Total wiretapping is being introduced - page 14
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
And maybe just because they are weak they will not be able to compete without restrictions, the strongest will simply absorb them, taking all the positions, and then will certainly try by all means to keep those positions. Without restrictions, these weakest ones will simply be prevented from even trying to get back on their feet. This is not about the Internet (you seem to be talking in general about the trend of the weak).
I don't want to get into geopolitics and will return to the internet
Authoritarian regimes usually seek to restrict their citizens' ability to read/watch/listen and express themselves freely.
probably because they understand their lack of competitiveness in general and that freedom of opinion is a threat to their "integrity
the topic is very much about politics and very little about technology
and it would be interesting and useful to look at everything from a practical point of view
no one seems to be blocking vnp or banning their use.
vnp encryption is not banned for individuals, and only "certified" (=broken) algorithms are available for legal entities, if I understand correctly.
so, for example, if a company wants to reliably protect their data, they need to use encryption in a covert manner (plausible deniability) masking the encrypted data/traffic as something
BTW half the votes are almost in.
the initiative continues to be the most popular
Once again ... a word of warning: I will not speak to you again. Don't be offended.
Feeling the greatest loss, I'll leave on my own. A word or two. Why then promote democracy, freedom of elections and the right of the majority to decide their own destiny, if 20 out of a hundred have the best conceptual thinking,
and the majority doesn't support them, and do they have better conceptual thinking if they can't even convince the majority to follow them. It turns out that these 20 are just as willing to usurp power in defiance of the majority, in defiance of their own anti-usurpation slogans.
I don't want to get into geopolitics and will return to the internet
Authoritarian regimes usually seek to restrict their citizens' ability to read/watch/listen and express themselves freely.
probably because they understand their lack of competitiveness in general and that freedom of opinion is a threat to their "integrity
the topic is very much about politics and very little about technology
and it would be interesting and useful to look at everything from a practical point of view
no one seems to be blocking vnp or banning their use.
vnp encryption is not banned for individuals, and only "certified" (=broken) algorithms are available for legal entities, if I understand correctly.
so, for example, if a company wants to reliably protect their data, they need to use encryption in a covert manner (plausible deniability) masking the encrypted data/traffic as something
BTW half the votes are almost in.
the initiative continues to be the most popular
I don't want to get into geopolitics and will return to the internet
Authoritarian regimes usually seek to restrict their citizens' ability to read/watch/listen and express themselves freely.
probably because they understand their lack of competitiveness in general and that freedom of opinion is a threat to their "integrity
If even if it is not the fastest policy of a country's regime to develop and improve the lives of all citizens, then for such weak countries so far, a restriction is a protection of the regime from external forces that may nevertheless act within the country as well.
And for your example, limitation is the regime's protection from its own citizens. For me, the restriction can be considered both evil and good, while for you the restriction is evil in any case, if I understood correctly.
Well, or you consider only the second option, and I see more the first.
Feeling the greatest loss, I shall remove myself. A couple of remarks. Why then promote democracy, free elections and the right of the majority to decide their own destiny, if 20 out of a hundred have better conceptual thinking,
and the majority doesn't support them, and do they have better conceptual thinking if they can't even convince the majority to follow them. It turns out that these 20 want to usurp power in spite of the majority, in spite of their own slogans against usurpation.
I am exactly against it being the majority that decides the fate. I am in favour of the introduction of electoral qualifications (property, education, etc.). History is replete with examples of people simply being misled, realizing that the majority is simply incapable of deeply analyzing even what they've just been told. There are very few truly educated people, even a diploma or degree is no indicator. There is no knowledge. And where knowledge ends, faith begins. Do you believe that two times two is five? An educated person KNOWS, but the rest (those same 80%), will say "well, I guess so, I guess I believe it". Some of them will simply be afraid of being called ignorant, the rest of them will simply be afraid of being called ignorant because they cannot prove otherwise.
As for "most people don't support them", Kozma Prutkov wrote back in the mid-19th century: "People are like sausages. What they are stuffed with, they carry in them." Remember Gaddafi - I remember people celebrating his birthday in the streets and almost a month later sticking a shovel in one place.
....Remember Gaddafi - I remember people celebrating his birthday in the streets, and almost a month later sticking a shovel in one place.
Remember Gaddafi - I remember people celebrating his birthday in the streets and almost a month later sticking a shovel shaft in one place.
Before that, the correct understanding of the process was instilled by regular bombings from March 19 to October 20. Along the way they did not forget the "cuttings" for Gaddafi's family, including the young children - all on the wings of democracy, under the name of "no-fly zone".
Don't go on about the people.
That's it - you've given up on the cat.)
What's my cat got to do with it?
So the cat, so what?
You chicks have a perennial theme - I'll shut up...
I don't have a cat at all... He only sometimes takes over for me here while I sleep.
It's fine, I love cats and cats, and it's mutual.) I used to have a cat myself, Vasya.
We're not trying to create fears here but trying to analyze the situation from different angles. And I'm happy to see many interesting opinions expressed.
My opinion right now is this. In Russia, the economic downturn continues. For two years now, there has been a decline in trade in the food industry, by 5% a year on average. That is, people have started saving on food, with the range changing towards cheap ersatz products. I've written before, a month ago there was a wave of cheap cheese bars like Druzhba with an ultra-low price, what are they made of - a mystery. But they sell well, I asked my salesgirls. I shop there myself and I can see this trend in the regular supermarkets.
Now the question is how to draw attention away from economic problems? It is necessary to make a powerful splash and then remove it. The State Duma elections are in September. The czar needs his United Russia to win. Let's see what happens next.
Again, I'm not a Globe and I'm not predicting anything, this is just one version.
Hello cat (as I understand from your words, it's Dame :)
Remember the NORTH OST
Back then, the secret services could not intercept and decrypt mobile phone conversations!
back in the 90's and early 200's every mobile phone call was encrypted and protected
- just after that problem was solved
- After Nord OST, cellular operators do not encrypt conversations.
Phew, what on earth are you talking about. The GSM protocol originally had homemade 64-bit encryption. To clarify, there are open encryption protocols in the world, mostly asymmetric. That is, the source code is open and there are constant competitions for hackers to crack the message. Huge computing power is required to crack the key by brute force. There is sort of hope for quantum computers just for hacking.
And it is always thought that it is the openness of the protocol that ensures its security, as hackers pick at it and try to find vulnerabilities in the algorithm. If the algorithm is clean, but the computer power for decryption is increased, just increase the key length and that's it.
When designing GSM they thought that by making a proprietary algorithm they would be better protected. Wrong, the algorithm was hacked 10-15 years ago (can't remember exactly).
more often because they wanted to do something