryption implementations, and why employers are content to treat your mobile phone like their own property, demanding apps, RATs, etc. be installed
• Most cybersecurity is thinly-veiled compliance, and amounts to certified bureaucrats implementing products from that small bunch of vendors with the means to influence policymaking
• The public messaging around security always uses the noun in the abstract, which to me is telling. Security for whom? Security against what? Security for what? See also social media and the term “safety”.

20 was the lead engineer ‘mishearing’ Zuck after he said 2.

Say it with me, peeps. Tenant on your own land!

Sounds like the protocol equivalent of regulatory capture.

Make it easy to buy stuff and people will.

In case you haven’t worked it out by now, the following advice may be of help:

They’re not gonna do that

‘Thank you, thank you. As you know I’ve suffered for my art’

but if you have a problem with the wages, just tip more.

enabler | noun

en·​abler i-ˈnā-b(ə-)lər

: one that enables another to achieve an end especially : one who enables another to persist in self-destructive behavior (such as substance abuse) by providing excuses or by making it possible to avoid the consequences of such behavior

https://psychcentral.com/health/are-you-an-enabler

sharing - this one is key. I use a shared shopping list and we both need to add and edit.

https://etherpad.org/

Get jotting with your friends in seconds: https://pad.disroot.org/

A Boeing suicide…

A crass nickname for the CIA Prize for Journalism if I ever saw one.

Or put another way, it’s enabling advertisers to better camouflage themselves as humans. (Because we just cannot have people communicating directly to each other on the web…)

No, Mr Mangione! A Fortune 500 executive is a living, enterprising creature!

I don’t care…heheheh <ebike swerves onto sidewalk>

Competitor lobbying doesn’t even enter into it, I’d guess.

The US State Department won’t tolerate Americans being exposed to media that doesn’t adhere to its view of the world. What large groups of Americans think - and vitally, the bounds of what they are permitted to think - is a national security ‘issue’ in the eyes of the state. No such problem exists with Facebook, cable news, the establishment newspapers, etc. As Chomsky teaches, propaganda is equally about what isn’t in the news.

My fledgling settlement of Highjade in the steamy tropics got hit by transport pod raiders. Four of them barged into my fab lab and killed my main crafter, then trashed the equipment. A few days prior my only drug maker was kidnapped, so I’ve run out of penicillin too. On the bright side I still have a masterwork sniper rifle and I thanks to all the flagstones I’ve laid, no infestations in a long while.

I got the feeling Arkane was always shit at org politics, to be honest. Creative energy without corporate strategy. Big shame.

Take this social media law, plus the software backdoor nonsense from a few years ago, and I can’t help but see a clear message emerging from legislators to Australian developers who’d seek to build great digital spaces and tools: Do not domicile anything in this country. Do not host anything on servers in this country. Expect hostility from authorities toward the anonymity, security, and privacy of the people using your code.

I hope you’re wrong, and they’re going to arbitarily apply the law to King Doge and Zuck, with everyone else getting ignored.

What I find intriguing is the potential for fediverse/decentralized service uptake amongst Australians, should the corporate providers decide it’s too much bother implementing an identity solution for 26m people and simply rangebans them.

In an alternate universe, parents are devoting 10 per cent of their doomscrolling time to studying their router manuals and determining access windows for social media on their LAN. But why obtain a gram of education to address a serious parenting issue when a ton of democracy-threatening legislation driven by politics will achieve a quarter of the same thing?

Some advice for TNG. Don’t skip seasons 1 and 2. It’s popular but misguided advice. I finished TNG this year and generally enjoyed these seasons despite their flaws.

To that effect, here’s an optimized episode watch guide for each. Six episodes removed per season to save you 9 hours in total. Return to the skipped episodes later if you’re interested.

Didn’t it ultimately achieve its aim with the creation of Lower Decks?

talking points like, “why don’t women look feminine aymore,” “why are characters designed for diversity/inclusion first before story,” “Concord sucks lol.”

They’re fair observations. Convergent, homogenous graphic design plagues big-budget game production.

Ubi is the sort of mob that could put out a title set in Georgian England and offer a cast that includes among others a queer green-haired ship’s captain, a Chinese bailiff and a Rastafarian archbishop. There’s a place for getting whimsical with character creation, but done often enough (and across so many genres), it becomes self-satirizing.

TNG 3x03 The Survivors. Trek works just as well when introspective personal drama gets priority over the science fiction.

One of these days I’ll post my maiden TNG viewing notes…