Thanks for the explanation!

“But ultimately,” Trump said, “they have to make a deal (1) because otherwise they’re not going to be able to deal (2) in the United States. So we want them involved, but they have to ‒ and other countries have to ‒ make a deal (3), and if they don’t make a deal (4), we’ll set the deal (5).”

Why Trump uses the word “deal” so often? English is not native for me, so I would like to know, is there some hidden meaning in it?

There is also an option to use Android’s QuickShare from MacOS: https://github.com/Martichou/rquickshare

Thank you again! I will try to reach an owner of the domain!

That is sad. I’m just a contributor who is liking the project and willing to contribute. I’m doing it in my free time, I’m not paid for it, I’m not making money on the project… Setting a nonprofit LLC is not an option for me, unfortunately. It would require to hire lawyers to make all the paperwork and yearly reports, I just do not have such capabilities… Thanks anyway for the answer!

*logs on the server of app creator.

Yes. For me reasons of VPN on Android (even with Google) are following:

1. Most of greedy apps are trying to collect info about your location. Because in most of the cases you will restrict direct access to the location data, apps will try to do it through IP. VPN resolve this problem at all.
2. A lot of greedy apps or websites are trying to do fingerprinting to identity your logs. While it is possible in theory to do fingerprinting by fuzzy matching all-logs against all-logs, the task is so computationally heavy that the only way is to try to do fuzzy-matching (aka fingerprinting) within the locations. VPN allows you to hide your location.

Of course one may say that VPN does not provide a 100% protections from fingerprinting, I think there should be applied the same approach like in cyber security: the goal is not to protect yourself by 100% but to make attack so expensive that it does not make sense. VPN makes fingerprinting so hard that noone will really do it until you are a journalist, intelligence officer or something like this.

To be honest I do not see any reason to use Lineage with Pixel while there is GrapheneOS… But maybe there will be some users of it: it is always better to have more free open OS

It is a good question who are “authorities” on the occupied territories. It looks like for Meta authorities are the occupation force. How people should free themselves from the occupation forces?

And that is very strange for me. Under the news about AI-search from OpenAI I asked about comparison with AI-search from Kagi, but got a lot of downvotes and a link to the post where the author express his negative opinion about AI.

My question was about benefits of openai search compared to kagi search. How is this link related to my question?

What are benefits of using openai search when we already have Kagi that is much more privacy a friendly, is ads free and provides the same functionality?

As I can understand from EFF articles, the problem is not only in MAGA guys and their conspiracy but in KOSA proposal itself.

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2024/09/new-us-house-version-kosa-doesnt-fix-its-biggest-problems

For me the problem is more in GPL violation: they distribute blobs under GPL3, user made a request of the source code by creating an issue, but they ignored that request. It is not only about “you have to fix it” versus “just fork it” imo.

If I already use Pandas for processing my data in-memory, CoW can significantly improve the performance. That was my point.

If you are doing data processing in pandas CoW allows to avoid of a lot of redundant computations on intermediate steps. Before CoW any data processing in Pandas required manual and careful working with code to avoid the case described in the blog post. To be honest I cannot imagine the case of offloading each result of each operation in the pipeline to the storage…

I did not see in article any proof that Chineese scientists have a bad intentions. A statement about “they always do it [because they are evil maoists]” is not a proof for me.

I did not see in the article any arguments, except the fact that Chinese researchers are in some US blacklists. Only proclamations about EU should restrict, EU should prevent, etc. But without any arguments why. Maybe lack of actual arguments is the reason why the article is so short?

They are just trying to maintain an image!

It is the same question as “What are trustworthy countries” imo