Interesting, I read about excavations in beginning of 20th century on Wiki:
> In protest of the government's increasing restrictions, Carter and his associates stopped work in February 1924, beginning a legal dispute that lasted until January 1925. Under the agreement that resolved the dispute, the artefacts from the tomb would not be divided between the government and the dig's sponsors, as had been standard practice on previous Egyptological digs.
Why they did have a rule that private persons can take away the artifacts? It would be better not to dig anything.
Is it much different from Apple and Google who trick user into agreeing and upload all user's data into a US cloud for convenient LE access?
Also, as I understood, this is a feature to allow server-side indexing of the project. But of course I wouldn't run this, and I generally wouldn't run any IDE or AI tools without a sandbox.
Sadly this plague of silent auto-updates is spreading to Linux. For example, browser plugins in Firefox on Linux can silently auto-update without user consent and without any checks and can be used as backdoors. Furthermore, the auto-updates are not using a package manager; firmware also seem to quietly update and also is not using a package manager.
Who are those people having lot of time to re-read their old message history? I assume most people only read last several messages in a chat. This matches the real life conversations which are not stored anywhere. However, police will definitely be happy to discover that your many years messaging history is intact.
I would rather want a feature, like Telegram has, where you can set auto-delete of all messages older than N days.
>Who are those people having lot of time to re-read their old message history?
Everyone who has to, say, prove that they kept paying their rent for a year without interruptions. You sent a photo of your money transfer from the bank app to your landlord, and he sends the "received" screenshot from his bank app.
Moreover, a lot (even most) people make personal notes by sending messages to themselves.
For me searching my old messages is really useful. I don't scroll back through history but I'll search for things like "plumber" to find the number of a plumber a friend texted me a while back.
the only people that really trust the police are ones that never actually had to deal with the police (which may be a whole lot of people). however, if you ever have an unfortunate situation to have a run in with the police, there is a good chance you will not be all that trusting any longer. people trust the idea of police more so than anything else
Well, true. But even so, having the history intact is also a way to remove suspicions from yourself.
"Where were you during the event X? I was very far from the place you are interested in, as can be proven by this photo, sent to my grandma, have a look at the history in her phone."
I am ok with Electron if it is needed for Matrix. Also, Telegram has a C++ desktop client.
Also, I would not advise to add proprietary repositories as you grant them root access to your system which is against security practices such as the principle of minimum privileges and defence-in-depth.
> TikTok in August agreed to settle three U.S. lawsuits brought by young people who accuse social media companies of designing their platforms to be addictive and harming their mental health.
I am so happy I do not live in US where an idiot harms themself and non-idiot has to pay them.
It definitely can be stopped. For example, China sells cars internally at cheaper prices, but they are locked to prevent using them outside the country. However, there are people who can hack and unlock them allowing operating in any country. But maybe it would be illegal in the West, I don't know. Removing the modem is an easier task.
I would sincerely hope .gov addresses use SPF/DKIM/DMARC. That makes spoofing impossible. In Revolut's case, the sender's email system had been compromised.
> In protest of the government's increasing restrictions, Carter and his associates stopped work in February 1924, beginning a legal dispute that lasted until January 1925. Under the agreement that resolved the dispute, the artefacts from the tomb would not be divided between the government and the dig's sponsors, as had been standard practice on previous Egyptological digs.
Why they did have a rule that private persons can take away the artifacts? It would be better not to dig anything.
reply