“The suit also alleges that Al-Ahmed's Arabic-language Twitter account was suspended in 2018 and has not been reinstated despite multiple attempts at appeal, and accuses the company of keeping Al-Ahmed's account offline because of its interest in maintaining users in Saudi Arabia. "While Twitter may wish to play the victim of state-sponsored espionage, Twitter's conduct in punishing the victims of this intrigue, including Mr. Al-Ahmed, tells a far different story: one of ratification, complicity, and/or adoption tailored to appease a neigh beneficial owner and preserve access to a key market, the KSA," Randy Kleinman, the attorney for Al-Ahmed, wrote in the complaint.“
* do some companies have good enough insider risk controls to make it expensive or risky to access particular kinds of sensitive data?
* not all nation state actors are equally well-resourced (and not all of them have equally large populations of computer science grads from which to recruit potential spies): is there a difference between what (say) KSA or Iran could get, vs US/UK/China/Russia?
If you can't get to data handlers then you can go after developers and the software supply chain. You have to understand, people can cooperate with threat actors without implicating themselves by getting paid or coerced to allow an intrustion (fall for a phish link or email, install seemingly legit software, insert a USB drivr they found in the parking lot,etc..). Worst case they get fired.
Your phone number is the same as your home address, because it is linked to same in a million databases.
Should a tech company silo its data and operations so each country has its own independent unit? No, too infeasible and defeats the purpose for a lot of their services.
It is always a mistake to use nationality as a proxy for trustworthiness.
Being a US person, personally I'm much more concerned with the negative impacts of US spies spying in the US than foreign spies spying in the US.
Foreign governments don't regularly go around mass murdering and torturing Americans the way the US government does.
Americans have a lot more to lose from CIA spying than they do from Saudi intelligence agency spying.
ok, just kidding, now serious take:
US population: 330kk
Rest of the World: 8kkk
Delta (8kkk-330kk)
Even if we assume that distribution of highly skilled people is not uniform (lack of decent higher edu places, harder access to computers/internet)
then you still lose shitton of outliers
edit.
ops I misread.
afaik it's pretty common within gaming communities
e.g
1k - 1 000 (of gold)
1kk - 1 000 000 (of gold)
1kkk - 1 000 000 000 (of gold)
>I can't say I would recommend the practice.
Oh, I just realized that somebody may think about other kkk...
damn, but with number in front of it it's just like yet another unit - I guess?
Why not use use m for million and b for billion? That’s the standard that everyone understands.
The repeating k scale is better than m, b, t, etc because it still preserves a sense of scale. 2m does not look 1/1000000th the size of 2t. 2kk does look a lot smaller than 2kkkk. You can also still easily convert to real number by substituting each k with 3 0s.
And lastly, I don't know the letters going all the way up to 10^47th. That's nearly enough to wrap the alphabet twice, and it's not even that high for that style of game.
The scale is fine, it's just the letter that's unfortunate. M is the Roman Numeral for 1,000; they could just use that. The worst thing I can associate with any number of M's is someone enjoying their food entirely too much once you hit like 7 of them.
>The Year 2000 problem, also known as the Y2K problem, Millennium bug, Y2K bug, Y2K glitch or Y2K error,
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_2000_problem
https://ell.stackexchange.com/questions/39370/what-does-k-me...
We really should use more of SI units like Mg and Gg... Even Tg...
Ah okay.
> Oh, I just realized that somebody may think about other kkk...
Well more just because (I thought) it is unusual it'd be hard to understand in a context where you hadn't made it obvious. Maybe I'm just out of touch!
Twitter’s CEO is on the record being cozy with deep pocketed Saudi investors in Twitter. It was certainly not the fear of discrimination lawsuits that permitted Saudi agents gaining access to Twitter’s systems.