can be configured per application

wireguard can too using network namespaces

not exclusively as an interface in kernel mode

Which devices are you people running where you want VPN/proxy but don’t have kernel permissions to run wireguard? Firefox on iPhone? Porn on wifi washing machine?

but hopefully for the last time

That’s what they said last time. “Never again” etc.

Curious, what is SOCKS5 used for that regular wireguard cannot do? I’m only familiar with the use case of telling Firefox to connect through a SOCKS5 proxy, which may be convenient as a form of split tunneling - only firefox traffic goes through the VPN and everything else through clearnet - but wireguard can be configured into a split tunnel form as well with a bit more work, and works for all software not just the ones aware of SOCKS proxies. Is it for use on a system where your permissions are too limited to turn on wireguard but not so limited that you cannot change Firefox proxy settings?

Talescale is a VPN, “private network” is what P and N stand for. It’s just one with only forwarded ports and no outbound traffic. The question was are forwarded ports important, and yes they are. So important that some users pay for a VPN twice! Once for something like Mullvad with no port forwarding, and once for Talescale for port forwarding. It’s true it has benefits like static IP, but even on my commercial VPN I get the same forwarded IP and port when connecting to the same server, so I don’t want to pay twice.

In theory, the rich can just continue paying off each other spending money on rich people stuff. 80% of the economy consisting of activities like robot-staffed billionaire-owned construction companies making and selling super-yachts to oil billionaires, who made their fortune selling fuel to space tourism companies ferrying billionaire designer bag heiresses to the Moon. The rest of us can starve to death and the economy won’t even blink.

I’m coming up with “agent noun”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agent_noun#Words_related_to_agent_noun

I agree that OP is in the best position to report the crime to the police - they are closest to the police station, they have video evidence, they literally know who the thief is - but it should not be their responsibility! OP has done nothing wrong and there are no measures they could have taken to prevent this crime (other than not shopping online at all). If OP gets a police report, OP is taking up the task of being the victim, and then BestBuy has no legal obligation to refund them at all, other than out of the kindness of their heart. Rather, BestBuy is the victim in this crime, same as if the item was stolen off the shelf at their warehouse and scanner records forged. It is their responsibility to file a police report, if they want the numbers in their system to add up. Only then could they ask OP to kindly provide the video evidence to help them out, and they’d be lucky if OP would give it to them, having no obligation to do so.

Yes! It’s an olympics game of mental gymnastics where everyone - BestBuy, DoorDash, OP, the police - try to offload responsibility onto someone else. However, a crime WAS committed. Someone is the victim. The victim is the one who was deprived of property/money and will not have access to it until/unless the thief is caught and property recovered. BestBuy thinks OP is the victim, since the item was stolen off (not)their porch. OP thinks BestBuy should be the victim, since OP had no involvement in organizing the delivery. DoorDash could also take up responsibility of being the victim, since it was their (not)employee that stole from them.

If OP goes to the police now, they would be losing the mental gymnastics by accepting the status of the victim. BestBuy would never refund them in this case. It is in OP’s best interest to pursue the chargeback first. If OP succeeds in the refund or the chargeback, then BestBuy will have no package and no money, so BestBuy would be the victim. Then it will be BestBuy’s responsibility to report the crime.

The “libertarian paradise” idea is that as far as Best Buy is concerned, the item was delivered. If the DoorDash delivery driver happened to turn right around and steal the package, that’s a separate crime and a matter for the police to deal with, same as if anyone else had stolen it. And it’s OP’s fault for not picking the box up sooner, during the 3 seconds it was sitting on the porch. The porch that wasn’t even theirs. So anyway, the libertarian solution is for OP to contact police to track down the thief and either recover the stolen item or sue the thief for monetary compensation. Best Buy is innocent and no refund is coming. DoorDash is innocent too because they contracted with an independent contractor to deliver the item, and what the contractor does after the item has been delivered is not their responsibility.

If NYC uses ranked choice voting in the general

It does not, for some weird reason. City primaries only.

This is literally that scene from Schindler’s List where the Commandant sits on the balcony and snipes any prisoner below who isn’t laboring fast enough. And for years they were saying this was unrealistic and such crass cruelty could not have happened!

https://piped.video/watch?v=N0DqnUk90lo

I got excited that the paper makes concrete predictions for particle masses - the electron, muon, and tau, the quarks, and the neutrinos. For the moment, particle masses are free parameters in the Standard Model that you need to plug arbitrary experimentally-derived numbers into. A theory that can calculate them directly would be a great theory, even if it were as weird as having 3 time dimensions.

Buuut… this paper doesn’t actually explain how it calculates all its amazing predictions. It just starts with something like “what if Schrödinger equation, but instead of exp(it) we had exp(it1 + it2 + it3)!” And I agree: yes! Let’s! What if! We should explore all possibilities, no matter how weird, if they lead to better understanding of the world. But then it immediately goes to say “let α and γ be some [unspecified] constants. Therefore the mass of the muon is 105.6583745 MeV”. Like… how?

I thought maybe this is a paper just to announce the theory, and all the laborious calculations are in the supplemental materials, but at the very bottom it specifically writes “Data Availability: The theoretical predictions and numerical calculations presented in this paper are fully described within the text.” **Frodo mode:** Fine, keep you secrets!

Until the author shows the actual theory and the calculations outputting all these amazing predictions, they are no more useful than that LinkedIn post that said “what if e = mc2 but e = mc2 + AI”

Always has been 🪩👨‍🚀🔫👨‍🚀

The Pied Piper strategy from the 2016 Clinton campaign!

Pets are allowed on New York City subway. No ticket required, no time restrictions. They just have to be in a bag. Never experienced a problem with one.

If the engine is powering the refrigerator, it is exempted. Engine powering air conditioning is not exempted.

He’s been in the news for several years already. I’ve looked into doing the bounty hunting thing - I couldn’t find anyone in violation! Every truck and bus driver in the city are generally in compliance of the idling limits. Only occasionally would some one-time-visitor out-of-towner who might not be aware of the city ordinance run afoul. Not sure whether people are just respectful of traffic rules, or whether this guy is a menace everyone knows about. If so, the bounty program is working effectively as intended!

Modern ICE passenger cars even automatically turn off their engine at traffic lights. Engine startup has become so reliable that the car can guarantee to spin up the engine and resume applying engine power the moment you press the gas pedal.

New York City has also banned plastic bags since 2020. I was skeptical about the ban at first, because by measure of material weight, bags are but a small fraction of plastic waste. Thin film is just too efficient in terms of use-per-weight ratio. I also thought anyone who didn’t want to use plastic bags already had the option to bring their own reusable bags with them.

My newfound appreciation for the ban is that not only does it divert the use of plastic material, but it forces a change in the public perception around plastic use itself. Sure, you could bring your own bags, but it felt awkward because no one else did. You felt like you were inconveniencing the cashiers and other shoppers by breaking the routine, as if you were asking for special treatment. But now it’s perfectly normal! You want to carry that bag of potatoes in your arms without an external bag? Go right ahead. You want to run home carrying a jug of milk dripping condensation on the pavement? Doesn’t make you look like a crazy person! All thanks to the ban. Single action by the government on behalf of the collective has achieved what collective action by many single individuals could not have.

For trash I’m still using plastic bags I hoarded in anticipation of our ban in NYC 5 years ago.