It seems the specific problem was that military planes were being used instead of civilian planes:
That does make sense to me, since I'd feel less comfortable if a military plane was flying into my country, whereas I'd be more comfortable if a regular civilian flight was used instead. From the perspective of a Colombian, I would be concerned about how national security would be affected by giving permission for military planes to operate when they wouldn't otherwise have permission.
Something that might be useful is a general strike (see https://sh.itjust.works/post/9745322 and https://sh.itjust.works/post/31602246 also). It would be nice for more people to be unionized in preparation for that. I suspect that it would be better to start unionizing for jobs that more people have (like Personal Care Aides or people working in a retail store or fast food restaurant), since after having a union contract is more normalized it'd probably be easier for people like medical doctors or pilots or lawyers to have a union contract.
I'm personally interested in electoral reform (see [email protected] and [email protected] also), such that I wouldn't have to worry as much about coordinating with other people before I vote. However, it's guaranteed that someone will always be dissatisfied with the results of an election that isn't unanimous, so that might not be a complete solution. A more general solution might be to handle more things locally with voluntary organizations. Another option could be to generally devolve power to local institutions (like to a state government or municipality) or to create more independent institutions that are directly accountable to the government of the United States but can act autonomously (like the Federal Reserve System) so that less is dependent on the Congress or the President, and then to reduce the authority of more powerful institutions. If some states withdrew or were expelled from the United States of America that might help (since the power of an expelled state and a post-expulsion United States of America would naturally be more local, and the power of each would also affect less territory).
This seems to be the confusing product: https://www.walmart.ca/en/ip/Kraft-Smooth-Light-Peanut-Butter/10298330?from=%2Fsearch
I wouldn't recommend that, since it's likely that anyone who could register with Signal using the same phone number could harm your ability to communicate with other people reliably, and I don't have many reasons to maintain a VoIP telephone number: https://www.privacyguides.org/articles/2022/11/10/signal-number-registration-update/
If someone gets a new phone number from their carrier, they should not be prevented from registering with Signal indefinitely because the previous owner has reglock.
The intention of reglock is to prevent hijacking of numbers you actually own, not to guarantee the number for yourself for life.
While this change makes sense from the perspective of making it so you cannot "hold a number hostage" as long as you keep checking in, it is particularly important for people who've used disposable phone numbers to know this.
I found that URL from https://www.privacyguides.org/articles/2022/07/07/signal-configuration-and-hardening/ which I found from https://www.privacyguides.org/en/real-time-communication/
There is some documentation that supports this idea, like https://support.signal.org/hc/en-us/articles/360007059792-Signal-PIN
Enabling a registration lock triggers a 7-day inactivity timer if your number is registered on another device.
Registration Lock expires after 7 days of inactivity.
After 7 days of inactivity, a new PIN can be created. The old PIN and information associated with it are no longer available.
I also recall that Mental Outlaw discussed this in the past, but I have failed to find where.
What "new EU law" is being discussed? I read several articles like this but I failed to figure that out.
It helps me that this article expressed "The EU's Code of Practice on Disinformation, introduced in 2022, includes several voluntary commitments" is relevant, but I don't consider a law that is 2-3 years old to be "new". Moreover, I'm not even sure what a "voluntary commitment" is in the context of a law.
This is the first news story I found that seems to be related, but it's dated June 03, 2024: https://www.fortinet.com/blog/threat-research/menace-unleashed-excel-file-deploys-cobalt-strike-at-ukraine
I suspect it's legal because it was a prevalent practice before laws were made, and nobody wanted to change that so they just made sure the law allowed for what they were already doing. For example, Kansas was part of a "territory" before it was a state, so only the USA as a whole had authority, and I doubt there were many laws about the subject we're discussing, so there was probably literally no local law enforcement in most of Kansas at some point. Additionally, in the USA people settled / farm(ed) by having one family live far away from everyone else (as opposed to in Europe where it was supposedly more common to have a central place where a lot of people lived and then they would walk to their sector of farmland that surrounds the town). This means that people with 8 kids probably assigned any 14 or 16 or 12 year olds to watch the younger kids, while the adults and older children were out farming or preparing food (which took a lot more time in the past), since there was no other adult that was physically close by (and any that were would probably have to attend to their own farm/business rather than help with raising someone else's kids).
Re-creation of someone else's post because the original was removed and I found it funny when I first saw it
There is more discussion that might be useful here: https://ponder.cat/post/1453581