tety

Digital wallets as in Apple/Google Pay? I had a similar thing happen and I am wondering what did you make of this double charge, what did the attackers do in your opinion?

Google has strict licensing for what you can do with such data (almost nothing) and you have to go through an extreme vetting process

However, this won't generate the same headline because any company can go through it, and it isn't some API sold for some special privileged company. Also the user knows it is sharing their mails (not sure if that's the case with facebook)

In order to write something that reads user emails in Google APIs you have to go through multiple levels of hell, so I don't think that's a fair comparison

The UX, latency and API design consistency were absolutely terrible when I was forced to use Azure

That is not true in my experience, Windows API is superbly documented and C# docs are of far higher quality than Java's

Can you share some of the tools and methods you used to reverse such a large C++ codebase into readable code?

Probably more about Safari than Maps

If they limit the market they disincentivize google and mozilla from investing in native iOS versions of their browsers

These are official IDF accounts, the photos are said by the IDF to be found on the journalist laptop and have backing articles published by journalist who received the same information from the IDF.

Psychological warfare campaigns are usually done under false flag, so I doubt this is the case

Look at the images and judge for yourself

These are photos published by the IDF, not random users on X

even if you don’t trust the IDF, you could easily verify if those are the photos of the same journalist by looking at them.

Airstrikes also happen in the context of attacking an entire building or called during a firefight

I am not saying journalists weren’t targeted when they were involved in the fighting or part of Hamas.

I am saying whether you have evidence that journalists were targeted for being journalists like you are implying, and that is evidence i don’t think you have

The fact that journalists in war zones died doesn't mean these were "targeted exclusively" is there any evidence that Israel has targeted journalists intentionally that weren't involved in the fighting?

https://twitter.com/AvichayAdraee/status/1756728159158812921 This tweet has many photos of the above journalist participating and commanding a Hamas exercise, I think these are pretty incriminating.

https://twitter.com/idfonline/status/1745158775567175764 This tweet contains an Islamic Jihad document listing another journalist as a member

So you claim they also made up all the photos of that journalist training on an ATGM? https://twitter.com/AvichayAdraee/status/1756728159158812921

Another thing worth noting, some of the casualties mentioned in this site is of Palestinians journalists dying on October 7 and the following days, which only show how problematic their claims are.

As the airstrikes didn't start yet in Gaza, these obviously died inside Israeli territory after they crossed a border, so they can film a massacre among other horrifying acts inflicted upon civilians such as rapes and mutilations.

I don't think these are the same journalists that people think about when they imagine journalists, but rather the same kind of 'journalists' that filmed the isis decapitation videos

When I was a kid, I heard that the sun is going to eventually explode, destroying planet Earth and us all. This was deeply saddening for me on a deep level, I remember crying and all. My parents tried explaining this will take 5 billion years, and we will all be long dead anyway but this wasn't really helping. Prior to that I had a major shock when I learned about death, and this was kind of a relapse.

Looking at it now, I think doomerism, preppers, apocalyptic religions and the guy that stands on the street shouting "it's the end of the world" are all a basic part of the human experience. It's not a coincidence every cult eventually reaches the narrative of the impending end of the world.

Death is suppressed and finds other avenues to pop out in

A rebel organization is not the yemen government, that’s exactly the reason they are successful at being a proxy. all the benefits of being a state without any responsibility for your actions.

About the common western trope of “you should never fight terror because it will only bring more terror” that’s false. There is no way the palestinian population would be more radicalized, they are at the end of the spectrum. It wasn’t like there was any type of atrocity known to man on October 7 that was stopped short due to being too extreme.

Also, israel had shown that when fighting palestinians organizations in the second intifada 2001-2004, it succeeded in greatly reducing the amount of terror and achieve deradicalization

the fact there isn’t a better source does not make the only source reliable.

This is going to be a major issue when the actual court case will have to rely upon it.

the numbers will always be ‘too high’ as they are the number of civilian deaths in a war.

However, if they are much lower relative to similar conflicts than that changes a lot. Currently we have no way of knowing that, yet still people attribute these numbers some magical properties

it is accepted by the UN because there is no other figure. they have no other way of estimating, also the UN is far from a neutral element in this conflict

The UN is a political body composed of the political interests of its members, which are mostly authoritarian states, and it hasn’t shown much support for Israel due to the vast membership of Islamic countries. Parody case in point, Iran being Human Rights commission seat

UNRWA, the UN agency on the ground was shown again and again to be in the very least in the mercy of Hamas therefore cooperative, at most its infrastructure and staff was used by the organizations for attacks against Israel and to hold hostages.

The ICJ in this case heavily quoted UNRWA as a source while it is an extremely problematic one.

The hospital bombing I quoted above is an example case where many experts tried to estimate casualties based on evidence, they arrived to figures that range from tenth to fifth of what Hamas published.

This together with the fact they control the casualty figure and have a clear interest at inflating it in order to stop Israel from attacking, is pretty obvious to me what’s going on.

Leaving the fact that this figure also includes Hamas members, and therefore is useless at estimating if there is excessive collateral damage

kinda different comparing a state with an organization that was caught lying about death statistics numerous times in the past [1] and including in this war (such as the ali ahli hospital incident).

it should raise some questions how the casualty count went to 500 in a few hours, where everywhere else in the world it takes days to get a body count after any disaster

It is beyond me how someone can believe that an organization capable of kidnapping babies to advance its political goals is beyond lying to do the same

[1] https://www.haaretz.com/2010-11-09/ty-article/hamas-admits-6...

They cannot uphold article 1 on their own account, without international support and they're not a signatory.

You need to show that the intent of Israel is to destroy the Palestinian people in Gaza, even partially. What I see is the attempt of Israel to prevent more October 7 attacks, which Hamas declared it is going to repeat. The actual goal here is to protect Israel's own citizens from genocide, which Hamas has shown willingness to commit and ability (albeit in a smaller scale currently).

I think it is perfectly valid for a country to protect its own citizen from being burned alive among many other atrocities that were committed, which is also one of the reasons the genocide convention was created in the first place.

As this is war, it's also causing immense suffering in the Palestinian side. Which is why a war to remove Hamas from power was constantly deferred in the past, knowing they are highly entrenched in the civilian population. However, I don't think they left Israel any other way this time.

you’d might want to google the amount of civilian casualties in the yemen civil war, its proportion to deaths in the Gaza war and houthis involvement in said civilian deaths.

You might be surprised how preoccupied they are with ‘preventing’ civilian death

there are a lot of things here yet i didn’t see how this aligns with the definition of genocide

but care to explain what is the meaning of the dates? what do you refer to in 1916/1917 and 40s?

I think it is completely within Israel's ability to dismantle most of Hamas fighting force, and then manage the Gaza Strip similarly to the West Bank. Failing to do so might bring about the scenarios you are talking about, which is the tragedy of those that scream genocide too prematurely. As done in all previous wars with Hamas, the international crowd has called what was happening genocide although it clearly wasn't, thereby pressuring Israel to stop, enabling worse and worse wars in the future and more civilian deaths.

I completely agree though that a lack of a two state solution will lead to catastrophe for either people or both eventually. However, I do not share your pessimism about US/Israel regional prospects. Remember that this is mainly due to self-inflicted restraints, which is how asymmetric warfare really works. As seen in September 11 in the US and October 7 in Israel this can change rapidly when faced with an external threat

About your regard of the oct 7 as a military operation with some war crimes thrown in, it was a military operation concentrated almost completely on civilian centers, so the war crimes aspect was pretty central. I do not doubt they would continue if not stopped, but maybe you think otherwise.

Is that a universal thing that what politicians say is being taken in such a high regard? Especially the many Israeli ministers of nothing that have no actual ability to affect the situation. Judging by how the war is going on, I don't see any scenario where the Palestinian population disappears from Gaza, and I don't see any Israeli action that is advancing that.

However, you are right that due to the sheer cruelty of Oct 7 there is a major process of radicalization in Israeli society, and if Hamas dreams of recreating this attack 'again and again' materialize, I do think the Israeli side will begin to level its moral base to that of its enemy, which might end in actual genocide. Which is why I believe removing this organization is in the best interest of both people, even though it is causing much suffering currently, it is not impossible it can turn very much worse yet.

I am not sure that's the definition of genocide. The only clear instance of genocide in this war is the October 7 attacks. I'll remind you it included attacking all population centers in a specific geographic area, going house to house and killing whoever was inside, as well as burning the houses in order to prevent the population from returning.

You could argue Israel evacuating the northern of Gaza strip is ethnic cleansing, but that would only be valid if they are not allowed later on to return.

The difference between Palestinians civilian deaths in Gaza is that these were not systematic, not concentrated in a single space (for example all houses in a location) and were done mostly for a military purpose (attacking a defacto non-uniformed military). Choosing to evacuate the population before attacking was done to minimize casualties, although they are still massive even when removing the Hamas members from the statistics and their inflated nature.

There's a moral difference and an international law difference between attacking valid military targets and killing civilians in the process and when your stated goal is attacking uninvolved civilian targets (international shipping passing by). Also, GP saying 'bullying' seemed to me detached from the facts of what was going on.

About being white, as far as I know I am not considered white both in the 19th century scientific racism sense and even in its modern extension of dividing the American population by the extension of that original theory.

But if I am considered white, do you think it undermines my arguments?

It doesn't mean each one is morally culpable, but it does really hurt the narrative of 'hamas kidnapped the population'.

I think Gaza is going through an enormous tragedy, but Israel did undertake efforts to reduce civilian casualties (such as evacuation), although much less so than previous conflicts. Having said that, war is still terrible and having to fight in such a population dense area with an enemy who is embedded into the population has a huge toll.

About the dehumanizing approach, I agree. I think one of the results of the October 7 attacks is that it heightened that sentiment in the Israeli population, especially among most of the population who did not feel that way previously about the Palestinians. This is due to some of their actions which are frankly inhumane: decapitation, genital mutilation, baby kidnapping, child rape, live burning, and focus on civilian areas

Care to explain how preventing an organization from attacking civilian ships is bullying?

It's tragic, but there was and is wide support of October 7 attacks in Gaza, as well there was wide participation of the civilian (non-organization aligned) population in the massacres, including looting, killing, kidnapping and probably rape.

Furthermore, Hamas was elected by the population under popular vote, and it is a palestinian organization entrenched in every facet of civilian organizations and life, and strongly stems from palestinian cultural norms (e.g. islamism, martyrdom, etc)

You cannot completely act as if Hamas is not the defacto government in Gaza, and in any war in history, especially urban warfare in civilian setting with non-uniformed combatants, you cannot truly hurt only the military apparatus without also hurting civilians. This is simply a fact of life.

It is a Western trope going as far back as the Nazis to act as if governments have no representation of their citzenship, especially authocratic ones. Even to this day for example, the German government of 1933-1945 are called 'the nazis' rather than germans, as if they came from outer space, and returned to their planet on 1945, leaving none of their members in the Western/Eastern Germany governments.

They keep proxy organizations in every failed or quasi state in the region such as Palestine, Lebanon, Iraq, Syria and Yemen.

As these are non-state actors using civilian infrastructure, the international legal order cannot handle these, as they are not party to any law. Therefore when a western aligned country needs to fight these they are in an extreme disadvantage. Any real attack will kill the civilians whose infrastructure said organizations are providing and misusing, eventually pressured to stop retaliating. This was used by Iran in Saudis/UAE vs Houthis, Israel vs Lebanon/Hamas or US vs Iraq.

The approach of having a full fledged state yet declaring it is not a state gave them invisibility, allowing these organizations to grow in strength. Due to their extreme ideology and brinkmanship, ironically this still means someone will need to fight these eventually (see Hamas, Hezbollah, Houthis), but in a much greater civilian loss than when was possible previously.

Later on, Iran improved this strategy by creating an alliance of these organizations. They train each other and have planned to fight together in the case of war (partially successful in the last conflict). Currently, they are on the verge of losing two such proxies (Hamas, PIJ) and are in the risk of another one (Hezbollah), and that's why Iran is trying to exert pressure on western countries through attacking civilian shipping.