I'm sure that's perfectly fine in 99.9% of cases but I can never rid that niggling doubt in the back of my head that thinks the cheap devices (especially Chinese) are backdoored or have some deeper malware embedded on the system. It's the unknown that kills me, as stupid as that is. At least I know what type of shit LG TV is phoning home.
If you have an idealogical reason not to (like majority of the users in privacy based communities) then you already have your answer and you can read them in the comments.
I'm going to be different here and answer from a practical perspective and say that sigh yes it's probably fine to use WhatsApp if you already use Instagram.
By this point Meta already knows more about you then you'd probably feel comfortable with. They're very good at micro analysing every little signal you generate when you use their platform. I think it's somewhere in the realm of $30 per user per year they make off the average Instagram user. That's the value of how much data they have on you.
WhatsApp users are not monetized so there's less incentive to track you to that extent. Also, WhatsApp messages are mostly end-to-end encrypted. You are giving up your phone number but they probably already have it.
If it were the other way around and you already used WhatsApp but not Instagram I would say NO. But as it is, WhatsApp does not represent a meaningfully significant decrease in your privacy if you already habitually use Instagram.
It is frustrating but not unexpected. If someone wants to engage with me on an intellectual level then all respect even if we disagree. Some people aren't capable of that and it shows. I didn't think it was an inflammatory opinion and I'm still happy for someone to disagree with me and explain why. Maybe I'll change my mind, maybe I won't. I'm up for the discussion but some people just want to pick fights on the internet. Thanks for your response.
I'm unsure if the details of that process are public but presumably it is possible through coordination with the bank, the treasury department, or both. What I could find publicly was that CZ's personal fine of $70m is payable either by ETF, cashier's check or money order.
EDIT:
This rabbit hole also led me to find out that this year, British American Tobacco has a $500m fine for violating some Weapons of Mass Destruction regulation. It sounds horrifying but they basically sold equipment to make cigarettes to the DPRK and tried to hide it. It's confronting seeing proof how blatantly corporations act. There was actual people who decided to do this.
I really don't understand how you can "force" anyone to do anything over Omegle but I guess that's neither here nor there. The more important point is that it would have been better to take the opportunity to catch more pedos doing the same thing on this site. They're still out there just moved to different platforms now. It's not really the win she thinks it is. There's HIGHLY questionable/NSFL stuff even on TikTok and Google Photos.
May I suggest putting that in the body instead of [South Africa]? That's much more valuable information. Btw wasn't critiquing you at all, I was critiquing the article headline.
Everyone's debating the merits of WebView but I find a browser made by CoinBase, Inc who operates a crypto platform advertising 8% APY to be way more dubious than the battle-tested Chromium browser engine.
Literally. I don't want to watch endless ads intermixed with tired old programming. Trying to shove it down my throat will not work either. There's a reason it's dying and they share a lot of the blame.
Last time I had a pi-hole running it didn't effect YouTube ads and was known not to as pi-hole works at the DNS layer but YouTube ads are served from the same DNS endpoint.
Does this title sound stupid to anyone else or just me? Like... the jobless rate is defined by unemployment.. so what else would be keeping it at 20%? It's not really saying anything at all.
That's definitely a real problem that would need to be considered. I'm sure it has been in great length. My gut feeling says it's workable though and the problem being more political than technical.
Would they need all those resources dedicated to just one company? I feel like they wouldn't have spent anywhere near $4.3B. Considering the investigation was started in 2021 so let's say 2 years or $3B. It seems extremely unlikely and even more than 1 order of magnitude off.
I'm sure that's perfectly fine in 99.9% of cases but I can never rid that niggling doubt in the back of my head that thinks the cheap devices (especially Chinese) are backdoored or have some deeper malware embedded on the system. It's the unknown that kills me, as stupid as that is. At least I know what type of shit LG TV is phoning home.
https://techcrunch.com/2023/05/18/popular-android-tv-boxes-sold-on-amazon-are-laced-with-malware/