Skip to content

An LAPD helicopter claimed to have ID'ed protesters from above and threatened to "come to your house"

Technology
144 76 3.1k
  • 177 Stimmen
    32 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    undefined@lemmy.hogru.chU
    Didn’t they threaten this like five years ago? Any time I share access I just have friends/family VPN into my home network. ¯\(ツ)/¯
  • 0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    9 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • escorte paris

    Technology technology
    1
    1
    0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    18 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • First Tesla Robotaxi Ride

    Technology technology
    14
    37 Stimmen
    14 Beiträge
    140 Aufrufe
    A
    How do you heil a Tesla cab?....you don't. Unless you want to end up rotting in a concentration camp in El Salvador. Fuck face is exactly the type who would rape you in the morning and then walk outside the room into the balcony and shoot an innocent bystander for no reason. See "Schindler's list". So you don't.
  • xAI Data Center Emits Plumes of Pollution, New Video Shows

    Technology technology
    50
    1
    516 Stimmen
    50 Beiträge
    769 Aufrufe
    G
    You do. But you also plan in the case the surrounding infrastructure fails. But more to the point, in some cases it is better to produce (parto of) your own electricity (where better means cheaper) than buy it on the market. It is not really common but is doable.
  • 364 Stimmen
    198 Beiträge
    2k Aufrufe
    F
    Okay but we were talking about BTC pump and dumps and to perform that on the massive scale which dwarfs any stock ticker below the top 5 by hundreds of billions of dollars while somehow completely illuding people who watch the blockchain like hawks for big movers... It's just not feasible. You would have to be much richer than the official richest man on earth and have almost all of your assets liquid and then on top of that you would need millions of wallets acting asynchronously. And why would you even bother? If you're that rich you could just not hide it.
  • 461 Stimmen
    94 Beiträge
    1k Aufrufe
    L
    Make them publishers or whatever is required to have it be a legal requirement, have them ban people who share false information. The law doesn't magically make open discussions not open. By design, social media is open. If discussion from the public is closed, then it's no longer social media. ban people who share false information Banning people doesn't stop falsehoods. It's a broken solution promoting a false assurance. Authorities are still fallible & risk banning over unpopular/debatable expressions that may turn out true. There was unpopular dissent over covid lockdown policies in the US despite some dramatic differences with EU policies. Pro-palestinian protests get cracked down. Authorities are vulnerable to biases & swayed. Moreover, when people can just share their falsehoods offline, attempting to ban them online is hard to justify. If print media, through its decline, is being held legally responsible Print media is a controlled medium that controls it writers & approves everything before printing. It has a prepared, coordinated message. They can & do print books full of falsehoods if they want. Social media is open communication where anyone in the entire public can freely post anything before it is revoked. They aren't claiming to spread the truth, merely to enable communication.
  • 21 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    19 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet