Readit Newsdavethedevguy commented on US Ends Support For Ukrainian F-16s ukrainetoday.org/us-ends-... · Posted by u/ctack
This seems like a huge own goal for the US.
Who will want to buy American military technology, when the ability to employ it is at the whim of whoever wins the next election?
Especially as it's clear now than any alliance with the US is fragile at best, and could end overnight depending on which side of the bed Trump wakes up on.
davethedevguy commented on I Went to SQL Injection Court sockpuppet.org/blog/2025/... · Posted by u/mrkurt
I FOIA'ed >1M pages of docs for my project cleartap.com, a DB of water quality of the USA.
Most states would charge a small amount to gather the documents.
Michigan wanted $50K to for the FOIA request. I think because of the Flint lead crisis. They wanted me to go away.
I noticed that you do have data for Flint. Did you have to pay it, or is there some appeals process if you're quoted an unreasonable amount?
Great project by the way!
I actually submitted this two days ago, as you can see here:
https://news.ycombinator.com/submitted?id=aestetix
I wonder why it's showing "2 hours ago" and it's now showing up.
Could be the second chance pool
How do you live in a house without knowing what a hole saw is?
At some point, everybody had to learn what a hole saw is for the first time.
Not to be cynical, but if anyone has looked at anything revealed about security agencies in the last few years it's very clear what's happening here - whenever US wants to do something unpopular/straight up illegal, it just asks the UK(or any other partner country) to do it instead. American government can't ask Apple for data on any American citizen, but if UK obtains that data and then it happens to be shared between agencies......that's all fine. It's been happening already for years.
UK governments have been pushing for this for years, usually invoking some recent terrorist event as justification.
I'm not suggesting you're wrong, but I don't think this is _just_ the UK being a US puppet, there is very much an appetite for it in the UK parliament too.
Mate, the "take all steps necessary to root out paedophiles" referendum would be won with 95% of the vote. It's all in the framing, you know that.
> It's all in the framing
Yeah, that's the root of the problem, I think.
It's easy to sell people that "we just need this one more bit of access to your private data, it helps us stops paedophiles and terrorists", but each step takes us further down a bad path.
I'm sure everybody would agree that having full camera surveillance inside every UK home is too far, but no oversight at all is also bad.
There is a point along that line where society would say "no, that's enough", but successive governments have realised that they can slowly push that point further right and nobody seems to notice, or care.
I think this is an unquestionable overreach on the UK's part. If you live in any country that isn't the UK, you should feel the threat from this: the UK government believes that it is entitled to a backdoor on your hardware, even if you've never stepped a foot on UK soil or intend to. Mass surveillance is a threat to everyone, but this is not an instance of that, which has guards against it, like encryption. This is the UK asking for an encryption backdoor to everything, including for phones that never traverse its soil or internet boundaries, or even cross anywhere near FVEY collection devices.
This is a dramatic overreach of authority.
I'm from the UK, and I completely agree.
The general public either don't know about growing mass surveillance and privacy invasions, or don't care. "Terrorism and child abuse = bad, and if this prevents it and I have nothing to hide then why would it be a problem for me?"
Where's the coworker who interrupts your flow every 10 minutes?
Presumably this would be Jane, who felt the need to comment on the OAuth ticket:
> Make sure to follow the security best practices
Thanks Jane! Appreciate the input, don't you have your own work to do?
Their X profile proudly displays "UK-based" while conveniently ignoring basic UK business regulations: no company information, no proper invoicing, no VAT details for B2B sales, and mysteriously missing business address requirements.
Looks suspiciously like someone running an under-the-table operation, courting legal trouble not just from the original designers they're "inspired by," but from Her Majesty's Revenue & Customs who tend to take a rather dim view of tax avoidance.
Not being VAT registered when starting out is not necessarily a sign of a tax dodge.