wnoise

It's "rules of thumb for a working physicist".

Mike and Ike is almost always my standard recommendation.

They're often terrible at knowing what helps or hurts values though.

The point is limit the damage that distrusting badly-behaved CAs do. Right now there's a lot of blast damage as anyone using them suddenly has their stuff break. If multiple signatures were common, then a given CA could be distrusted without hurting as many others, so it would actually be a viable threat to keep them in line.

Yeah, that's one of the complications. It would have to be ignored in processing, or multiple variants be presented at once (preferred).

Certificates are not the same as the public key; multiple certs sharing the same key is essentially the way around this. It's not as elegant as identical signing of the same cert, but it could work.

That's an interesting wrinkle I was not aware of.

It is a shame that you cannot have a cert signed by multiple CAs.

(The format seems like it would allow it, but nothing supports it, and in practice CAs demand the ability to actually modify some fields, and then sign that.)

It's flagged because lots of "trusted" users flagged it.

Why did they do that? Some might have an aversion to politics in general. That has long been a strong strain here, with people seeing it as diluting the tech focus.

But for a lot, it's clearly more sinister. There has been a lot of partiality in tech recently to plainly fascist and other ultra-right-wing ideas, especially among the executives and capital. They like it, and want it to win, everywhere, and will reflexively do what they can to help it, including burying bad coverage.

You're confused that I accurately described the origins and meaning of the term "remigration"? It is not merely closing borders and deporting immigrants without legal permission to be there. Calling for remigration absolutely is calling for ethnic cleansing. They're not shy about it, except when trying to convince non-racists that it's actually completely reasonable, and will only happen to criminals, the "worst of the worst", and those who haven't assimilated.

The rest is a large pile of missing the point, and bringing up things I did not say. I did not say any one was doing it. I said people were calling for it.

For the leaders of the Örebro Party in particular, Wikipedia suffices: > In a podcast segment about second generation immigrants involved in organised crime Allard stated "They will also be forced to leave, even if they are born in Sweden, because they have no natural connection to Sweden. They are not Swedish. They have not been interested in becoming Swedish."

(I am aware that Sweden is _Jus sanguinis_; it is entirely possible that second generation immigrants don't have citizenship; that merely makes it legal. And he does not explicitly make even that limiting argument.)

Note too that ethnicity is narrower than skin color; the lumping together of all European-extraction is a contingent feature of history, and is weaker than you might think. Kicking out non-Swedes would ethnic-cleansing, and would be even if the people being kicked out were white.

Nor does also deporting people for non-ethnic reasons make the rest of a remigration program not ethnic-cleansing. It's not the goal, but it's no big loss to these nationalists, because they're authoritarian race-collectivists willing to cause harm to get those people out.

Every country does deportation. "Remigration" is a neo-Nazi term that is explicitly a call for removal not by immigration status, but by ethnicity.

We know what ethnic-cleansing looks like, and the horrors it both requires to do and eventually causes.

"Government goodies, but just for people like us" is very much compatible with far-right governance.

How is the clojure program given not that?

Don't forget pizza delivery.

Saying your quoted words is a request for someone to read and respond; it's still pressure and a burden.

More commonly, edit them.