notabot

This is one of the most fundamental problems with the design of the fediverse, nd whilst thus protocol does go some way towards addressing it, it feels like a but if a sticking plaster rather than a true solution. It's something that I think the nostr protocol got right; your public key is your identity, and you sign posts with your private key. You send your posts to multiple servers, and publish the list of servers you've pushed as a message, so when people find it, they can also find the rest if your messages. There's no needs to migrate your account as all of your content is duplicated on multiple servers, and your public key doesn't change unless you lose the private key. Server owners can decide who's allowed to post messages on their server, but the duplication means that no one admin can block you completely.

Ah, I though you were talking about trump. The twitterer's position probably is as you suggested.

I would suggest that his logic is, in fact, based in the notion that his personal interest must be placed above Party, Country, and Principles.

That's very decent if them, but the thing is, there's now strong demand for those houses, as there's a corporate buyer looking to purchase them, so the price has gone up a bit. Say by an extra digit or so added to the value.

I'll be intregued to see how the mastodon integration wirks from a user perspective. Will it be integrated into the same view, or will it be a separate view? Will we be able to follow individual users, or tags? I look forward to finding out.

This one and the OP have different amounts of nose growth. One of them is a lie. Is nothing sacred anymore!!?!

You really don't want to run your coke through the dishwasher, it makes it taste funny.

Debian works fine without systemd, there's even a page in the wiki detailing how to install without it, or switch if you dud install systemd by mistake.

If he does, then hopefully he'll read the resposes here, reflect on his actions and their results, and work to improve himself.

I don't think the difference between him physically triggering the wipe and him giving them the code that triggered the wipe would have much effect from a legal point of view. In both cases he deliberately took an action he knew would lead to the destruction of the data. I think his defense's approach of challenging the legality of the stop is probably much safer.

I suspect that the prosecution would like to set precedent that you can't claim to be under duress when a lawful authority is performing a search, so the defence staying away from that area is probably a good idea.

Sinuous tea dispensing orifice.

Pretty much. A compketely blank phone is a clear sign that it's wiped, and why would you do that, unless you have sonething to hide, hmm? A phone with a couple of weeks of boring use, maybe a few photos of nice sunsets, a few messages, a take-out ordering app, some boring history in the web browser, and maybe a login to a social media account that follows some celebs and an old school friends or two who don't seem to post any more, just says you got a new phone a while back and you're fairly boring.

Obviously, if they actually have something on you, or they want to pin something on you, those precautions won't actually help much.