Its good to be dubious. Its also good to include them to get a different bias into the mix. Only consuming media of the same bias will leave you ignorant without you knowing it, thats the believe I've come to adopt.

And you only realize which part of the bias is shared across a lot of media when you read media from outside the bubble. And a lot are within the bubble. To quote wikipedia:

progressively fewer individuals or organizations control increasing shares of the mass media.

There is enough reason to be dubious about all mass media. BBC is founded and owned by the UK government and many other publications by a billionaire family.

Previously I had thought media literacy was about chosing "reliable" sources but nowadays I believe its more about reading many of different biases and being dubious of all until their bias emerges.

IDK if that resonates with you at all or not. But I can also recommend Noam Chomskys "Manufacturing Consent", its a classic ofc.

Children for the rich / eugenics for the poor.

Inhumane and monstrous.

But at least capitalism would finally implode after the rich realize without exploitation of the workers they got rid of the backbone of their society

Tankiehaft russlandnah

Schwierig zu sagen da beides Kampfbegriffe sind, man müsste es definieren

Ich persönlich würde sie so oder so wählen (wenn ich könnte) sie sind glaubwürdiger als so ziemlich alle anderen Politiker (beispielsweise limitieren die Abgeordneten ihre Bezüge freiwillig am durchschnittsgehalt eines facharbeiters) und treten für eine vertretbare politik ein.

Its impossible though to get rid of paid actors that mingle to spread ads or agendas and who are indiscernable from normal users.

As soon as the reach is there I assume capital interests will be flocking in

They DO seem obsessed with hating ML and ridiculing the idea anyone could be CIA

Hmm...

Lol standard halfwit take:

Adopting the "tankie" slur for everyone without substance and obviously no knowledge of what they are talking about - check

Being embedded in propaganda and blaming others who point it out - check

"You're not including facts" - lol for what? Am I responding to a factual argument? Am I demanding facts from you?

But sure have some facts:

Guardian from 2011 - Revealed: US spy operation that manipulates social media

Intercept from 2014 - HACKING ONLINE POLLS AND OTHER WAYS BRITISH SPIES SEEK TO CONTROL THE INTERNET

Believe me it has only gotten worse in the >10 years since

Twitter files revealed pentagon bots were whitelisted as well

If you miss your propaganda friends that hard reddit is still there for you

Edit: I realize your missing punctuation threw me off, I read: "(aka anything, they don't like including facts)" ...doesn't change much though

I legitimately don't understand why Leninists are so keen on making folk heroes out of tyrants.

What a sentence! You're jumping to conclusions all over the place!

You're conflating information with a desire to "make folk heroes out of tyrants", trying to denormalise a desire to understand what was actually happening.

There was bloodshed but not on the Tienanmen square and the conditions are less clear than you believe

It is obvious that most peoples idea of what happened is heavily influenced by propaganda, I know mine was.

If you could stop sabotaging efforts to cut through the disinformation that would be great thanks

Also: "They are tyrants" thanks I'll defer judgement as long as the evidence you present us with turns out to be propaganda, there are other "tyrannical governments" much more in reach

Tough to defend position if you only consider systems intact today (and thereby filtering out nazi-Germany for example)!

The US only has made a science out of propaganda (see Walter Lippman & Edward Bernays) and the capital to pay for it all over the word (NED/bellingcat/victims of communism foundation/radio free liberty|europe|iraq|asia/"congress for cultural freedom" and other direct CIA derivatives)

Its whole shtick is to manufacture narratives to paint your opponent so bad that you appear without alternative. Be it domestically (presidential elections) or abroad (country x is ruled by the next hitler)

I am not gonna attempt to compile a list, bc i would want have to add sources and I am tired to loom that up. But start with Operation Condor since OP kindly mentioned that, but the rabbit hole goes deep

Lol that killed me.

The Make-a-wish foundation visits a sick child and gift it dead parents, realizing their mistake they proceed to kill the child after one day of anguish, respectfully shake hands and congratulate each other for another job well done.

This war could not be more clear in who is the aggressor

Ofc it could be clearer. For example: The US invasion of Iraq was a an actually unprovoked invasion

You're just late at learning about a border conflict at a time of horrible escalation and don't have anything but imperialist propagandaof a meddling party to draw conclusions from.

And no I don't have the emotional energy to spare to discuss it here I just want to signal much needed dissent to people stumbling over this thread

I mean "because password hashes" is basically my original rational so not sure it qualifies as a counter argument.

But the link you provide is more explicit:

When the user enters the new password, the system generates the variations of the new password entered, hashes each one of them, and compares each hash against the old password's hash. If any of the hash matches, it throws an error. Else, it successfully changes the password

It is possible to hash all 1 character variations I guess, I kinda doubt that it is done often (does anyone know a library?).

I guess complexity increases linearly so password length is might not severely limit this mechanism. It would be interesting to see a calculation of how long it takes for a long password can to calculate all possibilities for 1 char variations for utf-8 or other charsets

Thanks for sharing the link!

So a syntax highlighted comment