> They are not even trying to hide it — and I suppose it is not a secret at all: The more time users spend on Facebook and Instagram, the more money Meta makes.

Why would they try to hide something that is obvious?

With the decline of Twitter as the place that it seemed like everyone used to be on, other similar services seeing a small increase is not too surprising. I'm wondering if traffic from Threads, which they launched in 2023 (after Musk bought Twitter in fall of 2022), gets counted under Instagram, since you use your Instagram account to login? I get that Zuck and co want to say those increases are tied to their magical AI to please investors, but was it really?

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/106th_United_States_Congress

I don't know how one would reach that conclusion, least of all a Major at the nation's leading military educational institute. Nothing "hell-bent" about it.

> Maybe the UN can levy the USA for this

The UN has no "levy" powers.

Huh? As a parent with kids who take the bus, people ignoring the flashing lights on buses absolutely does matter.

> this is a case of finding someone guilty with no physical evidence.

Bus drivers call the cops on the cars who do this already. What evidence do they have, other than the license plate?

We settled on the X5 50e. ~40-45 mile electric range with an overall ~450-500 mile range, and rather good performance when you want/need it. Total price well equipped was ~$92-94k. Also drives a lot nicer than the iX did.

We are getting an equivalent of about ~800 miles a tank. Could do better, but we only use the basic charger on 110v, which charges at a rate of ~1 mile an hour.

More to the point though, what is this cheap and easy domain scoring system that does a better job than a blanket ban?

The best domain reputation provider, DomainTools, definitely isn't providing their data for cheap, nor is it always the fastest. We pay a substantial amount to them for thousands of requests a day, something we reserve for enriching actual security incidents, not because someone wants to go to catparty.foobar or whatever.

You don't have a right to enter a private establishment as a journalist. You don't have a right to interrupt a religious ceremony under the banner of free speech. Don Lemon was up front, in the church, with his mic in the pastor's face, while the congregation was still there and the pastor had already asked them to leave.

In general though, if you want Fortune 500s to utilize your service/company, don't utilize a novelty TLD.

I mean, there's goal post moving and there's just building a whole new stadium across the country.

lol, no, it's really not.

> Also when talking about encryption between servers within datacenters you seem to be missing that in order for such multi -stage/path encryption (separate certs/keys) to be possible the data first has to be decrypted at each point

Why would I want the data to be decrypted at each point and why would datacenters do that? Encrypting and decrypting data is expensive computationally, so that's not how things work at all. There's no need to decrypt data to know where it needs to go. That's why we have TCP/IP and other similar stadards.

The datacenters can maybe add another layer of encryption on top of my data as its moving around their networks, but there's absolutely no way for them to strip off my encryption.

> Yours and others' claims that things somehow got better after Snowden is just a completely baseless statement

Things didn't magically get better. A lot of people worked hard to improve the overall security posture of the industry.

As for the rest of this... how many conspiracy theories are you trying to pack into a statement?

> "even if this statement is an exaggeration"

It's not an exaggeration, it is simply false.