No they don’t (well… they do, but not for this). Bump stocks are a stupid gimmick that were only ever banned in the first place to appease low-information hysterical types.

It’s another tool for the toolbox. How can being more prepared with a more diverse set of tools be bad for any situation? Right now the only tool seems to be posting outraged comments on the internet.

So many weasel words in this declaration, from “major” invasion to stopping the supply of “the weapons that have been used historically to deal with Rafah.”

Next we hear that what’s happening now is only a minor invasion, but they’ve halted the supply of US catapults and siege engines just to be on the safe side.

Poverty and mental illness control, now

That’s exactly what he was saying.

This actually looks like an improvement in policing overall.

• Shooting an unarmed man isn’t any worse than what we have today and to be fair the guy actually had a gun and not a phone or something.

• More impressively, it shoots him dozens of times and every bullet connects with the intended target. Not even the window behind him breaks. Cops these days dump their magazines without any regard to the surroundings and hit bystanders or just lose most of the bullets somewhere down range.

This scene may not be dystopian after all.

RCS, as adopted by GSMA , is zero encryption text messaging. RCS with encryption is a proprietary Google product and relies on Google servers.

On my phone, so links may come later. It’s hard to find solid documentation on it, since their encryption extension is proprietary, but it’s been referenced as being based on the Signal Protocol. The Signal Protocol, or every implementation of it that I’ve seen, uses a central “trusted” repository of public keys to tell message originators query to encrypt the message to. For Signal, and I assume Google RCS, that central repository is Google. The protocol doesn’t allow for federation, so any system that is interoperable with Google RCS will rely on Google as the trusted authority.

The private key part I’m much less sure of, since both the Signal and Google RCS clients are closed source. Signal makes you jump through hoops to add a new client, involving one of your currently installed clients. This suggests that Signal isn’t in possession of your private keys. On the other hand, all you need to set up a new Google client is your account password. This suggests that either your keys are held by Google (perhaps encrypted by your account password) or that new keys can be added without needing explicit involvement from current keys.

Of course this is all speculation because the implementations aren’t available for inspection.

So is this going to be standard RCS, which has no encryption and the telcos need to support, or the Googlified version that does E2E encryption but requires storing keys on Google’s servers?

RCS has interoperability issues itself and Google hasn’t been making the situation better.

Yes, so now ceasefire resolutions have been vetoed by Biden, Putin, and Xi. Good company.

This is all such absolute insanity. So disappointed in the human race these days.

Oh yay! Biden is on the same side as Putin and Xi, in disagreement with the rest of the world.

Not quite the win I think you’re going for there.

Nitrogen hypoxia sounds like one of the best ways to die, without pain or panic, but I completely understand why no company wants to be the supplier of the means of executing people. Small volume, small profits, extreme controversy. What’s to want there?

Meanwhile, Biden pisses away his domestic support by propping up this Nazi clown. I’m starting to think Netanyahu wants Trump and the DNC is going to deliver him on a silver platter.

Yes. I’m a man of few words.

I’m too cynical, I guess, but I’m sure the ’hot mic’ incident wasn’t an accident. But either way, is a ‘come to Jesus’ meeting more or less serious than a ‘sternly phrased letter’?

Are we still sending Israel the weapons that are being used to carry out this genocide?

It is a goddamn masterpiece and absolutely worth playing. I just finished playing it again after so many years.

Edit: I read the article (ugh, sky is shite. That’s minutes of my life I won’t get back.) and admit that the headline was bullshit. I’m ashamed that I fell for it.

Not to defend this guy, or even police in general (ACAB), but the sheriff or chief of police is supposed to be more of a political position that decides where to allocate resources and how to prioritize the needs of the community. Since that involves discerning the will of the people, it makes sense that the people should decide who fills the role and get to continually reevaluate it. The alternative is that another politician just appoints someone into the role, which has most of the same downsides while also being undemocratic.

That’s just theory, of course, and not even considering how messed up the whole election process really is.

Sure, but this is part of the process. If we don’t call them out, they assume that everything is peachy and the status quo is their mandate. I’ll admit it’s inflammatory and over the top, but it’s sort of catchy.