It's not weird that this article, which translates the technical firefighting and structural aspects of the fire for laypeople, does not mention a xenophobic conspiracy theory that has been rejected by the French authorities.
That rejection would be more credible if it came with an alternate explanation (none as of right now), or if it hadn't come while the building was literally still on fire.
Which part of the article I linked is xenophobic? Which part is a conspiracy theory? And finally, which part has been rejected by the French authorities?
It's in French and I don't have the energy to make a summary of it, but basically your original article is a mix of misreading and bad faith interpretations of an already biased original source.
> Everywhere, the email service will have to give your emails to the police when they come knocking
The Australian law is broader and contains fewer checks than anything comparable in the developed world. It lets law enforcement compel, with no oversight and in secret, any Australian "to re-engineer software and hardware under their control, so that it can be used to spy on their users" [1]. (Australia has no bill of rights [2].)
The American analog is an intelligence agency getting a national security letter [3] stamped by a FISA court [4]. The order can compel disclosure of information on hand, but cannot compel a product to be re-engineered [5].
> "The order can compel disclosure of information on hand, but cannot compel a product to be re-engineered."
OTOH this could be unnecessary at large American companies because the needs of national security services may have been engineered in. Thinking of Room 641A [1], etc.
That service was worse than anything else because it failed to provide the crucial "availability" property. And in the end he gave the keys to the government anyways. So he failed on every count.
Notice that lavabit reopened again in 2017, and is now even open for new customers. I will try it, but I'm a bit scared of the likelihood that it will be closed again. Changing your email address is no small hassle, and I am already pretty happy with my fastmail one.
I moved my addresses over to my own domain (lyndsysimon.com) many years ago, way back when I was still using gmail as my provider. I've since switched a couple of times, and have never had to change my address.
These days I use Protonmail. I like it for what it is, and it checks all of my "privacy" boxes, but the search functionality leaves much to be desired. I understand the technical limitations that constrain that, but I still wish there were more options.
If you are pretty happy with fastmail, why switch? They will only access your email with a court order (fine with me). If you don't want this, I'd try ProtonMail, they encrypt the email, i.e. are unable to provide email content in clear text. The price is that email handling is (much) more painful.
> If you are pretty happy with fastmail, why switch?
I do not really care about my personal case, here.
But I try to maintain a (some say exaggerated) consistency in "paying with my wallet" according to my principles. Since the Australian government provisions seem an unacceptable betrayal to its citizens, the only way that I can make some pressure in favor of them is by visibly boycotting Australian tech companies. If I were an Australian citizen concerned with the AABill I would certainly appreciate this gesture. My fastmail account is just a 80 EUR/year epsilon amount which will not affect the economy in the least. But it is symbolic gesture in the right direction.
I am still undecided on dropping my fastmail account. But if I do I'll try to make as much noise as possible regarding the reasons.
I don't know anything about this case but innocent people plead guilty all the time in the USA. It's a much safer choice than going to trial where the sentence may be much much longer.
In the beginning, when Gmail was only accessible by invitation, the killer feature was the relatively huge amount of free storage it offered. 1 gigabyte vs 20 or 100 megabytes at other providers.
The Powder Toy wouldn't simulate the vacuum required for it to work. It'd get closer than most other falling sand games if you turn on water equalisation though.
Unfortunately no. I experienced it when running software signed/hashed and it just would not run. The dev told me that this was well known and that I should not use the builtin zip. Sure enough, unzipping the file with 7zip worked like a charm.
I’ve found the same when downloading a proprietary lib that would not link with a C/Fortran application. The devs there tracked it down to the windows zip being used to pack the file, which they did not normally do.
So, just hearsay, but I’ve never even dreamed of bothering to file a bug report with microsoft. Is that even doable?
