Who gets to decide what “hurt” means? The person hurting or the person being hurt? And how do you get both of them to agree what hurt means?

Proving works only if everyone agrees on the underlying definitions. If a group defines fire as being cold, there is no proving anything.

You need to have something shitty to see if the other thing is good. Otherwise we will just build EU-approved Meta that does the same shit from all over again.

Because it doesn’t have encryption by default, and encryption is not a setting in many public providers + if security works, then only within a single provider, not between them.

Because you simultainously claim EU will be a federation but then explain how it will not work as a federation. I read your comment, it’s just not understandable.

Can you compare the power California has within the US, to the same power a country like Slovenia would have in federal EU? It’s not mindless nationalism, it’s also the very real threat of giving up your own soveregin right to someone or something, that might totally ignore your interests, or continuously put their interests above yours. You see how Trump ignores the interests of California as they are completely opposite, what makes you think that any nation in EU wants to be in the same situation ever in the future, if they don’t have those problems now and can prevent it quite easily, by doing nothing?

In EU there will never be an European as the leader, they will always be a German, Slowak, Swede… and at that point it’s clear which interests they will push forward.

Because how many attackers are actually interested in attacking fax? Like… have you ever heard of hackers hacking physical mail? It’s to old for people to care, and “people not caring” is implicitely secure by ignorance.

If you filter out only what you like, you are left with perhaps 1% of music.

Fax, still in official use in Germany.

I wouldn’t agree…

https://www.zeit.de/wirtschaft/energiemonitor-strompreis-gaspreis-erneuerbare-energien-ausbau

“Most of them work” is a far cry from “all of them work perfectly as if they were running on Android itself”.

Lets turn the sentence around, and see how it feels: “Some apps won’t work at all”. Very scary sentence for consumers with different expectations.

I understand, but the shift in user behaviour is significant and I think websites are not taking it into account. If the users move more and more to AI, and since Google introduced AI mode it’s only a question of time until it becomes the default, we will see more and more of what we thing are AI crawlers and less and less organic users.

AI seems to be the new middleman between you and the user, and if you block the middleman, you block the user. For people with hobby websites or established sites it may make sense because people either know of them, or getting more exposure is not a wish or requirement, but for everyone else, it will be painful.

I just realized an interesting thing - if I use Gemini, and tell it to do deep research, it actually goes to the websites it knows/finds, and looks up the content to provide up-to-date answers. So, some of those AI crawlers are actually not crawlers, but actual users who just use AI instead of coming directly to the site.

Soo… blocking AI completely could also potentially reduce exposure, especially as more and more people use AI to basically do searches instead of browsing themselves. That would also explain the amount of requests daily - could be simply different users using AI to research for some topic.

Point is, you should evaluate if the AI requests are just proxies of real users, and blocking AI blocks real users from knowing your site exists.

Anubis is the name of the tool. Also, Cloudflare just announced they have something against AI scrapers.

However, China has since grown significantly, and Taiwan no longer claims to be the government of mainland China, so that reason goes away.

The thing that we call “Taiwan” is an island, not a country, the country is “Republic of China” (ROC). We call it mostly Taiwan, because there is the People’s Republic of China (PRC) which is the mainland China. So you still have 2 countries, next to each other, both claiming to have the name “China”.

You claim the name, you claim the country.

Unlike all other examples, people of the EU don’t share common language or culture, so I am not sure if it’s really aplicable and realistic. We don’t have any deep interpersonal connections with people from other countries. Being from the same continent and having the same currency or even values is not enough if you don’t speak the same language, don’t celebrate the same holidays etc.

Besides, can you imagine asking Europeans where they are from and their first answer is “of course from the EU, you silly!”.

I wish, but highly unlikely.

Could be, but in the end, no risk no reward. People who do risk, are the ones who get rewarded.

Turn off internet access, or throttle it to the minimal usable speed.

That’s corruption, and it’s totally something else, but nevertheless there might be others who had no idea, but had the stock at the right moment, and sold as it was high. So, even in cases where the powerful play, the small ones, if lucky, could massively win.

On the other hand, you had the worlds wealthiest man, being second hand to the most powerful man on the planet, and he lost billions. So… I wouldn’t call those that much significant. I bet there are tons of smaller examples where CEO’s manipulate the stock of their own company that fly under the radar. But overall, in general, especially if you invest into ETFs (groups of stocks) you will barely notice anything and life goes on as usual. And the usual is 6-8% win per year on average.

Pardon my expression, everyone can have a lot of money.

A man who doesn’t want anything is rich, even if he doesn’t have money. I adjusted my comment accordingly.