They're obviously not fascist, and you'd know that if you were being honest about it and bothered educating yourself both on what fascism is, and on the realities of the PRC.

Also, it's not "state capitalism". They do use a market economy in addition to a planned economy, as part of the overall socialist economic system. It's not a binary either-or; using a market economy doesn't mean it's capitalism, and planned economy (intervention) doesn't mean it's socialism. They're structural terms, and relate to purpose: capitalism's purpose is to maximally extract profit and concentrate wealth; socialism's purpose is to better the lives (materially and culturally) of its people. China, as a socialist system, takes advantage of the benefits that a market economy can offer (efficiency, competition, resource allocation, demand and pricing signals) but doesn't use it to extract and concentrate wealth: instead, it uses the net benefits of the market economy to benefit the people. Similarly, a purely planned economy can be very stable and fair but is prone to stagnation and slow progress. By using both systems simultaneously, taking the relative advantages of each, China is able to benefit from efficiency and stability. There's also no pure free market economy: every capitalist economy has degrees of government intervention (another name for planned economy), especially in times of crises.

1. Strong nuclear force: holds the nucleus of an atom together
2. Weak nuclear force: responsible for radioactive decay
3. Electromagnetic force: of charged particles
4. Gravitational force: attractive force between objects with mass

• Decreased performance, as DRM is often hooked deep into event loops and adds non-negligible overhead.
• Decreased privacy, as DRM often requires pinging an external server constantly.
• Decreased security, as DRM is a black-box blob intentionally meant to be difficult to peer in to, and has been the target of attacks such as code execution vulnerabilities before.
• If you own a game but don't have an active internet connection, DRM may prevent you from playing the game.
• If you own a game but have multiple computers, DRM may force you to buy multiple licenses when you're only using one copy at a time (c.f., a physical CD with the game on it).
• Eventually, a DRM company is going to go out of business or stop supporting old versions of their software; if you want to play an old game that had that DRM, you won't be able to even if you own the game.
• &c.

DRM exists to "protect' the software developer, i.e. protect profits by making sure every copy has been paid for and to force people to buy multiple copies in certain cases. DRM never has and never will be for your (the consumer's) benefit.

Brave is built on Chromium. So, by default, no they are not safe from this. Without extra effort, Brave will have this feature. I don't know if its feasible but there's a chance the Brave devs can remove the code from their distribution, but that's the best case scenario and just puts them in the same position as Firefox: they get locked out because they refuse to implement the spec.

The engineers are writing up the spec, implementing the prototype, and will eventually be responsible for the rollout. The engineers are as much at fault as whoever thought up the idea. Without the engineers being complacent, the idea would be nothing more than an idea.

"Just following orders" has never been a good excuse for doing bad things.

Common but disturbing behavior: investigating whether calling out fascism is a problem, but not invesgating whether fascism is a problem.

Punishing people for saying what they see.

You can tell malwarebytes is broken because it doesn't catch itself as malware.

Every nation should kick Russians out, block their accounts,

The Russian people are not making these decisions. Moreover, those who have left Russia are probably among the least likely to support Russia anyway.

What good comes from attacking the people of a country because you disagree with the leadership of the country? This is the same disgusting rhetoric used in the USA after 9/11 where there were widespread calls to kick out ALL Muslims and people from the middle east.

Specifically,

The amendments pushed through by House Republicans included gutting diversity, equity and inclusion programmes at the Department of Defence. It banned flying pro-LGBTQ flags at military bases and ended funding for transgender-related medical services.

In perhaps the most telling reflection of the times, the bill also included a provision that would eliminate a Pentagon policy that offers time off and travel reimbursement to members of the military who must travel across states to receive an abortion.

Not being able to freely express yourself on military bases feels very Don't Ask Don't Tell: "you're allowed to be gay and serve, but you have to stay closeted to do so".

“Signal’s use luckily never caught on by the general public of China (or the Hong Kong Administrative region), whose government prefers autonomy, rather than letting US tech control its communication platforms, as most of the rest of the world naively allows.”

When you’re holding up China as an example for the world to follow for privacy

I interpret that quote to say that China doesn't trust US tech like the rest of the world does. It's not saying that China has more privacy and the rest of the world should follow, it's saying that the rest of the world also shouldn't be so naively trustworthy of US tech either.

Nobody makes cluster bombs in the US by the way.

This is somewhere between disingenuous and flat-out wrong.

Textron is a USA firm that produces Sensor Fuzed Weapons (SFW). The SFW is a cluster munition that is prohibited by the Convention on Cluster Munitions. The USA's Air Force has been the primary buyer of these until about 2016. Although it seems direct sales of cluster munitions halted around 2016 when the moratorium on cluster munitions was put in to place, this firm is still responsible for maintenance (which they are paid for) of existing munitions. (You'll note as well that "stockpiling and/or retention of cluster munitions" is also against the Convention on Cluster Munitions, not just the manufacture and use of them).

Orbital ATK (operating as Northrop Grumman Innovation Systems since its acquisition by defense contractor Northrop Grumman in 2018), a USA defense contractor, previously produced key components of the Textron weapons mentioned above. Although they no longer produce these parts for these purposes directly, they still have ongoing tangential contracts.

Moreover, these cluster munitions that are going to be sent are filled with M42/M46 grenades, which from what I can tell are manufactured by USA-based defense firms. The shells, which include the M1122, are coming from recycled munitions, so they aren't being manufactured new; but: they were produced by USA-based defense firms originally, and their consumption motivates replacement which also happens by USA-based defense firms.

Also, the notorious defense firms Lockheed Martin and Alliant Techsystems are helping develop the next generation of cluster munitions; so, increased use of the existing generation will almost certainly cause increased spending on future generations of the same type of weapon.

Here's the eleven categories of projects that CWSRF loans can be used for.

Here's the six categories of projects that DWSRF loans can be used for. The DWSRF also publishes a periodic Drinking Water Infrastructure Needs Survey that lays out approximate costs for various system sizes, and the distribution of system sizes across communities.

There is also a lot of overlap; quoting the OP article:

The [CWSRF] provides low-interest loans for infrastructure projects like wastewater facilities while the [DWSRF] provides assistance for initiatives like improving drinking water treatment and fixing old pipes.

The CWSRF Environmental Benefits Report from 2014 says:

• 14,838 Projects Financed
• To 5,222 Communities

with one of the highlights being:

95% of Subsidy Goes to Recipients that Could Not Otherwise Afford the Project

With the variety of activities they support, and the fact that they are permitting projects that communities could not otherwise afford to engage in, I'd say they're very valuable.