That's not at odds with him having raped her. In addition, most rapes (and murders, and most violent crimes) are committed by those in close relationships. Double in addition, I don't doubt for a minute that a rapist 40 years her senior would manipulate this woman into a "consensual" relationship post-facto.
Following up on this... I was Miranda user. With it I was able to run ICQ, MSN Messenger and other instant messengers with an encrypted layer slapped on top (as long as I was able to talk my friends out of using the official client). Today it's called Miranda NG[1] and it seems alive and kicking[2].
I find that the argument embedded in that question isn't very insightful.
The developments of personal computing since subscription applications became prevalent and app stores were integrated into operating systems has made things quite different from the era that preceded this one.
Apple used to sell OS upgrades. Today you can basically run Windows 10 for free. The revenue streams are different these days and they have plenty of incentives to turn your OS into a mall.
Windows has essentially always been free. There have been something like two billion PCs sold running Windows. The number of people who purchased a non-OEM copy is relatively small.
Free as in price? The price tag to customers didn't exactly mention the Windows fee, but the very few vendors that sold PC's without Windows pre-installed had a lower price on those options. Luckily many vendors seem to have concluded that Windows is not a sales argument anymore.
Free as in freedom? MS has tried to block out Linux from beeing installed through various chips and methods.
But I believe upgrades have always been an extra purchase until Windows 8? Nowadays it's free OS, free upgrades to get you in the door and buy their services (M365 for Microsoft, iCloud/apps for Apple.)
Until Windows 10 IIRC, Windows 8 was also a paid upgrade. Windows 8.1 acted like a service pack so it wasn't until 10 that upgrades became free, in a way. (Unless you're an enterprise customer, in which case 10 wasn't free either)
There's a growing number of mobile apps that don't expose all their features through their web apps, e.g. Cash, Venmo, TikTok, Instagram, Snapchat etc.
It's a total pain for me to have to always open my phone and use the tiny keyboard to carry out some trivial task.
Any app that has developers who think that making an Android version (TAM: 1B+ users) is more important than creating a native Windows version (also 1B+ users), is an app that I will want to run on Windows. I mean, I'd rather have a native Windows app, but if that's not an option, I'd rather have an Android app than a website in most cases.
Maybe Venmo since there is no desktop/web client. It frustrates me that Venmo has become so popular in my circles when it’s smartphone-only. I have a smartphone so I’ll keep using it there, but I could imagine some might appreciate the option to run apps like Venmo on a PC.
Lots of games, and some apps/services are mobile-first. I play a few different android games on my PC in an emulator. The best (IMO) Twitter client around is also Android-only.
Windows doesn't have a lot of great touch friendly apps since Windows 8 was a huge failure.
I could see myself using this if I ever bought a windows tablet.
For example, if you like comic books, the touch friendly comic readers on windows are pretty bad. Also the biggest comic store, Comixology from Amazon, is not available in a windows app version.
It's probably more interesting on things like Microsoft surface. Not sure Microsoft have the stomach for it yet, but they possibly could have another crack at doing phones.
Lately, happyfamilymedstore has mysteriously always been in the top ~ten Google Images results for super niche bicycle parts searches I do. They seem to have ripped an insane amount if images that gets reposted on their domain.
Anything outside normal behavior can trigger these automated systems. Trying to withhold important personal data will make you an unimportant user in the eyes of these hungry giants and it will trigger the lock out hell spirals sooner than later.
I use Instagram only in a separate container in Firefox. I have no phone number connected to it. I tried to manually delete my pictures the other week. Got half way through before being locked out for suspicious activity. Message said account would be deleted if I didn't give them my phone number.
So, I bought a prepaid SIM card and proceeded with SMS verification. They told me I had to wait 24 hours. After 24 hours I got a message saying I was still suspicious and had to send a picture of myself holding a sign with my username. You could mistake this process for a reddit gone wild submission.
I'm done with Insta. Went ahead and deleted my FB account too, while I could still get in.
I think the big issue is these companys simply take care of the major problems and let the edge cases slide. It is simply not cost effective for the company to have a solution for the problems of the 1 in 10000 customer.
I lost access to my Amazon account. They want bills with my phone number on them. I don't have utility bills and I don't have phone service at the moment. I am an insignificant edge case and simply not worth their time.
Bing/DDG results suck (when localized to Sweden), so I use Startpage.
I know it's owned by an ad tech company now, but I haven't seen any proof that will affect me. Its reach can't be compared to Google's, which has its trackers on just about every web page (Google Analytics and Fonts).
> The EU is currently drafting legislation to increase cyber security (revised NIS Directive, in short “NIS 2”). According to this directive, the registration of internet domain names will in future require the correct identification of the owner in the Whois database, including name, address and telephone number. So far, registries such as denic do not register telephone numbers of the holders. The leading Industry Committee wants to additionally mandate „verification“ of the registration data. The plans could mean the end of “whois privacy” services for proxy registration of domains, threatening the safety of activists and whistleblowers.[1]
Proxy registration referred to in that quote isn't what Whois privacy generally refers to though, no?
When I've seen it used by typical registrars it has meant that the owner's details aren't disclosed on public Whois lookups but are still required to be correct.
Yes, the current status is that the GDPR basically outlaws whois as "Domain holders must publish public contact information". ICANN's plan B, after failing to fight that requirement, is that registrars must hold contact information and provide it to parties with legitimate interests. The EU privacy regulators have been clear in their interpretation that IP lawyers do not have sufficient "legitimate interests" to be party to such a system, though they are ok with law enforcement having access. Part of that argument is IP lawyers are such a broad group as to make the information de facto public.
Anyway, this proposal seems to be basically a GDPR exception to make "whois" in some form allowable, which is backsliding on the current state.
