tony101

"You don't need a Google Account to participate in Meet video meetings. However, if you don’t have a Google Account, the meeting organizer or someone from the organization must grant you access to the meeting."

https://support.google.com/meet/answer/9303069

Demonetize and demote these videos, without taking them down entirely. Make them accessible through search but do not recommend them to people who are not specifically looking for the videos.

> "The video platform said it would now ban any content with claims about COVID-19 vaccines that contradict consensus from local health authorities or the World Health Organization."

The local health authorities (in the US) and the WHO also told us in February and March that masks were useless for normal people. Even though people in Asian countries were broadly wearing masks based on prior experience from SARS. It turns out that the US public health authorities and the WHO were both wrong.

https://www.dol.gov/general/topic/discrimination/ethnicdisc#....

https://www.eeoc.gov/prohibited-employment-policiespractices

https://www.eeoc.gov/filing-charge-discrimination

Lawful permanent residency does not expire. Green cards (which are used as proof of LPR status) expire, but you can keep renewing the card without applying for citizenship.

https://www.uscis.gov/green-card/after-we-grant-your-green-c...

https://www.alllaw.com/articles/nolo/us-immigration/failed-r...

However, if you do not apply for citizenship once you are eligible, you lose certain legal protections against employment discrimination:

https://www.justice.gov/crt/8-usc-1324b-unfair-immigration-r...

You could check whether the email passed SPF, DKIM, and DMARC checks. Google has certainly implemented these for their SMTP servers. If all of the tests pass, you can be pretty certain that the sender is the owner of the address.

Someone can also decide to simply delete their tweet. Unless you were closely monitoring the account, you wouldn't know.

In the US, there are different state, county, and local taxes depending on your location. There is no way to memorize a single number and have it be correct everywhere.

I think separately listing taxes has the benefit of transparency - you know how much the government is taking and can make more informed electoral decisions.

Article about the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA) fails to mention BIPA's name even once.

No, people just get detained and disappeared in China, with families sent to labor camps if you're Uighur minority. That doesn't happen in the United States.

Does the United States have problems? Yes. Are those problems on the same level as China? No.

Interesting. In EPIC v. DHS, the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit ruled that the TSA body scanners were constitutional, partly because "any passenger may opt-out of AIT screening in favor of a pat-down, which allows him to decide which of the two options for detecting a concealed, nonmetallic weapon or explosive is least invasive."

It seems like anyone who is denied the right to opt out could have a good case against the TSA in court. This Forbes article says: "Contrary to TSA’s statement in its new policy, TSA may not legally direct mandatory AIT screening for any passengers. Not according to EPIC, and not according to TSA’s own lawyers. EPIC v. DHS requires as a condition of a finding of constitutionality of the TSA screening procedures the ability of passengers to opt for pat-downs in lieu of AIT screening."

https://www.forbes.com/sites/lisabrownlee/2015/12/24/tsa-bod...

OP already acknowledged this: "for most adults, it doesn't matter as they got their SSN before it changed"

At least Android allows sideloading without using the Play Store. Chrome used to allow this, and I believe they've made it much more difficult.

There also seems to be concerns that 5G may interfere with weather satellites: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-03609-x

Yes. Another source: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-03609-x

Original title: Zoom's Encryption is “Not Suited for Secrets” and Has Surprising Links to China

What about homosexual men who are in monogamous relationships? Clearly they pose less of a risk than some heterosexual men who are promiscuous.

There are also many people on PrEP, which lowers the risk of HIV infection significantly (to close to 0%).

Google Meet seems to work pretty well if you have G Suite: https://gsuite.google.com/products/meet/

Google Meet also works well if you have G Suite: https://gsuite.google.com/products/meet/

> "Android and Wear OS App"

> "The app will no longer be available for download. Service to existing users and subscribers will continue until July 1, 2020, at which point the app will be shut down. Subscribers who are still active at that time will receive a refund."

That's unfortunate. I have been using it for years. Any recommended alternatives?

Interesting. It reached #2 an hour after submission, and then it suddenly dropped to position #13 within the same hour, around the same time when it was renamed by the mods.

#2: https://imgur.com/a/qgKQWxU

Sudden Drop to #13: https://imgur.com/a/6beWUHG

From Zoom's website:

"The following in-meeting security capabilities are available to the meeting host: Secure a meeting with end-to-end encryption"

https://zoom.us/security

https://web.archive.org/web/20200331095358/https://zoom.us/s...

Original title: "Zoom Meetings Aren't End-to-End Encrypted, Despite Misleading Marketing"

For some reason, the title was trimmed an hour after submission to omit the "misleading marketing" part.

The ranking also appears to have artificially been lowered. Now it is below some other posts that are older and with fewer points.

My problem with this is Zoom's misleading claims. If Zoom can't implement end-to-end encryption, it shouldn't claim that it does.

"Zoom... claims to implement end-to-end encryption, widely understood as the most private form of internet communication, protecting conversations from all outside parties. In fact, Zoom is using its own definition of the term, one that lets Zoom itself access unencrypted video and audio from meetings."

That's terrible for national security. Zoom engineers are based in China: https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/26/zoom-key-profit-driver-ahead...

"Officials in Spain said testing kits it bought from a Chinese company had only a 30 percent accuracy rate, rather than the 80 percent rate they had expected."

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/27/business/china-coronaviru...

"Spanish medical experts, who have examined the 9,000 kits delivered last week, said they have only a 30 percent probability of detecting the virus."

https://www.voanews.com/science-health/coronavirus-outbreak/...

"The news comes following complaints from Spain that about 70 percent of the kits it purchased were too inaccurate to be used to diagnose patients who were sick and stuck in emergency rooms."

https://www.foxnews.com/world/china-launches-investigation-i...

"Up to 80 percent of the 150,000 portable, quick coronavirus test kits China delivered to the Czech Republic earlier this month were faulty, according to local Czech news site Expats.cz."

https://news.yahoo.com/china-supplied-faulty-coronavirus-tes...

IANAL, but while lawful permanent residents do not have the same protections, they still have certain protections that make it legally unclear whether the president can categorically bar entry without an immigration court proceeding for each individual:

"Section 212(f) can certainly apply to applicants for immigrant visas. Whether it can apply to an LPR who is returning and not seeking admission is questionable. This is because under section 101(a)(13)(C), an LPR being covered by a Presidential Proclamation under section 212(f) would not cause the LPR to be considered to be seeking admission."

http://myattorneyusa.com/scope-and-history-of-section-212f-p...

"An alien returning to the United States who has been granted lawful permanent resident status cannot be regarded as seeking an admission and may not be charged with inadmissibility under section 212(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a) (2012), if he or she does not fall within any of the exceptions in section 101(a)(13)(C) of the Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(13)(C) (2012)."

https://www.justice.gov/eoir/file/478111/download