No, that wouldn’t make much difference. I don’t think I’ve seen a real world attack via SMS that even bothered to “forge” the from-field. People are used to getting texts from unknown numbers.
And how would you possibly implement this supposed “caller-id” for a field that doesn’t even have to be set to a number?
Blaming the victim solves nothing.
Scamming is a rapidly growing industry that is becoming more professional and specialized all the time. Anyone can be scammed.
To quote the most salient post
The app doesn’t provide client-side scanning used to report things to Google or anyone else. It provides on-device machine learning models usable by applications to classify content as being spam, scams, malware, etc. This allows apps to check content locally without sharing it with a service and mark it with warnings for users.
Which is a sorely needed feature to tackle problems like SMS scams
This is such lukewarm obvious stuff to anyone who’s done any agile project management that it’s mind-boggling they would fail to do it.
But I guess it’s what happens when decision are made by bean counters with absolute authority.
Why are there so many emigrants from Islamic countries? Most of them are even Muslims, but still they can’t live safely in their home country?
If you genuinely don’t know, you should abstain from having opinions until you gain a basic understanding of what is going on in the world.
The world is experiencing an unfathomable and worsening refugee crisis with 122 million people currently forced to flee their homes [1]. This is mostly due to overlapping long brutal wars. Refugees seeking shelter in the EU are mostly fleeing from Syria, Ukraine, Afganistan or Iraq. Most of these countries are majority muslim so that’s what most refugees will be.
As for why they can’t live safely in their home country, it’s because it’s a war zone, and has been for many years.
The rioters in Sweden were not “extreme muslims”. They were not particularly devout, but simply angry young men riled up by what they perceived as a racist state-sanctioned attack on their culture and heritage.
Many parties worked to escalate this issue, from far-right assholes looking to sow hate between religious groups, state actors trying to weaken Sweden internally and diplomatically, islamic countries trying to unify their people with a common enemy, as well as religious extremists seeking more influence. That’s why it gained so much attention, and generated so much outrage and violence.
Plenty of people were hurt by the Koran burnings!
Hundreds have been injured in riots directly caused by the these provocateurs, and completely innocent people have been killed by terrorists because of them. 1)
It has also resulted in freedom of speech restrictions, a more polarized society, and less constructive dialogue about Islam.
Wrapping the Koran in bacon and setting it on fire was never meaningful criticism of religion, it was meant to incite violence. And it did!
Even before Trump, the US illegally deported lots of citizens by accident. Because practical legal protections against deportation were shit even back then.
So they don’t even have to make it legal. Just impossible to practically fight illegal deportation.
Why does blocking ads not seem like a sustainable solution?
May I suggest you spend more effort understanding the situation, and less coming up with wild speculations?
I’m sorry but that is absolutely not “the whole point of open source”.
The point of open source is the ability to read, modify, keep and share the source code of the software you use.
It’s a good thing that no one is beholden to anyone then. Which is the entire point of free software.
2024 is the year of Red Star Linux on the desktop
You might be surprised to learn that Sweden also has sanctions against Russia, together with the rest of the EU, Norway, Switzerland, Japan, Australia, South Korea and a bunch of other countries. Because this is not about the US being an ass, it’s about Russia being an ass.
The massive negative outcry over this fairly uninteresting change certainly seems oddly overblown, almost as if there are parties trying to turn it into a big political issue to paint Russia as a victim. But idk, nerds freak out over stuff all the time completely on their own.
Giving them the benefit of the doubt, I think the Linux Foundation has a hard time being clear on the matter because it just isn’t clear. These are new laws and a global open source cooperation run by a non-profit is likely a corner case that the lawmakers did not think about at all when making them.
Yes, the sanctions against Russia, as mentioned by Linus. The change also said the maintainers “can come back in the future if sufficient documentation is provided”.
My guess is that the Linux Foundation must ensure that none of the people they work with are in any way associated with any organisation, person or activity on the sanctions list. And that they preemptively removed all maintainers that might risk violating the sanctions while they work with them to establish whether they might be covered by the sanctions or not.
Regardless of what you or they think of the sanctions, they are the law, and I don’t think anyone wants the Linux Foundation to have to spend their money on lawyers and fines because they had a maintainer who also worked on a research project funded by a sanctioned entity. (If that is how it works, IANAL)
Yeah the tech labor market has really proven that the idea of employment contracts being negotiated between equal parties isn’t true even in the best of circumstances.
Even when companies are desperate for talent, and willing to spend ridiculous amounts of money on salaries and perks, they are not willing to negotiate on anything outside of that. They still have terrifying contracts with non-compete and damages clauses they could use to wreck your life, no workplace democracy, unpaid overtime and whatever other shit is legal.
But hey! You get free snacks and enough money to buy the dinners you don’t time to cook and save up to survive your inevitable burn out!
Unless unions work differently where you live, they are a democracy that will pursue whatever issues its members vote on. If members don’t think pay is a problem, why would they try to change it?
Where do those numbers come from? I can’t find any source.
But I did find that 46% think no one won the exchange, perhaps unsurprisingly strongly split along party lines https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/5173356-trump-zelensky-meeting-poll/