Aceticon

Being an EU member comes with both Rights and Obligations and the objective was to have the former without the latter.

In fact the Referendum was done because the UK wanted to not to have to obbey the Freedom Of Movement rules for EU citizens entering its country (i.e. the Obligation) whilst keeping it for its citizens entering other EU countries (i.e. the Right) and was using the threat of holding a Leave Referendum to try and blackmail the rest of the EU, and the rest of the EU said "No!"

(This was actually just the later of a long series of instances of the British Government using that technique to get from the rest of the EU "exceptions" from the EU treaties, which went all the way back to Thatcher's time and was how Britain had so many exceptions that nobody else had).

The British Exceptionalism part is that many Britons genuinelly expected they would get that (and also similarly for a lot of other Rights and Obligations, such as being able to import bleached chicken from the US at the same time as having open and uncontrolled access to the Free Market were such food products are forbidden) from the EU as part of the Leave Negotiations.

Gzip encoding has been part of the HTTP protocol for a long time and every server-side HTTP library out there supports it, and phishing/scrapper bots will be done with server-side libraries, not using browser engines.

~~Further, judging by the guy's example in his article he's not using gzip with maximum compression when generating the zip bomb files: he needs to add -9 to the gzip command line to get the best compression (but it will be slower).~~ (I tested this and it made no difference at all).

American Exceptionalism!

I saw a similar thing in Britain during the Leave Campaign - lots of arguments of the "when we're out the EU will give us most of the rights members have, but without the obligations" kind, anchored only on British Exceptionalism, and enough people fell for it that Leave won.

Nationalist Delusions Of Grandeur is on hell of a drug.

Picture this:

• Several people are telling you a story, and they're all slightly different versions of supposedly the same story.
• You can't actually interrogate any of them or even talk to them, you can only listen to whatever story they chose to tell you.
• You can either chose one story or no story at all. You cannot chose more than one story.
• Each of them would gain something if you chose their story.
• You don't really know any of them personally, hence have no predisposition for trusting the story of one over that of the others or even know for sure that at least on of the stories is the true (i.e. they could all be lying to you).

This is the position of a non-aligned voter in present day politics.

In such a situation, people will either just go "I chose no story" (i.e. "all politicians are liars") or try and figure out who is the most trustworthy of those telling the stories, via indirect things (remember, people can't even directly speak with, much less interrogate the story tellers), so they will try and gauge a storyteller's trustworthiness based on how they talk, their posture and expression, the format of their storytelling, things they know about them outside the storytelling and so on and as part of that they will for example be less likely to trust those who look like or sound like previous story tellers who later turned out to be deceitful or even lying (and the more in the past they've been exposed to a certain type of story teller that turned out to be deceitfull, the least likely they will be to believe that story telling style).

It's this dynamic in choosing who to trust that modern populists like Trump are exploiting.

Curiously at other points in Time, after a period when the populists were in power fucking things up, the same dynamic worked to help the serious sounding highly educated style of storytelling gain power from the populists - at a high level and over longer periods (decades), the process is actually an oscillating system.

Just before her campaign started she got paid a million dollars (or maybe it was only half a million, not sure anymore) for going to give a speech to a handful of Goldman Sachs' Traders.

Nothing quite says "bought and paid for by fatcats" like getting paid that much money for a few hours of work by the Vampire Squid of Finance.

In an insanely propagandistic Media environment (both sides: notice the New Tork Times coverage of the Gaza Genocide) you're going to get lots of people who aren't above average educated types with high political awareness trying to gut feel their way into "who are the ones who lie the least" by going for the kind of discourse that sounds the least like the style of propaganda of the last couple of decades, and right now the "not the usual liar politician sounding" was the "populist strongman" because the trafitional media's propaganda has been slick highly-educated technocrat style for years.

Further you can't really start from your own "predisposed to believe that Democrats are truthful in what they say" point of view when trying to understand people who are not aligned with either "tribe" and for whom neither side is assumed honest so they're trying to figure out which one is less dishonest (or just think "they're all liars" and won't vote).

(I see the exact same issue with the members of the small leftwing party I'm a member of in my own country - they simply don't get it that most people don't just presume like them that the words of the party leaders are honest and those of other party leaders are dishonest)

I think the point the OP was making was that the Democrat leadership didn't even try to sound more believable to sway such people - they just kept on saying the usual things in the very same style as the propaganda of the last 2 decades thus sounding the same, whilst the Republican changed their discourse style so even though they lied even more than before, they sounded "not the usual lies" for some of the people trying to "gut feel" their way around politics coming from a non-aligned standpoint.

The nicest possible interpretation is that the Democrat leadership are guilty of massive incompetence.

Unless the new Treaty properly covers Services and hence includes Freedom Of Movement (which is required for suppliers in one country to freely provide services which cannot be remotelly provided in other countries), not really.

One of the biggest arguments of the Brexiters was to be able to get rid of Freedom Of Movement so that they didn't have to accepts all immigrants from the EU (all of which with time ended up with the funny outcome that now Britain still gets as many immigrants coming in as they did when part of the EU, only now they're almost all non-white something which the Brexiters - who are almost invariably racist - find even more distasteful).

I very much doubt that the current, New Labour, government who are maybe the most rightwing Labour government ever and have even been blowing a couple of far-right anti-immigration dog-whistles will be accepting the return of Freedom Of Movement.

Something around there being a new toilet in the country but with the music from The Sound Of Music?

Under the table were the fatcats are sharing slices of the cake, squirrel the little mice living of the crumbs that fall down, and once in a while one of the mice catches a bigger crumb, proudly raises it above its head and shouts: "See, the System works!"

Not the basic living income part, at least not anymore.

There is Social Security but it's generally pretty miserable and nowadays not even enough to pay for rent (thanks to insane housing inflation all over the place) plus most supposedly developed countries haven't been building much social housing in the last couple of decades (which is partly why the house price inflation is insane - less state built housing means less Supply but the Demand for new living places is still roughly the same).

Neoliberalism has been exported from the US to even the most Developed nations out there and that's definitelly screwed up the Social Safety net (also Healthcare, even in countries without a national health service, as well as in some cases the quality of Education).

Also even when things were at their best, there was always this coverage gap for the lower end of the working class: the poor were the ones helped by the social safety net and above a certain income point which was in the area of blue collar work, people could live a pretty decent life from working, but there was a segment of the working class with people having to work shit jobs, juggling multiple jobs and so one just to make ends meet and were the help from social security wasn't enough.

Even in the best countries this gap has been made much worse by decades of Neoliberalism, both by shrinking even further down the social safety net coverage (to just the trully miserable) and because on the upside income growth didn't keep up with price growth so even parts of the middle class now have to work shit jobs and count their pennies to the end of the month.

In Lutris there's a "Command prefix" configuration option both per-game and one in the global config with the default for all games, which is where the firejail command line goes (basically for sandboxing with firejail you're supposed to run "firejail firejail-options original-command original-options" and putting firejail and its options in "command prefix" does that).

Note that there are other sandboxing options that run in the same way as firejail but I found firejail to have more straightforward options.

Also note that this won't sandbox the actual setup of a game, only the running of the game.

Yeah, that's exactly what they've been doing - I have a windup radio and some electric network expert was explaining it.

Power has been back up were I live since about an hour ago but before I was listening on the radio as they kept announcing places coming back up during the afternoon and evening.