huppakee

The Federal Department of Justice and Police (FDJP), a Swiss authority responsible for overseeing law enforcement and public security, wants to impose a new rule that would grant it extensive surveillance powers over online communications.

Keep in mind, this change wouldn't go to a vote in Parliament and could be ratified without much public disclosure. If enacted, private encrypted email and messaging services like Proton Mail, Threema, and others could be seriously affected. And don’t even get me started on what this could mean for VPN providers.

Moreover, users might be required to hand over personal information, like a phone number or official ID, making anonymous sign-ups nearly impossible.

And it gets even worse — organizations would be required to hand over user data in plain text when requested, except for messages that are securely end-to-end encrypted between users.

I think they meant General Motors to throw $4 billion in a bottomless pit to to satisfy maga overlord

The defendants story makes up for it

Convincing marketing/lobbying maybe

Luckily the writer of the article understands that there is more to it than attracting 'the best' workers:

This week alone, US companies have taken over two UK tech businesses, and Mr Kassai doesn't seem surprised.

"Shareholders, investors, board members are going to find the highest bidder and the US tends to pay more," he said.

"There's four times as much capital invested into startup companies than there is in the whole of Europe, so naturally when it comes through a sale, the US is often able to pay a higher price."

A lot of advertising is annoying and misleading, even good advertising can lead to people buying stuff they don't need. I am definitely not pro-advertising but it does serve more than monopolistic capitalism, especially on a more local level.

I 100% agree and totally get why I am being downvoted, but just disabling advertising or banning tracking cookies are not a magic fix to save the internet from the perspective of the companies that now show these ads. But I am definitely I favour of changes, the enshittication went way to far already. But there is more than big social media platforms is what I mean to say.

To be honest, even though kidnapping a eu official is a much bigger deal than a Swedish citizen, I totally understand why Greta's involvement lead the news before. But now Greta is safe is am really glad the news is continuing to cover this. Could be more, yes, but if this happened last year there would be a lot less news coverage for sure.

Netanyahu fits that list no doubt

I understand every single word and am up to date about what's happening in LA and some other places, but can't make sense of this. Can someone please simplify this for me?

In real life i try to give people the benefit of the doubt, try to stand up for the underdog, give people second chances etc but in my life i've come to see that, unlike in real life, there are actors who want to come across like regular people but are not really a regular guy with just another opinion. I have no clue about this user in particular, but i tend to be extra sceptical when it's about a controversial topic - especially if a country, community or company involved who has in other cases hired people to influence opinions via social media. Isreal is one of those, so something like them never responding is more sus than when it's some unimportant topic. Still think it's good to be a positive person, but you might lend someone a hand you wouldn't if you knew their true intention (though again, i dont know what this guys intention is).