Apologies, I misread your comment and though you said protonvpn was untrustworthy. I’m not a VPN user so I’m not up to date with the rep of any of them, but I am a proton mail user so I was worried about the technical integrity of one of their products

As far as I understand it, proton is about the last VPN option you can trust with port forwarding

Could you explain this part please? What makes them untrustworthy?

According to the article, he was only there because he was a falling risk and was waiting for a LTC spot. What reason would they have to not only cut his hair, but also throw away his personal belongings? It makes no sense

It’s a double edged sword. Everybody’s got a different line for when something descriptive inadvertently becomes prescriptive

Love ya, Steve.

Sorry, I don’t think I understand what you’re suggesting. Are you saying encryption keys should themselves be encrypted?

FYI this story isn’t about plaintext passwords, it’s about plaintext encryption keys to chat history.

I kind of agree that this may be a little overblown. Exploiting this requires device and filesystem access so if you can get the keys you can already get a lot more stuff.

While the obesity part is kind of a digression, I think they were pretty clear: protein powder is a waste if you have a typical American diet and are not exercising, which is apparently most Americans. While protein powder on its own isn’t snake oil, it effectively is for most people.

It’s probably unusual. I hope that’s what your friend meant. If something you do is unusual, it doesn’t automatically mean you need to stop doing it.

Are you sure? This sounds like the exact opposite

Most residential bathrooms I’ve been in have had sinks close enough to reach over. If it’s not close I’ll pre wet TP and set it somewhere within reach. If there’s nowhere convenient to place it or it’s a public washroom I just don’t do wet.

I was always confused about the usefulness of bidets because I was taught to wipe with wetted tp at least once while wiping.

What is wrong with it? That’s exactly what he shows in the video. When betting it all, equal wins and losses is a net loss. The point is betting some fraction such that the gains overtake the losses

My takeaways would be:

1. Never trust averages on their face
2. Being consistent gives you an advantage
3. Always be looking to reevaluate your situation and maximize what you can get out of it

This is true if you’re betting everything you have. By not having shrinking bets after losses you can tap into the net gains. Compare 1 win followed by 1 loss with $100 start:

Win is $100+$80 = $180

Loss is $180-$90 = $90

Compare with fixed bets of $50 with bank of $100:

Win is $100+$40 = $140

Loss is $140-$25 = $115

The key is not letting your losses affect your bet amount. With the gain being only 80% instead of 100%, betting your bank means 1 win and 1 loss leaves you with less than you started. Making your bet amount fixed between flips means 1:1 will instead give you a net gain. The Kelly Criterion says there is an optimal proportion of bank you can bet that will maximize this gain over many flips

What immigration files is the author referencing?