We haven’t yet made an AI that can replace anyone’s job, so it might be better to hold off on resigning ourselves to that fate.

No the regular kindles have ad free tiers… for now.

I’ve liked using FreshRSS in the past, but has the developer finally capitulated and allowed users to sort entries by publication date?

It was probably the most requested feature and they always insisted it didn’t make sense or wasn’t possible despite being a common feature among other RSS feed readers.

The only solace I take in the enshittification of the web and the resulting rise in prices, is that we might see (be forced into) a return to the small web and an escape from the stranglehold that big tech and social media has had on us for the last 15 years.

If we’re lucky, the late-stage capitalism effect of ruining companies long term futures for short term gains might happen to entire industries instead of companies.

I’m not much of an Apple fan, I just like to get my privacy where I can. And with over a decade of experience in cybersecurity I can confidently say that as much as you shouldn’t blindly trust Apple, they at least give you a number of tools to increase your privacy out of the box.

Android on the other hand is a nightmarish hellscape of data mining and user profiling. There is GrapheneOS which is as of today a great option to circumvent Google’s data mining, but now that its future is at stake I worry for the future of privacy on Android devices.

But we get it from your post, you’re a pro-Google shill bot that didn’t actually read my comment and is just regurgitating nonsense to muddy the waters.

Every major OS can be secured to the highest security standards

Has Android added E2EE to their cloud backups yet like Apple has?

Apple is no friend to any of us, but Google openly and shamelessly scrapes every piece of data you put on their phones. Apple is absolutely the lesser of these two evils with out of the box functionality. I say this as a lifelong Android fan and Apple hater that entered the cybersecurity space and am only interested in the most private option I can get out of the box.

Like an Android can be more secure and private than an IPhone, but afaik that involves owning a Pixel specifically and installing an entirely different OS on it, one that Google a Is also out to get.

The NYPD beat cops aren’t really trained to look for or discover cyber security threats. Additionally, the secret service agents that discovered these were not from Washington but from the local NYC field office, and it was most likely due to heightened security measures surrounding the UNGA visit specifically.

They weren’t jammers either, they were just sim farms, commonly used for spam calling and other general mid-level cybercrime like that. Think of them as “A bunch of phones”

The thing is, the importance of this whole event is just being exaggerated, likely to make the Trump admin look good. Like they said these could “take down NYCs cell infrastructure” but they said they only found 100,000 SIM cards total. If every one of those turned on at the same time and tried to overload local infrastructure, it would result in a 1% increase in cell network utilization inside NYC.

Most people know the Secret Service for their job of protecting the president, but they actually have a number of different jobs to do beyond that. Protecting civil infrastructure being one of them.

The NYPD surely isn’t going to uncover cyber threats.

Catholicism isn’t like other Christian sects where you can kinda interpret things your own way. The defining characteristic of the Catholic Church is a rigid adherence to established doctrine.

If there were somebody out there that didn’t hold confession to the standard that I do, they probably wouldn’t bother going to confession. It’s not something you’re forced to do at regular intervals. Either this hypothetical person believes in the sanctity of confession or they don’t. If they do, they aren’t going to go to confession to tell the priest that they aren’t sorry and are ready to offend again. And if they don’t, there’s no reason for them to go in the first place.

The only possible third option which is extremely unlikely, is somebody who doesn’t believe in the sanctity of confession, going into a confessional just to not confess at all but boast about their crimes and willingness to do it again. But in that case, they aren’t taking the sacrament, so the priest could report them.

Your middle school level spiel and circular logic are not getting you anywhere here

No just somebody with a little common sense is all.

What is it that you think that page says?

That’s not how confession works. It’s not a “get out of jail free card”, and it doesn’t take a broad generalization to know that even somebody deluded enough to think that it is, isn’t going to tell a priest “and I’ll do it again” and still think they’re getting anything out of it. That’s just a scenario made up entirely in your head, and I wouldn’t waste too much of your energy worrying about scenarios that only exist in your head. We have enough real problems to worry about.

Again, there are absolutely restrictions to freedom of religion

Yes, and the seal of confession is not one of them, nor should it be.

A child rapist wouldn’t say that in confession. Confession is a sacrament where you confess your sins with regret, for the purpose of earning forgiveness. If somebody was not only not remorseful for what they’ve done, but are already determined to continue in the future… why would they be at confession? Your example makes no sense.

Putting aside the total lack of reason and sense in your hypothetical question, you’re asking what would happen if a criminal went into a confessional booth not to engage with the sacrament of confession, but to brag to a priest about a crime that they committed and boast that they’re planning to do it again? That would not be protected by the seal of confession since it isn’t one, and the priest could report that person.

And one of the founding principles of our nation can hardly be considered a “loophole” when it was placed there on purpose with cases exactly like this in mind.

Is your demonstration an attempt to equate listening to somebody’s regrets about committing a crime in the past, with perpetrating a crime?

And what do the Muslims have to do with this?

The seal of confession is protected by the first amendment as it’s a core tenant of the Catholic religion, and the U.S. government doesn’t have the authority to change religious doctrine of a religion that predates the country by millennia. There are decades of legal precedent for this so outside of a landmark Supreme Court ruling, it’s protected. If you were to violate the constitutional rights of these priests, you wouldn’t catch any more child abusers, you’d just be jailing people for their faith.

Also, the seal of confession is not “protecting people”. The church isn’t going to defend a child abuser, nor protect them. There is nothing to stop clergy from reporting child abusers to the authorities. It only protects speech shared during the sacrament of confession. If a priest were to find out that somebody is an abuser in any way other than through confession, they would report it the same as anyone else.

Great idea, let’s just disregard the first amendment entirely. And then once we’ve done that, the government would also be free to establish a state religion and force all of us to follow it.

I think we better put that monkeys paw back where we found it.

In many states priests are mandatory reporters.

But they can’t be forced to abandon their religious beliefs by the government by breaking the seal of confession.

That’s not a rule he can get rid of. The seal of confession is a matter of doctrine and divine law and the pope isn’t authorized to overrule god.

Also, again, there’s no rule against turning in child rapists. There’s a rule against breaking the seal of confession. If a priest finds out about a crime in any manner besides confession, they’re free to contact authorities.

And it’d be a dumbass idea anyway. If a criminal is coming to confession in the first place then there is some remorse for what they’ve done, which means that person might be encouraged to turn themselves in. If you started reporting them when they came to confession, it’ll work once or twice and then criminals would just stop going to confession. Which additionally, is an anonymous act. The priest doesn’t know who you are when you go to confession.

If you’re referring to priests turning in child rapists via breaking the seal of confession, no. Doing so is an automatic excommunication from the Catholic Church, that’s not something he’s instituted.

This week he did affirm his zero-tolerance policy on not only child abuse within the church, but also any attempts to cover them up. So the closest thing I can think of is the fact that’s he’s essentially threatened to defrock child abusers and anyone who covers for them.

Creative business accounting.