Encrypted DNS doesn't solve everything. Handshake for TLS sessions is still in clear, you can usually see the SNI, and since we are talking about Wireless, usually this data is available to anybody who is in the vicinity, not just the network owner. This already means that you can see what sites someone is visiting, more or less. TLS 1.3 can mitigate some of this (for those who implement ESNI, but you don't know that beforehand). Also TLS works until the user is not accepting invalid certificates prompts (HSTS doesn't work for everything) and there are still tons of HTTP-based redirect (check mailing newsletters and see how many first send you to an HTTP site, for example) that can be used for MiTM attacks.

A VPN moves the trust to a single provider that you can choose, which is much better than trusting every single WiFi network you can attach to and the people connected to it, I would say.

Also if you pay for the VPN (I pay Proton), it's not true that the company business is based on user data, they are based on subscriptions.

What's wrong with "I'd rather die than be disabled"? To me it looks a legitimate personal moral stance.

You can use your own GPG key (https://proton.me/support/importing-openpgp-private-key or using the bridge), whatever tool does the signing needs the key (duh) so I am not sure what you mean by "they store your private key" (they stored it encrypted as per documentation https://proton.me/support/how-is-the-private-key-stored), their AI was specifically designed as local, exactly to be privacy friendly, plus is a feature that can be disabled (when it will reach general subscriptions).

I don't care about cyptocurrencies, but I suppose they started with the most popular, nothing to do with privacy as they just let you store your currencies.

Anyway, use what you like the most, of course, but yours don't look very solid motivations, quite a lot of incorrect information, I hope you didn't take your decision based on it.

For those who are even more curious, Carlo Verdone (who was a friend of Leone) made some documentaries called "Verdone racconta Leone" (see for example this yt video). These documentaries are packed with anecdotes (Verdone told lots of stories in other occasions too!) and fun stories.

One of my favorite is how Leone convinced Clint Eastwood to use the cigar, which is probably now an unforgettable part of the way we remember Eastwood's character.

Surrendering is part of the rules, why are you blowing on hate, exactly?

Technically wouldn't being a democracy be an aggravating factor for Israel wrongdoings, which makes the population more responsible compared to Russian or Belarussian one (therefore including athletes)?

I don't really agree with the rationale, although I personally wouldn't have supported a ban on Israelis athletes (similarly to how I generally don't agree with the same ban on Russian athletes - unless you are specifically a supporter of values that go against the Olympics such as genocide...- e.g., I agree with Karjakin being banned from any chess competition).

The picture is from a completely different event, so unfortunately the two things are completely unrelated.

Possibly she would have reacted similarly, who knows...

There are almost 30 different countries in Europe. They also have quite different cultures and policies around immigration (for example).

Who are you talking about, specifically?

It is not obvious, most likely not necessary and in any case completely unproven. Why are you so busy making stuff up in this thread?

It does require fact-checking. You might ask a human and get someone with 10 fingers on one hand, you might ask people in the background and get blobs merged on each other. The fact check in images is absolutely necessary and consists of verifying that the generate image adheres to your prompt and that the objects in it match their intended real counterparts.

I do agree that it's a different type of fact checking, but that's because an image is not inherently correct or wrong, it only is if compared to your prompt and (where applicable) to reality.

You cited a couple of mid-2000 projects (e.g. OpenCL), that Apple opensourced and that anyway hardly apply to the current Apple, since 15+ years passed and the company is under new leadership etc. Then you listed a bunch of links, which I have looked at, and I saw that the vast majority of the OSS projects are related to Swift-ui and other tools that are useful to build app (mostly) in their ecosystem (webKit, careKit, etc.).

So to understand better, your argument fully relies on contributions that happened 15 years ago, to claim that the current company "cares" about FOSS?

Also, you disregard the second part of the argument in order to write your arrogant reply:

Apple is even worse than them considering how they want to have the complete monopoly of what can run on their hardware, which is completely antithetical to the core idea of FOSS.

Which is an answer to your statement:

So? Why should they? It’s a major competitor. Should they provide windows support too? Lol. (They don’t anymore, btw)

Which begs the question: what caring about FOSS means to you? For me caring about FOSS means caring about the freedom of the customers who already paid for their hardware to run whatever they want on it. This freedom Apple opposes in whatever way they can, in basically whatever hardware they make.

How do you imagine a recovery email to work, if the provider doesn't store it, and you lost access to your email by definition in the moment you need it? Recovery email is not needed, you can totally use your account without and proton doesn't ask for it. It's a feature where you obviously are disclosing that piece of information and link two accounts. It's either that or not using that feature.