No, they are very much in the middle. The attack occurs in the middle between sender and receiver. It doesn't matter when the attack occurs, that is the position in the message chain that the government targets.
It almost seems like Republicans want potential voters to imbibe neurotoxins that will negatively impact their IQ, harm their ability to concentrate, and make them more easily swayed by emotional appeals.
It's probably that they're reaching for straws on anything they can complain about. Which works when their lower iq voters see that there is controversy.
You're on the same "Risk Board game" like the rest of us. If you're not in the American sphere of influence then NSA is just taking all your metadata the harder way.
Cause somebody is selling the Chinese king false dreams of invading America. And maybe having documents on every American citizen would be helpful post invasion.
Scholars usually portray institutions as stable, inviting a status quo bias in their theories. Change, when it is theorized, is frequently attributed to exogenous factors. This paper, by contrast, proposes that institutional change can occur endogenously through population loss, as institutional losers become demotivated and leave, whereas institutional winners remain. This paper provides a detailed demonstration of how this form of endogenous change occurred on the English Wikipedia. A qualitative content analysis shows that Wikipedia transformed from a dubious source of information in its early years to an increasingly reliable one over time. Process tracing shows that early outcomes of disputes over rule interpretations in different corners of the encyclopedia demobilized certain types of editors (while mobilizing others) and strengthened certain understandings of Wikipedia’s ambiguous rules (while weakening others). Over time, Wikipedians who supported fringe content departed or were ousted. Thus, population loss led to highly consequential institutional change.
@manucode@feddit.de I am also in agreement that I don't know how a federated wikipedia solves what made Wikipedia so great. Per the paper above, fringe editors saying "the flatness of the world is a debated topic" gradually got frustrated about having to "present evidence" and having their work reverted all the time, and so voluntarily left over time. And so an issue page goes from being "both sides" to "one side is a fringe idea".
From reading the Ibis page, this seems a lot closer to fandom than the wikipedia. Different encyclopedias where the same page name can be completely different.
It's unpopular because it's so far removed from it's closes analogue analogue, envelope mail. And because it's on mobile phones people incorrectly assume it's closer to a phone call.
I find it's simpler to simplify all internet scenarios to postal mail & home telephone scenarios.
Internet archive should allow for people to put up donations to cover the cost of whatever obscure website they want preserved. Assign a priority incase funds get low.
Guessing fixing child porn propagation isn't the highest priority?
Make it easier for server admins to connect/link to the child porn hash databases, scripts for autobans + deletion of any content, flagging + notify to other servers etc.
When the best content can be found in the comments section 👍