57
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] fubo@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

What non-US regime do you suspect Microsoft of leaking personal data to?

The US government is okay with companies leaking personal data to the US government.

[-] dudebro@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago
[-] fubo@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago

Stuxnet, the anti-nuclear-proliferation worm?

[-] dudebro@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Stuxnet, the joint US and Israel project to exploit multiple zero-days found on Windows to wreak havoc on Iran's nuclear program.

You seem to be one of the people who think Israel gets to have nukes but not their enemies. Please admit if this is true or false.

[-] fubo@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

No, I'd prefer that fewer rather than more different parties had nukes, because it's easier for fewer parties to agree not to use them. Would've been nice if the Soviets never got them, too, don't you agree?

[-] dudebro@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

Ahh. That's a real roundabout way of agreeing with what I said.

Thank you for your shame.

Anything to admit it's okay for Israel and the US to work together to exploit windows vulnerabilities, which is how this discussion began.

[-] fubo@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

To be clear, I think it's a great idea for any humans who are capable of doing so to sabotage the ability of a country that doesn't currently have nuclear weapons to obtain them. The fewer different parties have nuclear weapons, the less likely it is that there will be more nuclear explosions on this planet.

It would have been better if Israel didn't have nuclear weapons.

It would have been better if the Soviet Union didn't have nuclear weapons.

[-] SturgiesYrFase@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago

I'll go way out on a limb here, and say everyone would be better off if literally no one had nukes. Call me crazy, but dying in a nuclear hellfire isn't exactly how I want to go.

[-] fubo@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Well, yes, but that's not really an option today. Non-proliferation is an option today: preventing the list of nuclear-armed powers from getting any longer.

[-] SturgiesYrFase@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

Of course it's not. But a boy can dream

[-] Duamerthrax@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

Any with the cash to pay M$.

[-] Raphael@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

Ahh america, never change.

I mean, please do.

this post was submitted on 13 Jul 2023
57 points (92.5% liked)

World News

32078 readers
1305 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS