blabyboy

Cooper booked again. Quelle surprise

Soumare finally makes an appearance....in the ref's book

Bit harsh mate

Lucky guy. Looked bad that

Ooohh 5hit. Ndiddi is gonna be off

Comedy defending by Waes

Kristensen is coming in too much from the left.. needs to hang out a bit more otherwise they're in each time

Me too. I really wanted the Zaltz to win and that could've cost him big time... Especially after the hotdog fiasco in the final task.

Palantir?

Standard fayre really. Some tantalising snippets to whet the appetite but the meat is only available in a SCIF. Didn't really learn too much from what info has been available for a while. Thought Nancy Mace came across well, she could be a force for change..but then I thought Gillibrand was going to be the same, so time will tell there really. Good to get stuff 'on the record' but would have liked to see Grusch back with his first-person testimony. At least they're addressing it, unlike the UK..

https://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/articles/c36pxjx855go Anticyclonic gloom mate 👍

BN has had at least two compromising leaks in the last couple of weeks around hostages and hamas all coming from his office. Needs to redirect the press elsewhere.

Ayew again,

I feel that if the average American understood Trump's tariff plans then he'd be dead in the water immediately.... Unfortunately, they do not, but the EU and Asia do.

You are crack on. Musk needs/wants more of the wavelength spectrum for his Starlink ambitions. He also gets a potential double bubble in that the users of those wavelengths are presently more left or centrist TV Comms channels, so possibly less visibility and resistance to his other ventures. He also has numerous run ins with environmental protection issues around Star base, which have slowed launches and development as well as attracting more costs and fines. Lastly, X has been on the downturn since his takeover and injecting a friendly FCC would be helpful for him, and peripherally, for Truthsocial. Musk is a really marmite guy for me.

Absolute SHITHOUSE!!!!!

There's been a UN ban of weather warfare since the 70's. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_Modification_Convention#:~:text=It opened for signature on,force on 5 October 1978.&text=The Convention bans weather warfare,of inducing damage or destruction. Crazy that the French didn't sign up

What a way to finish a landing!

Upper stage reentry looking good so far. Will be watching the flaps for depredation again.

It depends. If you're prepared to leave it there for a longer period then you'll ride out any perceived correction that may occur based on previous data. Note, this data is only indicative and not a definite guide to future performance. You also need to balance your appetite for risk versus reward. If you do go for the s&s ISA, you may benefit from tracking passive funds rather than actively managed funds as these have historically outperformed the latter. Humans very rarely beat the market.

Mashin' - making tea

Both sides use Telegram, there are several other apps, so no, if it disappears, the disruption would be minimal as they can jump elsewhere. They don't have access to the encryption keys. France is punching way above it's weight if it thinks it can take down Telegram, China can't, the US can't.. France?? Non! The odd thing is that these requests for information are related to Groups..and groups on Telegram are not encrypted, so any content would be visible along with any metadata obtained/ requested. So, I would guess that it's more about the request to take the group(s) down has not been fulfilled. Durov is also a French/Russian citizen so would be subject to the law as a native of that country. On further reading (it's a developing story), it appears Telegram have never serviced a request for takedown/information from any authority. Maybe Durov has finally pushed the buttons of the French.

Sure, I'll try, but as in other matters of your interest, personal research is beneficial. Telegram, along with many of the other messaging platforms e.g. (WhatsApp, FB Messenger, Briar and Signal) use end to end encryption(ETE).i.e only you and the person you are communicating with can read the contents of the message. Note, Content and the Metadata are two different aspects of a message. The Metadata can be obtained from a platform with the appropriate legal process and that would tell the authorities where one account contacted another account, the date, the time, but crucially not the contents. Consider it the same as sending a letter, the post office know that a person received a letter on a specific date and time, and if you include a return address, they have an idea as to who sent it, but they don't know what the letter contained. The benefit of ETE over a postal letter is that the encryption keys are generated on the senders device and then a public key is sent to the recipient so they can decrypt the message, there is no third party needed, and that act in itself also occurs over an encrypted connection... I.e. the post office cannot steam open the envelope and read the letter and then reseal it because they can't see which letter to open. There are other additional techniques to apply that improve this even further, but let's keep it basic for now. Various governments have tried to lobby/threaten/taint these platforms over time using the "for the sake of the children" trope as a bridgehead to gain access to the content by getting the platforms to weaken the encryption process and build in backdoor(s) that only parties with appropriate legal legitimacy would be able to access. Kinda sounds reasonable on the face of it. The question then becomes do you trust the agency that weilds the power to unlock that backdoor only for its intended purpose? At present, the resounding answer from an economic perspective is No, companies and the market in general do not. Once those backdoors are admitted to exist the owners of that platform know they are going to lose customers very rapidly - it is why the likes of Apple, Google, FB and the messaging apps have all resisted these requests. They would rather sit in front of a Select Committee or. Senate hearing and be humiliated by attention grabbing politicians than see their business crumble because customers would no longer believe they could communicate secretly and in confidence with a recipient. It is important to note here that some companies e.g. Apple have on a few occasions assisted with compromising a device .i.e law enforcement could get into the phone, but did not compromise the messaging app itself by inserting a backdoor, so they have in effect localised the hole to that one device It is also worth noting that the actual processes many of the apps use are based on open source software and the algorithms used are not within the gift of the platforms to compromise. These are the same algorithms used by banks for your transactions - do you want backdoors in them? Would you trust that those backdoors would not be exploited by criminals for gain? Online banking would suffer severe shocks in a short space of time. Stocks and shares trading would be especially affected by this with the obvious knock-on to various economies around the world and the global economy as a whole. Whenever I hear this type of argument, I wince because the ramifications of what someone is suggesting just has not been thought through or researched... Governments and three letter agencies rely on this naivety of the public to try and browbeat the platforms into changing their systems knowing full well that if they did that, the customers of that platform would desert it very quickly and switch to another app. "For the sake of the children" would be just the start, industrial espionage is the real goal along with population monitoring depending upon your country of residency. Pavel Durov cannot effectively give up the keys for the organised crime accounts because fundamentally he doesn't have the keys. At best France can try to get the metadata for certain accounts and have an approximate location and date for that account, but those accounts will already be dead accounts, the locations will be spoofed and the criminals off to another platform that is not under investigation. To me, this is very much more about being seen to do something than actually doing something productive. It is absurd what the French are doing, they would be much better working in the shadows with Interpol as various European governments did when they managed to infiltrate the Encrochat network alongside the U.S agencies to capture numerous drug lords. It is perhaps ironic, that the French are trying to enforce the law for this request, but the President is not enforcing the law from a much bigger request I e.an election vote, to change the government. Plus ca change!

You clearly do not understand end to end encryption and the economy based around that.

Man has chops.. https://www.blackstonechambers.com/barristers/nick-de-marco/