It goes so far that a lot of the very same people vilifying open relationships are the ones cheating on their partners.

On the other hand that is also one of those things that annoys me about romance culture, the whole notion of your girlfriend/boyfriend/wife/husband being “stolen” by someone else as if your partner was just a passive object instead of being the actual person in the cheating who made promises to you (which might or might not include sexual exclusivity depending on mutually agreed upon preferences between everyone in the relationship) and should keep those promises or break up with you no matter what any third person tempts them with.

So they stole all the cookies a single news website set in the browser of one user?

Counterpoint, if you don’t create a new device at least once every 2 years there will be people who disregard your latest device in their purchase decision because it is so old.

Sometimes what you are led to believe is also more closely related to some sales or marketing person’s life goals than your own.

I disagree…with your decision to limit your statement to their smartphones instead of applying it to all of their devices.

Tor exit nodes could also identify you if they cooperate with some of the websites you visit (the way e.g. a government could force them to).

If you have a HTTP fallback on HTTPS failure that might work, but only if the site doesn’t use HSTS and this is the first request on that client. I skipped over HSTS preloading in my earlier explanation which also addresses this issue for sites on the browsers list at least.

Only if you start with HTTPS but browsers have favored HTTP for backwards compatibility as the default protocol when something is entered in the address bar until very recently (less than a year for any browser to do that by default via HTTPS). Usually users don’t notice because websites redirect to HTTPS but technically a MITM attacker could just redirect you somewhere else.

Unless websites use the very latest version of SSL at the very least the hostname you connect to (the Server Name Indication field) is visible. As are your DNS queries unless you use DoT or DoH or DNSCrypt or some similar encrypted DNS protocol.

Until very recently most browsers also defaulted to using http for any address you typed into the address bar without a protocol so your first request was HTTP and could redirect you to an entirely different website. DNS spoofing would work just fine with this since the website you actually connect to over https after the redirect is already attacker controlled and has a certificate for hat attacker controlled domain (e.g. with replacement unicode characters that look virtually identical to the original website domain name).

The router can also see your Mac address so they might have a unique identifier to track you across open Wifi networks (if we are talking commercial country-wide installations run by one company).

Many gaming protocols also do not use TLS encryption since they rely on UDP and while there are encryption variants for that gaming is often unreasonably optimized for speed over everything else.

So in summary, in general, yes, the network you are connected to can be dangerous and can learn some information about your network usage.

The event’s puzzles were designed so they could be solved locally, making them accessible even to AI models with technical constraints.

Want to bet that those puzzles (or some very similar ones) were part of the training data of some of the agents?

I would assume the ideal design for distance would be shaped somewhat like a glider.

The Colour Out of Space seems appropriate for the times.

Actually Alibaba also has their own cloud services (Alibaba Cloud)

I mean they are likely considering the offer. Considering it a bad joke maybe, or an insult, or most likely both.

That isn’t Lemmy, that is just your client.

It is not that difficult to understand. Selling a service that costs money each month to run for a one time price is not sustainable.

GPL is just as bad as proprietary licenses in the sense that GPL makes the user worry about the licensing of some library they just want to use. MIT, BSD,… give the code user the freedom to avoid worrying about licensing bullshit. GPL meanwhile doesn’t really solve any of the problems you claim it solves because all it does is duplicate effort and the non-GPL duplicate is used in a lot of places where a single copy of the code could be used if the GPL-using author hadn’t stubbornly insisted on a disproven theory of how GPL will save us.

On the other hand a new GPL licensed version of coreutils will run into the exact same adoption problems that brought us the current mess of “you can use this parameter on GNU but not on the BSD version”,…

If you licensed your project incorrectly

If you think other people disagreeing with you on how to license their own work is “incorrect” maybe you are the one not really in favor of freedom.