notabot

'Sealed sender' seems to avoid this by not actually requiring the client to authenticate to the server at all, and relying on the recipient to validate that it's signed by the sender they expect from the encrypted data in the envelope. As I mentioned in another reply, I’m just going on what they’ve published on the system, so either I could be completely wrong, or they could be being misleading, but it does look like they’ve tried to address this issue.

Whilst I absolutely agree it's correct to be skeptical about it, the 'sealed sender' process means they don't actually know which account sent the message, just which account it should be delivered to. Your client doesn't even authenticate to send the message.

Now, I'm just going on what they've published on the system, so either I could be completely wrong, or they could be being misleading, but it does look like they've tried to address the very issue you've been pointing out. Obviously it'd be better if they didn't have your phone number at all, but this does seem to decouple it in a way that means they can't build a connection graph.

With 'sealed sender' your phone number, or any other identifying information, is not included in the metadata on the envelope, only the recipient's id is visible, and it's up to the recipient's client to validate the sender information that is inside the encrypted envelope. It looks like a step in the right direction, though I don't use signal enough to have looked into auditing it myself.

It's probably not so much you can't retire, but you can't retire with an income that you'll be comfortable on.

A brief look suggests the average pre-tax wage in Belgium is around €3800, or about €45000 per year. Assuming you already own your home, or continue to pay mortgage payments at the same rate as before retirement, your pension needs to roughly match your income to not have a drop in living standards. A €1250000 pension pot will buy an annuity that pays a bit more than that, probably around €55000 a year, but assuming you amassed that in your pension pot you would probably have been on a higher than average salary, so it's going to be close, and an annuity at that level wont increase with inflation, so your buying power drops over time, just when you're more likely to need a care home or nursing support.

Use cheap, low density wax and it'll slowly melt under the studio lights over to course of the program, which would be hilarious.

That only works if you can get everyone to stop talking about them. Unfortunately, he has a large enough cult that someone will always be talking about him positively, so the only reasonable counter is to flood the conversation with mockery. Against a more well balanced candidate that would just rankle, but it's really got under his skin, and under the skin of those who support him, so it's proving to be a worthwhile tactic.

Very well said. The key question is how do we, as a society, turn politics back onto that course, of considering the what and the how, not the person or the party.

The problem is more widespread than just America, it seems to take root anywhere you have an elected representative system and the electorate forget that they are the key part of the system.

Mayonnaise.

How's he doing? Well, he's been up and down.

Look, I'm not attacking them over this, as you rightly said, it has plenty of other drawbacks and concerns, I'm just emphasising that Google do have a large degree of influence over them. For instance, Chromium is dropping manifest v2 support, so Brave pretty much has to do the same. They've said that, as Chromium has a switch to keep it enabled until June (iirc) they've enabled that, but after Chromium drops manifest v2 the most they can do is try to support a subset of it as best they can. The Brave devs may not want to drop support, but Google have decreed it will be dropped, so they end up dropping it and having to put in extra work to keep even a subset working for some period of time.

If Brave gets even a moderate market share, Google will continue to mess them around like this as they really don't like people not seeing their adverts.

Ultimately it's software, so the Brave devs can do pretty much whatever they want, limited by the available time and money. Google's influence extends to making that either easier or harder, it much the same way as they influence the Android ecosystem.

They seem to have two levels of furniture; the flimsy, mostly made of particle board/cardboard and hope stuff, and the solid wood stuff. The latter is as robust any anything you'll get elsewhere, even assembled, just easier to get home and takes some assembly. I suspect it's mostly that that lasts, although even the lightweight stuff holds up well if you're carefully with it.

Both Brave and Chrome are built on the open-source Chromium browser engine

That's from the Brave website: https://brave.com/compare/chrome-vs-brave/

Yes there are plenty of changes, but it's built on it, and shaped by it, and Chromium is heavily influenced by Google. If chromium doesn't support v2 manifests it is unlikely that Brave will. In this particular case it may be that Brave's ad blocking and privacy features are equivalent to uBO, but it's still underpinned by an engine that Google has strong influence over, so it can't completely shake their influence.