circuscritic

I’m going to need you to actually quote which part of my comment you’re responding to.

As far as I can tell, what you wrote has exactly nothing to do with anything that I said.

At no point did I mention laws, or legal loopholes.

And I certainly never mentioned anything about the United States, or the legal liability of Twitter, except as in response to your comment.

I think you’re confusing my acknowledgment of the daily reality of a country that is currently divided between 3 and 5 major and minor factions, all in various states of civil conflict, with being something else entirely.

I wasn’t providing any opinion, or analysis, on the legality from Twitter’s perspective. I certainly wasn’t making any comparisons to laws in the United States and Yemen, or anything else that you’ve been talking about since your first comment.

I would make the “duh no shit this is clickbait” observation if the BBC ran yet another story about how kids are selling drugs on Snapchat or Instagram.

You mean the first three paragraphs describing a few ads on Twitter for weapons?

Followed by the BBC, quoting other British “NGO” organizations, trying to rally people to support additional actions against a group that Britain currently engaged in military actions against? Yes, I read that as well.

The article reads like two separate articles pasted together by a moron. The only connective tissue between the Twitter ads, and the Houthis, was that the weapons traders lived an area controlled by them. News flash, the Houthis control a majority of the country.

So again, in a country that has had an active civil war since 2014, it’s not surprising that people are selling weapons anywhere and everywhere, online, and off.

Why are you assuming that there is a state of law and order to any degree, outside of maybe the capital…?

Are you aware that we’re talking about Yemen…?

Notice that Wikipedia page for their civil war doesn’t currently have an end date i.e. it’s still active…

It’s not like Twitter is providing up support for these transactions, I’m saying it’s not surprising they exist on a public forum like Twitter for a country that’s ravaged by a decade war and famine.

Just like how kids in the United States sell drugs on Twitter or Instagram.

So no, Twitter is not automatically liable just because people are abusing the platform. I’m not saying it can’t get there, just that it’s not that simple.

Regardless, I wasn’t saying anything about the legality of it for Twitter.

Your reading comprehension is so absurdly bad, that I got to believe you’re either trolling, insane, or on a lot of Adderall. I’m out lol.

I’m having a hard time finding where I said that I wanted to live under Houthi rule, or when I denied their status as militant Islamists.

Can you please scroll up to my other comments and point those out for me? Thanks in advance.

Oh, and just a reminder to anyone who actually made it this far into this idiotic rabbit hole, my original comment was that it is entirely unsurprising that Yemeni civilians are buying arms to wherever they can, be it Twitter or a local marketplace, due to the past decade of conflict, years long aerial bombing campaign, and famine.

I can’t tell if you’re a troll, or actually insane. But I guess those don’t have to be mutually exclusive.

I didn’t denounce anyone, even among the groups and actors I mentioned. I simply gave a very brief look at situation. You’re mad that I didn’t provide a complete and detailed analysis, which is irrelevant to my point about civilians bearing arms.

Not for nothing, but your politics are pretty clear, and if it was relevant at ALL to this subject, I’d happily engage. But it’s not, so stop yelling into the wind to distract from the fact that your comments are clearly about your disdain of the Yemini people.

No, we’re acknowledging that countries wrecked by civil war and intermittent famines going back a decade, aren’t known for their ability to police domestic issues fairly, on time, or even at all. I’d be more interested to know what percent of the households are NOT armed.

For the record, I said nothing about any government, or political groups/militias. They’re armed primarily by their proxy sponsor, I’m talking about retail arms sale to civilians, bandits, normies, and scared parents alike.

Unless you think IRCG is arming the Houthis via Twitter.

This is bordering on clickbait, because of course weapons are being sold in some form or fashion at most forums or marketplace in Yemen.

It’s a country that has been wrecked by civil war and years of a genocidal air campaign by the Saudis, and now intermittent targeted strikes by American and British naval forces.

I would be shocked if most of those people aren’t also selling those openly at their local Bazaar or market.

This is 98% the right answer, but you drop them somewhere that keeps them intact, and believable enough so that people take them, and spend the rest of the weekend going to thrift stores trying to find an external floppy drive, and the next month trying to figure out how to get their iPhone to mount it.

Sounds like it’ll be family friendly game shows and Christian reality TV.

Honestly, that might actually be a profitable model they could make work, if they don’t fuck the infrastructure up, or allow cousin Billy to expose himself to female contestants on 3 different reality shows they’re producing.

I know it’s been done on the unit or tactical level, but I wasn’t aware of another example of this level of it being operationalized at this scale before

If you have an example to reference, would you mind sharing? Not being sarcastic, I’d be interested in reading up more on how that is dealt with at scale.

That might be an unintended benefit, but no, the rationale is pretty sound.

Basically Ukraine identified the local IP ranges and mass scanned them for open webcams for intelligence gathering and scouting purposes.

It’s pretty ingenious and I am left wondering if this is the first time this tactic has been deployed at scale during a conventional war.

Regardless, I expect this is one of those things that we will see moving forward in any future conventional wars, including governments requesting their civilians turn off their IP cameras, or otherwise forcing them to.

Are you really using all of human history as a timeframe to say that currency is a relatively recent phenomenon?

Again, I’m not anti-cryptocurrency, but it’s not really a currency anymore than any other commodity in a commodity exchange, or a barter market.

And I don’t care if it’s livestock, or Bitcoin, I’m not accepting either as payment if I sell my home, or car. Not because of principles, but because I don’t know how to convert livestock into cash, and I can’t risk the Bitcoin payment halving in value before I can convert it to cash.

And who was talking extremes? I’m just pointing out the absurdity of the claims that crypto is the replacement for, or salvation from, our current economic system, or the delusion that currency backed by a nation is somehow just as ephemeral as Bitcoin, or ERC20 rug pulls.

You said Bitcoin was designed to free us from the tyranny of big capital, but it’s been entirely co-opted by the same boogeyman. So regardless of the intentionality behind the project, it’s now just another speculative asset.

Except, unlike gold or futures contracts, there’s no tangible real world asset, but there is a hell of a real cost.

Printing currency isn’t destroying the planet…the current economic system is doing that, which is the same economic system that birthed crypto.

Governments issuing currency goes back to a time long before our current consumption at all cost economic system was a thing.

lol

Forever? No, of course not.

But paper currency is backed by a nation state, so I’m betting it’ll be around a bit longer then a purely digital asset without the backing of a nation, and driven entirely by speculation.

I’m not even anti-crypto. It was novel idea when it was actually used entirely as a currency, but that hasn’t been true for quite some time.

This is straight out of Monsanto playbook going back decades. There’s a reason why a lot of countries have either passed laws legally shielding local farmers from accidental cross-pollination, or just banning GM seeds, not for any pseudoscience rational, but because of the way agro business uses natural cross pollination as a vector for lawfare and predatory business practices.

The inability to relock the bootloader is gigantic security vulnerability. It negates, or entirely voids, a significant amount of a devices physical security, including FDE.

There are other security issues with LineageOS, but that’s part of the trade-off. There’s nothing inherently sinister or incompetent about that, it’s just the nature of the beast.

Regardless, I’m not here to chastise anyone’s choice of OS, or to even imply that there is a right, and wrong ROM, there isn’t.

I was just pointing out that there are pros and cons, and users should be aware of them when making those decisions.

Security and Privacy are not the same thing.

Stock Google is absolutely a hit to ones privacy, but LineageOS is a often big hit to device security.

If you don’t have a Pixel, and therefore can’t use GrapheneOS, check and see if your device is compatible with DivestOS.

However, neither will offer root support for reasons that both devs have decent write-ups explaining within each project’s documentation.

I do realize that not everyone places security above all other factors when deciding on their smartphone OS, but I think they should be aware of the trade-offs so they can make an informed decision.