I suspect you were downvoted because your comment sounded like it was generated by an LLM.

They claim to not be a cybersecurity pro

Can't a law be passed that states prosecutors legally cannot consult or assist in cases or for defendants they were involved with during their tenure as a prosecutor for X years after they leave their position?

Restricting them too much is a double edged sword because a lot of people use government work as a stepping stone even if they don't go to work for people they directly deal with. Making it too hard to find a job after can make good lawyers never go into public service because they couldn't get the cushy private gig afterwards.

Politicians don't have much incentive to do this since plenty of them get cushy jobs at bigco benefactors of the spending bills they voted on. Trying to target prosecutors would cast a eye on themselves.

It's like trying to separate church and state in England back in 1600-1700s.

"Politicians don't have much incentive to do this since plenty of them get cushy jobs at bigco benefactors of the spending bills they voted on."

It is the same problem - bribery/corruption but hard to proof and not much interest to investigate.

Then some friend of Boeing CEO would invest in prosecutor's startup

Or firms could trade hires ("if you hire this person, I'll refer a client to you"). Or they could "persuade" a client's legal dept to hire her ("We're looking for a new partner and we like your experience... On a totally unrelated note, I know a talented young woman who's looking for a job...")

The allegation is the prosecutor got a cushy gig at the law firm, not that they subsequently worked on the case after switching sides.

Ah so the implication is not that the prosecutor gave them inside info on the government's case's weaknesses but the prosecutor intentionally played the case suboptimally in hopes of being paid after the fact? If this was done with prior assurance that sounds already illegal no? If it was done simply on the hopes of securing "payment" afterwards with no prior deal then that seems like a large risk for the prosecutor to take.

I keep a W11 drive in my system (separate drive from my main linux system) for games and I find I haven't booted into it in months.

And I know when I do it'll take probably an hour to get all the updates out of its system. Ugh.

"Common sense" is basically the opposite of science.

I like science, but that doesn't mean it has to be the end-all-be-all. Otherwise it would be a religion.

There are situations where overthinking it is bad. Yes, obviously, microplastics in your brain are bad for you. Common sense. Any delay because "the science isn't there yet" does more harm than good.

I didn't know nitter was alive again, thanks!

Might not be long-lived.

https://github.com/zedeus/nitter/issues/983

? I thought this was understood by most. It's a common portrayal in media as well.

I think the point is that you can't tell a good person from a bad one by inspecting the atoms.

Doesn't one company own almost all the dating apps in the US? That seems... potentially problematic.

Interesting article on the founders: https://jewishjournal.com/mobile_20111212/132669/

Boring short article that names three Tinder founders and adds no other founder details other than two claim to attend their parents’ Shabbat dinner tables every Friday.

The 'rest' describes using Tinder.

Not sure why you're being downvoted. But you're totally right. We hum and haw about Tik Tok - but we don't generally give them any information other than our scrolling (behavioural data). Dating apps have a ton more detailed information on individuals (dating preferences, age, specific geographic locations). But I suppose IAC (Barry Diller) and MTCH are US-owned.

Started construction in Feb 2022, with an estimated cost of 16.3 cents per kWh.

https://www.nortonrosefulbright.com/en/knowledge/publication...