walletdrainer

> What makes it giving up sovereignty? I understand it creates the potential for separation in future but not yet.

Look at where the border is, the separation has already happened to a very significant degree.

lol

> How can we know the IRA “won”?

In signing the GFA, the UK effectively gave up on it's sovereignty over NI. That was never going to happen through "peaceful and democratic means"

>And even then mostly because a lot of people were supportive of their cause even if they were against their methods

But IRA didn't win because those people supported their cause, IRA won despite those people being against their methods.

It was the force they used which directly led to the GFA, without the bombs and the killing the British would never have surrendered.

There's no credit due for correctly reading your adversary?

Obviously the Israelis could have just kept their mask on, but Hamas was clearly correct in their calculation that they wouldn't.

> How is force working for Hamas?

Brilliantly. It coaxed an Israeli overreaction which has led to basically the entirety of the rest of the world turning against Israel.

> Hamas are still regarded as terrorist savages by everyone sane

Why would Hamas care? They remain firmly in control of Gaza, while their cause is winning hearts and minds globally.

>We tried that. That didn't work.

Ah yes, because businesses just love to turn down free money.

>Once again, nobody is asking that. So you are misunderstanding SKG.

If SKG really does not want games to remain playable after EOL, they're certainly piss-poor communicators. I thought the whole point was to "stop killing games", i.e. make them last longer.

>> You're suggesting a subsidy for gamers which everyone else would to pay for

>No, that's not how it works. Not even close.

As far as I can tell, legislation which enables you to play a game in perpetuity instead of for a limited time will likely reduce the amount of tax revenue your gaming-related activities generate.

A useful metric to focus on here is the cost per hour of entertainment. The price of the game itself might stay the same, but the cost of your gaming itself would be subsidized.

> You seem to be arguing under the presupposition that there are two equal entities, industry lobbies and everyone else, and somehow that division of viewpoints gets equal consideration from the governing body.

Where exactly are you getting this from? Why are you attributing this to me, or anyone? There's not a single commenter here arguing this point of view, only some windmill-tilters arguing against it.

> but due to you actively portraying your opposition as malicious

It's extremely difficult to see how the statement quoted below is not fairly characterized as malicious

>The industry should only be allowed to comment after the laws have been written and fulfill the goals of European citizens.

If the opposition simply seeks to silence you, rather than to argue against you, how are they not malicious?

You can use this deeply dishonest criticism against virtually any point of view you dislike.

Someone arguing the opposite position would be a corporate shill pushing for regulatory capture. Everyone who disagrees with you is always a corporate shill.

The government should give everyone free gasoline, everyone who says otherwise is a corporate shill only working to protect their profits!

Being offended is a core part of the American identity.

It's particularly funny because "monster-in-the-middle" appears to be a deliberately quirky marketing term invented by cloudflare.

Those sources feel more than slightly contrived.

>I'm a bit confused about why you are still wondering

They did admit to being German.

It's the American version, concepts like "man" and "woman" are deeply sexist and offensive in their culture. There are no men or women, only monsters.

Let me also just leave this masterpiece right here https://blog.barracuda.com/2025/10/02/beyond-mitm-rising-dan...

If something like this had been implemented 20 years ago, we'd probably be exactly where we are now. What's the point?

Maybe look at how people actually use it? Not sure why the Indian blogspam is worth looking at.

"Engagement" has a specific meaning. It's different from "like farming" or "karma farming". Some platforms specifically reward engagement, making it a reasonable thing to farm on those platforms.

> using automated systems for mass liking or following

Clearly the author was clueless, this has nothing whatsoever to do with engagement farming.

> There is no guarantee that they will be a big part of the stock market. It is not "absolutely" sure, for them or for any new public stock

It's really hard to believe that you'd be writing this in good faith.

In reality, even without being publicly listed(!), these companies have already managed to become an absolutely massive part of the market. After the IPO? Hah.

>It feels like you're being willfully dense about this. I can see why the other person accused you of being AI.

No, you fucking idiot. Not everybody who disagrees with you is AI.

"Engagement farming" is a term of art with a specific meaning, basically just the adult way of saying "ragebait". People engagement farming on IG or TikTok are typically doing so by posting deliberately controversial content designed to troll upset viewers into writing upset comments. It is inherent to the technique that it only works on platforms without downvotes.

You don't see anyone "engagement farming" on Reddit either, it's always specifically "karma farming" because farming karma requires positive engagement. Engagement farmers do not care if the engagement is positive or not, the required approaches are completely different.

> The biggest mistake I made was high uptime. arjie.com was up for 10 years plus on a Hetzner VPS so that by the time they wanted to sunset the machine underlying I had no idea what my teenage self had set up. I have the backups but the site hasn’t been up in a decade

LLMs have solved this problem, they’ll happily deal with the software archaeology on your behalf. This is the kind of task they really excel at.

Also, you just don’t get LLM-isms at this rate if you’re simply using them for translation. (From the common commercially available products)

Yes, but academic HPC environments are very 90s and are far from what is generally considered reasonable in 2026.

> Rather: Josef Průša is not a native English speaker (his mother tongue is Czech).

Are you joking? Guy has been tweeting in English for almost two decades, that’s not the problem.

Here's the frequency of the " - " pattern in tweets by "josefprusa"

  2020:  8 / 761 tweets  = 1.1%
  2021:  5 / 533 tweets  = 0.9%
  2022:  9 / 597 tweets  = 1.5%
  2023: 21 / 450 tweets  = 4.7%
  2024: 57 / 725 tweets  = 7.9%
  2025: 23 / 390 tweets  = 5.9%
  2026: 15 / 136 tweets  = 11.0%

> Can we make the kernel vulns less important?

Local kernel vulns are totally unimportant in any vaguely reasonable environment.

Banal accusations?

Here's the frequency of the " - " pattern in tweets by "josefprusa"

  2020:  8 / 761 tweets  = 1.1%
  2021:  5 / 533 tweets  = 0.9%
  2022:  9 / 597 tweets  = 1.5%
  2023: 21 / 450 tweets  = 4.7%
  2024: 57 / 725 tweets  = 7.9%
  2025: 23 / 390 tweets  = 5.9%
  2026: 15 / 136 tweets  = 11.0% 

Now, go ahead and tell me this guy is not yet another spammer polluting social media with LLM-generated garbage.

You can come upon such information by other means

In sports? Perhaps you just observe a player get injured in a car accident and bet based on that.

The information contained within might be accurate, but the information clearly wasn’t important enough for the person posting it to actually bother communicating it like a normal human being.

That’s pretty telling!

Do people genuinely not understand how stupid it makes them look when they copypaste ChatGPT output onto social media like this?

Based on his tweets, Josef seems like a guy incapable of coming up with his own original thoughts.