They wrote. It down.

It may prove to not end in consequences, but they took notes on a criminal conspiracy before the outcome and it’s part of evidence submitted in federal court.

Nothing burger is not nothing.

Better still, is he swore under oath to having $450 million in cash. So if he says otherwise he then opens himself up to charges for lying under oath.

Most modern cancer drug treatment is sequenced to at least the specific proteins of the type of cancer it is.

Have breast cancer? Cool. We figure out which of the many variations so that we can give you medications for that exact type of breast cancer.

This sort of specific targeting has been increasing and increasing for the last 20 years. MRNA is the next step of that and is highly likely to be a means or become or for treatments in many other areas.

Opinion letter.

None of the accusations in the title can be substantiated, more than a dozen other apps and technologies are backed by the same organization the article mentions funds part of a signal’s budget.

Assertions that TOR has a governmental back door, that the CIA wants people to use Signal, are not substantiated, and the article states at the same time that there are fears the anonymity of Signal threatens western governments. Can’t have it both ways.

The only definitive thing this article can prove or cite is where some OTF funding goes, which was publicly disclosed since it’s inception. It reads like a /r/superstonk GME reeeeeee post equivalent for communication security by a ti foil hat.

Not being able to inspect their code vs no passing are different things.

Why is that wall needed? Can you expand on this more?

His point, which seems pedantic, but isn’t, is to illustrate the specific attack vector.

Breaking encryption would mean that the cryptographic process is something that an attacker can directly exploit. This is as close to impossible as it gets in that line of work.

While you can compromise the effectiveness of encryption by subverting it using other attack vectors like man in the middle or phishing or the good old fashioned physical device access, these don’t break the algorithm used in a way that it makes it vulnerable to decrypting other data.

None of those mean an algorithm used like say the ole Two fish encryption is “broken”.

Blowfish Triple DES Twofish RC4 Etc. All are fine and not currently broken. All however cannot protect your data if some other attack vector companies you or your site’s security.

The US fucked up hard on its killing of civilians, but MODT of the time it was at least a result of supporting direct ground combat where friendly forces were engaged. At least that was true from weeks after the initial invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan.

Israel is tossing bombs at targets, using the most advanced aircraft in the world… and their ground forces are not within 10 miles of the site.

That’s what makes this inexcusable. They had time. They didn’t have ground forces under threat. Every vehicle isn’t an IED waiting to happen yet. They have the time to check for authorization before letting a JDAM off the rails.

The right to defend has to come with purse string implications if they use it as right to kill without mercy. They do this, we cut funding. They do it more, in clearly not accidental strikes, we impose sanctions. The purse will hurt enough due to their reliance on western arms, that they change lest they not be able to drop bombs at all.

It’s one thing to have a legit terror target and mistake the building or some freak accident. It’s another to drop a bomb on a refugee camp and then simply shrug.

She knew she had the condition and avoided high caffeine drinks.

She did not know about the caffeine content, 390mg in the large lemonade, due to poor labeling by Panera. This one drink is 10mg less than the maximum daily dose for HEALTHY person according to the FDA.

Given the lack of consuming any other caffeine products regularly due to her knowing about their impact on her heart, it is not a leap to say the lemonade was the culprit.

Further, the lawsuit alleges harm, even if not the sole cause of death, from their product due to not making it clear to the buyer that contents has so much caffeine.

According to coffeechemistry.com, one liquid ounce of espresso can have anywhere between 30 and 50mg of caffeine. That means that a double shot will likely have anywhere between 60 and 100mg.

She bought a lemonade, without caffeine labeling, that contained 8 shots of espresso in caffeine. Cause of death or not, the legal culpability and reasonable expectation that this would not be in its contents is clear as day.

This will never go to trial.

Billion with a B.

It doesn’t have to end as a formal killed program.

It just has to continue unchanged, as an UNFUNDED mandate.