jupr

Just found this and thought this was interesting to share here.

Descriptive Introduction of the Silent Weapon

"Everything that is expected from an ordinary weapon is expected from a silent weapon by its creators, but only in its own manner of functioning.

It shoots situations, instead of bullets; propelled by data processing, instead of chemical reaction (explosion); originating from bits of data, instead of grains of gunpowder; from a computer, instead of a gun; operated by a computer programmer, instead of a marksman; under the orders of a banking magnate, instead of a military general.

It makes no obvious explosive noises, causes no obvious physical or mental injuries, and does not obviously interfere with anyone's daily social life.

Yet it makes an unmistakable "noise," causes unmistakable physical and mental damage, and unmistakably interferes with the daily social life, i.e., unmistakable to a trained observer, one who knows what to look for.

The public cannot comprehend this weapon, and therefore cannot believe that they are being attacked and subdued by a weapon.

The public might instinctively feel that something is wrong, but that is because of the technical nature of the silent weapon, they cannot express their feeling in a rational way, or handle the problem with intelligence. Therefore, they do not know how to cry for help, and do not know how to associate with others to defend themselves against it.

When a silent weapon is applied gradually, the public adjusts/adapts to its presence and learns to tolerate its encroachment on their lives until the pressure (psychological via economic) becomes too great and they crack up.

Therefore, the silent weapon is a type of biological warfare. It attacks the vitality, options, and mobility of the individuals of a society by knowing, understanding, manipulating, and attacking their sources of natural and social energy, and their physical, mental, and emotional strengths and weaknesses."

>including without limitation the rights to use

'use'...arguably the sole purpose of the API is to fetch the data.

You are grasping at straws.

Honestly the HN archive is very valuable. If you had it all on a local db with everything indexed you basically end up with a offline search engine.

Where is this archive located you speak of?

That made me chuckle but I guess if you have never seen one I could see how that assumption could be made.

If this photo is real I wonder what can be revealed about the approach they have taken by analyzing the architecture of what we can see.

On the other hand, it's never been easier to design a place that doesn't need those things, or be confident the javascript is on your side.

javascript, like tor, is powerful in both directions depending on what it's used for.

That wasn't meant to be an argument against other privacy protecting technologies. I'll take them all. Although you can't just compare apples to apples when you speak of close sources technology. I applaud apple for the long held stance of privacy protections.

And to be fair, tor comes at the price of speed. But convince isn't the only thing in the math equation here. Privacy basically boils down to a three part equation these days with the variables being Speed/Convenience.

A lot of that speed and convince can be made up for with being familiar with the tools and adapting to a new norm. The actual network speed isn't really that bad comparatively.

I found the signs to be hard to find and poorly placed.

But since I knew about it before traveling, I just said no photo please and it was pretty frictionless.

The people behind me did not even realize you could say no, and no one really wants to be late for their flight.

Make the sign bigger. Its not a good test in my view.