Ahah, I just told myself: cannot wait for Adam Something to debunk this

Ghostery, Disconnect, Privacy Badger, etc

• Redundant with Total Cookie Protection (dFPI)

Privacy Badger does more than dFPI. dFPI just isolate cookies. Privacy Badger blocks cookies. And completely block connection to some hosts that are dedicated to tracking, which prevent other forms of tracking that aren't cookie-based.

In that blog post, google does not commit to open sourcing these play services features, to integrate in future system upgrade.

I would love to be proven wrong.

Many of these are Google Play Services features, so it won't be available to users open-source Android flavors that are google-free.

There are 42 RIPE Atlas probes online in Hong Kong.

Someone part of the Atlas network could check this against various probes.

https://atlas.ripe.net/probes/public?sort=-id&toggle=all&page_size=100&page=1&status=1&country_code__in=HK

They had a choice between complying to censorship, or refusing to play along and if necessary stop doing business in Hong Kong.

In the past, Google Search got out of China for the same reason.

I wonder if that'd work, or if the Great Firewall of China already blocks it in Hong Kong

.. hackers are invited to find new ways to break into widely used software, like Safari, Adobe Flash

Flash? What year is this !?

Cars are resources intensive in general, although EVs clearly pollute less, even when taking batteries into account (lifecycle analysis), and even if electricity used to charge them isn't renewable.

All cars company deserve some push back, but producing EVs isn't a good reason to single out Tesla.

In this case it seems there's another factor, which are fear for water resources due to putting too much/large factories in one place, and Elon being an asshole.

Okay, I misinterpreted your comment.

That's consistent with past reports of secret unauthorized PRC police stations in the USA/UK/Netherlands/Germany/Canada/....

Their ostensible purpose is to help Chinese citizens overseas with administrative issues [..]

However, there are also reports of the stations being involved in “persuade to return” operations.

For context:

Eurovision: Greta Thunberg among thousands protesting against Israel competing in contest

Having a backup at a cloud provider is fine, as long as there is at least one other backup that isn't with this provider.

Cloud provider seems to do a good job protecting against hardware failure, but can do poorly with arbitrary account bans, and sometimes have mishaps due to configuration problems.

Whereas a DIY backup solution is often more subject to hardware problems (disk failure, fire, flooding, theft, ...), but there's no risk of account problem.

A mix is fine to protect against different kind of issues.

That would indeed be a good backup strategy, but better be specific. "Offsite" may be interpreted in different ways.

The same ToS which the judge says X cannot enforce because it conflicts with copyright law.

They had backups at multiple locations, and lost data at multiple (Google Cloud) locations because of the account deletion.

They restored from backups stored at another provider. It may have been more devastating if they relied exclusively on google for backups. So having an "offsite backup" isn't enough in some cases, that offsite location need to be at a different provider.

What about users' copyright? Would Bright Data have to obtain permission from every user to scrap data while following copyright law?

I guess this wasn't a question raised during this lawsuit.

WTF Hungary?

Some of you may die, but it's a sacrifice I am willing to make

Lord Farquaad

They should look into exponential backoff