MHLoppy

Composites from:

• YouTube: New Skin Suit Reveal (edit: the production quality on the intro stuff is pretty wild)
• Xitter: official character reference sheet

Mama: kamamesigogo123 Papa: cillia

There is this

The messages, obtained by The Atlantic, were also turned over by Trump Jr.’s lawyers to congressional investigators. They are part of a long—and largely one-sided—correspondence between WikiLeaks and the president’s son that continued until at least July 2017. The messages show WikiLeaks, a radical transparency organization that the American intelligence community believes was chosen by the Russian government to disseminate the information it had hacked, actively soliciting Trump Jr.’s cooperation.

I don't personally know much about it beyond that.

If you read the article, which part of the last-resort financial consequences do you deem insufficient to curb the "absorb the fines" business approach?

Supermarkets that fail to meet these requirements would open themselves to fines worth three times any benefit they derived from their misconduct.

Alternatively, the fine could be up to $10 million, or 10 per cent of the supermarket's annual turnover if the benefit can't be determined.

Those fines would need to be approved by a court, but consumer watchdog the ACCC could also issue up-front infringement notices worth up to $187,800 if they believe there has been a breach.

Are you not entertained?

I've sent him a DM on infosec.exchange (Y)

Edit: he said he's taking a look

??? Why the hell did my link get turned into a link back to Fedia lmao

but even when he was unnamed, the Guardian had piles of hard evidence to back up the 2012 Pentagon stories.

I guess to me, the difference between publishing some documents [1][2] or slides [3] as per your example with The Guardian isn't that different (again, for me) as implicitly saying "the source(s) is/are legit" if whoever's publishing the information has a track record of being trustworthy regarding factuality since I can't necessarily verify the authenticity of that evidence anyway.

While I can certainly believe the US would do this, the article is very light on evidence: a "senior official" is their source.

The article says "In uncovering the secret U.S. military operation, Reuters interviewed more than two dozen current and former U.S officials, military contractors, social media analysts and academic researchers. Reporters also reviewed Facebook, X and Instagram posts, technical data and documents about a set of fake social media accounts used by the U.S. military. Some were active for more than five years." which seems like it's not just hinging everything on one person. I don't think naming the military / government sources would be reasonable here, so I'm not sure what more burden of proof you're after that they could actually provide.

It also doesn't say whether studies showed the efficacy of the Sinovac vaccine. All reports at the time (which could definitely be the result of propaganda) said it was nowhere near as effective as the big 2 (later 3) western vaccines. Was/is Sinovac comparable to the western vaccines?

Also in the article: "Although the Chinese vaccines were found to be less effective than the American-led shots by Pfizer and Moderna, all were approved by the World Health Organization.", so no, not as effective, but:

• "Social media posts decried the quality of face masks, test kits and the first vaccine that would become available in the Philippines – China’s Sinovac inoculation."
• "“COVID came from China and the VACCINE also came from China, don’t trust China!” one typical tweet from July 2020 read in Tagalog.
• "Another post read: “From China – PPE, Face Mask, Vaccine: FAKE. But the Coronavirus is real.”"
• "Although the Chinese vaccines were still months from release, controversy roiled the Muslim world over whether the vaccines contained pork gelatin and could be considered “haram,” or forbidden under Islamic law. Sinovac has said that the vaccine was “ manufactured free of porcine materials.” Many Islamic religious authorities maintained that even if the vaccines did contain pork gelatin, they were still permissible since the treatments were being used to save human life. The Pentagon campaign sought to intensify fears about injecting a pig derivative."

These quotes I've copied are not simply campaigns of "Sinovac is less effective".

Then they chuck in Osama Bin Laden and the South China sea for some reason. Yes, the CIA stealing blood samples from Polio Vaccine recipients was oafish, but those were real vaccines. There was no propaganda comparison.

In context, what's there about Osama bin Laden feels fair to me. It's saying don't get.. whatever this is (psyops?) and healthcare mixed up because it can damage the latter (i.e., "here's one time where the two weren't separated and it caused healthcare problems as a consequence"). It's not about whether the hepatitis vaccination thing was a propaganda effort or not, or if the vaccines themselves were real or not -- it still lead to worse health outcomes because people became distrustful as a result of it.

The South China Sea part also seems not unreasonable in context. (paraphrased) "there was some existing distrust among Filipinos due to past actions by China, such as " seems.. on topic to say in a discussion about public trust?

It's a small instance with fairly low activity (322 monthly active users reported). [edit: excluding this one] The only two local magazines I know with semi-consistent activity and >100 subs are @floatingisfun@fedia.io and @firefox@fedia.io and even the latter seems to be only sporadically active right now. The head mod of the former mag (hitstun) has done some cool local CSS stuff though!

The thing about federation is that you can subscribe just fine to communities on remote instances, so that's where you'll probably end up getting most of your feed from.

YouTube: When The Government Asks For An Independent Consultation | Utopia

Procrastination is a hell of a drug

I worry that if mass graves due to covid weren't enough to jolt near-unanimous support for protective measures, little else will. Would of course love to be proven wrong :(

edit: for the sake of clarity / not accidentally misrepresenting things, graves would be dug up there (as per the article) with/without covid, but the number of bodies being buried in that manner went to ~7x the amount during non-covid according to the article.