Funny how this is supposed to be absurd - upside down duck, cake, “bizarro” and all - but it’s actually pretty accurate. So many products out there that require you to download their shitty spyware in order to do the things they are supposed to do.

There are a lot of answers here but I feel they mostly miss OP’s point so I’ll try my own:

What stops a scammer from HTTPS certifying foobar.reputable.com is the trust system.

Anybody can create a certificate on their machine for anything within seconds, even you could create a certificate for www.google.com. The problem is that you, as an issuer, are not trusted by anybody.

Browsers and operating systems are released with a list of issuers that are considered trustworthy, so if you want your certificate to be recognised it has to come from one of these, not from you.

All of these issuers are in the list because they have been individually vetted, and are known to do their due diligence before issuing certificates, so they would not give you that cert unless they know that the bank domain or subdomain belongs to you, and the technical means to achieve this have been explained in other answers.

But if one of these issuers went rogue, or if you hypothetically hacked into their certification authority, then indeed nothing would stop you from obtaining a valid and recognised certificate for foobar.bank.com.

This is why for example Trustcor was removed from this list in 2022: from that position it would be trivial for a certificate authority to allow third parties to spy on people.

They’ve been preparing for this for a while. Months ago already I remember reading accusations of the ICC being antisemitic by Israelis and various sympathisers. The old fiddle that never stops playing.

This is a very interesting question that would require so much more talk than is proper for a lemmy comment.

I’ll try and make a stupidly short summary:

In political philosophy, it is commonly accepted to define a state as a political community where the government detains the monopoly over legitimate use of physical force.

Basically what allows you to feel safe in such a community - as opposed to a more tribal one - is that you know that you can’t be harmed by your fellow citizen. When you buy your groceries you don’t want to worry that the shopkeeper will beat you up because he doesn’t want to give you change. When you are outside enjoying your sandwich you don’t want to worry about a random guy cracking your head open in order to steal it. You are not worried because you know that their violence would be considered illegitimate, and would be met by legitimate violence.

This only works if everyone agrees to delegate their use of violence to the state, who in turn executes that violence through the appropriate means (police etc) using the appropriate rules. If violence is taken into one’s hands the whole foundation of the political community breaks down, which means that the state has existential interests in prosecuting whoever does it.

States where violence is not really prosecuted are those commonly considered failed states.

Now I know this is rather abstract and the real world is more complex than that, but as I said this would require a lot more space than is available here. But there is your answer: [privately administered] violence is not the answer.

I don’t really understand this seemingly widespread notion - that is also represented in this comic - that nations “agree” to go to war.

That is not really how it works most of the time, there is usually an aggressor and a victim. It is usually not two powerful leaders butchering their own country’s population, but rather one powerful leader butchering two countries’ population.

I know it’s not the point of this comic, but this really, really annoys me.

Season 8 is the last season, you watched all of scrubs and you had the beautiful finale (as even the data shows, it’s amazing and my eyes always wet when I rewatch it).

There is no season 9. There is a spinoff show, called “scrubs med”, which takes place in a med school and has some of the scrubs characters as teachers but they are there just as supporting characters. Somebody in charge of the show decided that for scrubs med to be successful it had to be branded as scrubs “proper”, so the show was released as scrubs, season 9.

Obviously it tanked. Too bad, because I think it was a nice show after all.

So I get rid of the land border with France, but in exchange I get a land border with USA - possibly the only worse country.

Also we lose Sicily and their awesome food and women but we get to keep Sardinia, where the best food is cheese with worms and the best women are one meter tall with moustache.

Bad deal man.

Wait apple is still operating in Russia? Weren’t we sanctioning them or something?

Let me introduce you to Europe

Society doesn’t work on edge cases. But for the sake of argument:

If that’s all the animal products you eat, these chickens are not selected through the common practice of grinding male chicks, the hens are going to die of old age, etc etc etc - for what I’m concerned you’re vegan.

Veganism is about ethics, not diet. Diet is a mere consequence. Lab grown meat is more vegan than coconut gathered by enslaved monkeys (yes it’s a thing).

So if you fine one such farm where animals are never killed or otherwise exploited then by all means, eat those eggs and call yourself a vegan. But something tells me you won’t find it.

To be fair being attracted to minors IS a mental illness as those people never chose it and can hardly do much about it, except for taking therapy like you do with other mental illnesses.

Likewise, being about who they are attracted to and again being something they did not choose, it also IS a sexuality.

More than anything else it is a curse. Imagine having to live with an attraction to people you can’t hope of actually dating, imagine having no way to love somebody you’re attracted to without harming them.

Now those people I have seen in the “MAP” space have a tendency to actually favour acting on their urges one way or another which is horrible, so I have no problem with your last paragraph. What I do not like is the other two, framing pedos as wicked people.

There is a stigma on pedophilia which is justified but also framed very poorly. The behaviour should rightfully be stigmatised, but the people should be treated for what the are: mentally sick and in need of help.

The stigma on the people that is well exemplified in your second paragraph is exactly what makes it hard for morally sound pedophiles to go and seek help.

Jesus says that for every number in an empty set it is true that 1=2?

That’s formally correct, any property can be attributed to elements of an empty set - for example, every unicorn currently living in my house is afraid of tea.

This is counterintuitive because for this to be true you’d expect me to have to prove the existence of my unicorns and then their phobias, but formally speaking I just need for counter-examples to be impossible.

Logically speaking the negation of “all my unicorns are afraid of tea” is “at least one unicorn is not afraid of tea”, which is not possible since I have no unicorns, therefore my sentence is formally correct. Even though people wouldn’t accept this because it is counterintuitive.

Did I get the joke?

As a non native English speaker, that is the grammar mistake that most baffles me in natives. Like, how does anybody think that “of” is the right word there, how does it make sense in their heads.

True 🦴🍎☕️ material, if it weren’t that absurdly common.

Never happened, also it was just a few thousand, also they were kulaks and Ukrainians did it anyway. But also never happened, western propaganda. And what about NATO bombing Belgrade?!?!?!?!

That’s rich coming from someone who threatens to intervene with her army if someone complains to her

I’m so tired of hearing this, can we stop with the “poor Russians under the tsar” narrative?

When Ukrainians got pushed towards the russian empire by their aspiring dictator they did Euromaidan, they got shot at and bravely pushed on, and have been fighting for their freedom ever since. They get to complain about Putin, and they get my sympathy for their suffering.

Russians have completely given up their agency, a couple of arrests and beatdowns by the police were enough to pacify them. I don’t see any protests or rallies anymore, I don’t hear about any partisans. Those in favour of the war have no sympathy from me. Those who are against it but kept silent because they chose a 0.5% chance of getting shelled in Ukraine over a 100% chance of getting arrested have no sympathy from me either.

To the dead Russian who “didn’t want to be involved”: cry me a river, you had your chance to not be involved. You get what you chose. Good riddance.

Which is not a bad thing, it’s more unix if you will. Router is a router, switch is a switch.

You provide your own switch and you choose the features: port count, port speed, vlan, etc — or get a 10€ switch if you don’t care. When a port breaks you replace the switch alone.

Multifunction tools are generally a tradeoff where you buy immediate convenience and pay with more ewaste and more money in the long run.

Guy 1 and 3 fucked up big time, now their display of love for Christmas spices is ruined. What were they thinking

I’m with you. I was just addressing the general question, which doesn’t get addressed as much as it should :)

I would rather see the conversation going towards reforming the broken system rather than going in the direction of “fuck the state it’s all broken anyway” which wouldn’t help anybody.

Let’s call this murder an act of political violence. If it’s the first, brutal step towards reform, then it’s one thing and we can “celebrate”. If it’s the first step towards Dodge City (which is the vibes I get from some comments) then there is very little to be happy about.

Unrelated but I love your username