It’s not a scam. It’s a system that exists for people and made by people. Period. Money, outcomes and so on only have value because people assign them value. If you remove people then what you do has no value or concept of value. Life is not some video game with an omniscient score counter. Other people are the score counter.

It's not clear to me that I should care if my data was in the breach. For my data to have been in the breach the following must have happened.

1. I opted in to sharing my information with everyone that 23andMe identified as relatives. "Relatives" in this context means genetic 4th cousins or closer. For me that turned out to be 1500 people, all of whom are as far as I know complete strangers to me (I'm adopted).

2. One or more of those 1500 people used the same password on 23andMe that they used on some other site that suffered a breach that gave up plaintext passwords.

3. That password was included in a credential stuffing attack that let someone get into their 23andMe account, where that intruder downloaded the account owner's relatives list which included my information.

When I chose to share my data with 1500 strangers I was pretty much conceding that I didn't really care who got it.

You don't understand the logic of "there are some crime problems we're willing to accept more intrusions to solve than other crime problems?"

Seems like something virtually everyone believes, and all that changes is where they draw the line of balance between intrusion and safety.

Google and trust are an oxymoron

Every one of these "How AT proto works" explainers focuses on data ownership—which is where ATProto shines—and glosses over data processing, where ATProto is decidedly weaker than ActivityPub. ATProto is built on a global, public view of the world, where all events are visible to a trusted global "AppServer" that can make all of the decisions for you—how to create your feed, who can see who's posts, etc—all of those decisions have to be made by a trusted intermediary. ActivityPub is more like RSS or email—your local server only has to manage the feeds you subscribe to, and your inbox is directly built from all of the posts you have access to. People you subscribe to send you your posts, and you don't have to process them at all.

This is why Bluesky could never have "private likes" in the same way Twitter or ActivityPub does—every AppView needs to track the like counts of every post in the network manually. It's a huge hassle! I just don't see this architecture winning out in the long term, when compared to the AP feed-subscription architecture.

    primarily because multiple programs can access the same identity

Actually, this was how AP was originally designed as well—it was just that the most popular early implementations took shortcuts to remove that functionality to fit them into their existing architecture. This is a direct consequence of the fact that the biggest AP implementations when it was initially adopted were descendants of older OStatus social networks, and not built to be "ActivityPub-native" from the ground up.

Well, then show the evidence.

If this is a shareholder action, of a publicly-traded company, then (IIUC) shouldn't that be publicly-available information somewhere?

The problem with your strategy is that the items you listed have very little upside; yes, the prices won't collapse, but they also wont go up a ton. Their prices have reached somewhat of an equilibrium.

A lot of collectors are trying to find something they can buy for cheap and then sell when it goes up in price by a lot. If you want that, you have to pick something that hasn't had its price hit an equilibrium yet. You need to take a risk on something new.

I don't buy that eating McDonalds or ice cream or pop even regularly is inherently bad for you. People don't call a loaf of bread junk food, but is mostly just starches and sugars. A McDonalds burger may have a lot of fat and calories, but it still has beef in it which has lots of nutrients. Pop may be mostly just calories from sugar, but nobody is drinking pop as their only source of food and if your other foods are nutrient dense, I don't see much of a difference.

That is fair. I suppose what I meant is, the idea of working at one of these companies can be really exciting, almost a fantasy, but in practice: it might actually hurt you in many ways. 'Look what they make you give', as a certain character once said. With that said, obviously I think it's cool and worth doing, but there are significant and painful downsides, too.