Human Shield is a fun little linguistic trick that turns innocent human beings with lives and internality similar to your own into prop objects wielded by an inhuman enemy. This makes it way easier to justify mowing them down in service of your geopolitical goals. Every time that phrase is used it is a sign that someone is probably trying to justify something inhumane; usually something that would be considered a war crime if done against the ones using it.

deleted by creator

The only thing that has successfully managed to thwart the FBI in their attempts to break into a phone was Apple’s hardware based encryption. To such an extent that they took legal and legislative actions to try and circumvent it. The specifics of how the encryption works is irrelevant to this argument, and you are more than welcome to consider that point conceded.

I’m not claiming iPhones are superior. I don’t care about dumb OS wars, just don’t put things on your phone expecting that they can’t be retrieved. That’s the only point I’m trying to make here.

And the keys absolutely would give them access since those keys are used to sign Apple software which runs with enough privileges to access the encryption keys stored in the “Secure Enclave”. Anything you entrust to a company’s software is only as secure as the company wants to make it, and the only company to publicly resist granting that acces is Apple (so far)

The Secure Enclave is a component on Apple system on chip (SoC) that is included on all recent iPhone, iPad, Apple Watch, Apple TV and HomePod devices, and on a Mac with Apple silicon as well as those with the Apple T2 Security Chip. The Secure Enclave itself follows the same principle of design as the SoC does, containing its own discrete boot ROM and AES engine. The Secure Enclave also provides the foundation for the secure generation and storage of the keys necessary for encrypting data at rest, and it protects and evaluates the biometric data for Face ID and Touch ID.

https://support.apple.com/guide/security/hardware-security-overview-secf020d1074/web

The FBI wanted access to Apple’s encryption keys which they use to sign their software. They don’t have ‘your’ encryption keys, they have their own that the FBI wanted to use to bypass these features. They eventually dropped it because they found a zero day exploit which apple fixed in later versions. That is why the newer phones aren’t vulnerable (yet).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple–FBI_encryption_dispute

They’re exploiting vulnerabilities and back doors not brute forcing your passcode. The only way you’re keeping them out is with hardware encryption which the iPhone has and probably why it’s the only one not vulnerable. Hardware encryption also won’t matter if your vendor shares their keys with law enforcement. As far as I’m aware, Apple is the only one that’s gone to court and successfully defended their right to refuse access to encryption keys.

Don’t put anything incriminating on your phones.

Wow the head of AI for MS doesn’t know what the word freeware means.

Chinese spies incepted Biden into acting like a demented 81 year old with the Havana syndrome gun.

Maybe one of the member nations could do something to create that safety instead of throwing up their hands as Gaza starves. Or even just acknowledge that this is exactly what Israel wanted to achieve by killing aid workers.

The last time they sanctioned Israelis it was like 4 individuals and they walked it back almost immediately. This shit only exists for the headline and will disappear until some reply guy throws it in a giant list of Biden’s “accomplishments” that they will post whenever someone suggests Biden isn’t doing shit to help Gaza.

Congratulations on your child.

The ones they dropped into the ocean causing people to drown trying to retrieve them or the ones they dropped on top of crowds of people, crushing them?

The fact that Israel suggested the pier to begin with should have tipped everyone off. The lack of aid getting into Gaza is not due to a logistical problem, you can’t solve it through haphazardly slapped together shipping infrastructure. Especially when that infrastructure already existed; does anyone think Gaza didn’t already have a suitable pier? Even if they didn’t there’s tons of aid sitting at the southern border behind lines of Israeli settlers protesting it.

Specific aspects of gender roles are what toxic masculinity criticizes, you’re trying to substitute a general term for a more specific one. Toxic masculinity specifically refers to the ones that are toxic, not the fact that men have gender roles at all. It’s, like you said, right there in the name.

My dude, scenes from a Barbie movie are not representative of an entire political movement and I really don’t think your interpretation of those scenes makes for any kind of proof of your claims.

Do you have anything demonstrating the feminist movement supports this shit:

The Duluth Model of determining domestic violence another example. Child support is another. The banning of paternity testing is yet another

Or are you just labeling these things as feminist because you do that with everything you perceive as misandrist?

You’re making a lot of claims about things I don’t think you really have a grasp on. “Toxic masculinity” is not an implication that all men are inherently toxic. It’s a criticism of societal expectations for men that harm them and their relationships.

You’re saying that feminism has seriously hindered acceptance of male masturbation but all you’ve provided here is vague unsubstantiated implications of media bias and a single author’s name. I’m not going to read the entire collected works of whoever Dworkin is to figure out why you think they’re both representative of the entire feminist movement and also hate men wanking it. Give me something tangible here. A quote, a law they supported, a speech, a video, literally anything at all that isn’t just some insinuation that’s only attributable to yourself

I would consider myself a male feminist and I masturbate daily so if the movement thinks that’s wrong I’d like to know so I can stop describing myself as feminist.

You’ve been clear about what you think dude, we want to know why you think it.

That’s not an explanation you just restated the claim they asked you to elaborate on. What have you encountered that led you to this conclusion?

when people like something as a meme but take it so far that it makes others mistake it for a genuine wave of appreciation. like Morbius

a fine is a price.