Silicone isn’t what makes parchment paper heat-resistant (and isn’t even used on most standard parchment papers). Cellulose pulp is treated with sulfuric acid to cross-link the cellulose molecules, making them more chemically and thermally resistant.

That’s not really a solid argument. Blocking is likely implemented as a very tiny piece of what is already very likely a massive table join operation. Computationally, it’s likely to have as much an impact on their compute costs as the floor mats in your car have on fuel efficiency.

Everyone already sees different content. It’s an inherent part of Twitter. It’s not a static site where everyone sees the same thing. You see the tweets of who you’re following, and don’t see tweets of those you’ve muted. All that filtering is happening at the server level. Any new tweets or edited tweets or deleted tweets change that content too, which is happening potentially hundreds of times a second for some users.

Anyway, caching would be implemented after a query for what tweets the user sees is performed to reduce network traffic between a browser and the Twitter servers. There’s some memoization that can be done at the server level, but the blocking feature is likely to have almost no impact on that given the fundamental functionality of Twitter.

It absolutely does matter. Alec Baldwin also asserts that he never pulled the trigger, and the FBI’s analysis found a flaw in the weapon that could cause it to fire without pulling the trigger.

In order to be convicted of a crime, the state needs to prove mens rea (i.e., the intent to commit the crime). You can’t be convicted of a crime unless the state can prove you either intended, or should have known, your action would be a criminal act.

If I’m at a gun range, the instructor who is teaching me hands me a gun and says it’s safe to fire downrange, and I shoot it, but it turns out someone is in fact downrange out of my visibility and is injured as a result of my shot, could I be convicted of assault with a deadly weapon? The clear answer is no, because I reasonably relied on the expertise of someone whose job it was to ensure the situation was safe before I performed the dangerous action.

Similarly, there was someone on the set whose job it was to ensure the gun was safe to use. That person handed Baldwin the gun and asserted it was safe to use. Baldwin reasonably relied on that person’s expertise when he handled the gun and did not do anything unreasonable with it while handling it, so it doesn’t make sense to charge him. If he had some role in the presence of live ammunition, then he might be liable in some way, but in his role as an actor, he bears no responsibility.

But you can upvote and comment. OP didn’t specifically say posts, just increases in upvotes and socialization

I had the Samsung Note 2 back in the day. I installed a custom bootloader and OS that worked fantastically. I had GPS issues, and all the guides I read said I have to reinstall Samsung’s OS, get a GPS fix, then reinstall my custom OS.

I made the mistake of installing a newer version of the Samsung OS which installed Knox and locked down my bootloader. I was now locked into an old, insecure Android version with no possibility of ever upgrading because Samsung abandoned it.

From that day on, I vowed never to buy another Samsung product again. Screw them and their anti-choice bullshit.

That’s what I said though.

Your ISP can’t see what you’re downloading if you encrypt, but the IP (intellectual property) enforcers still can if they’re participating in the torrent. Then they find out which ISP that IP (address) belongs to and sends them a letter saying “we caught your subscriber downloading XYZ illegally.”

However, at least one US district court has ruled that just catching an IP address downloading a torrent illegally isn’t proof that any particular person illegally downloaded the IP (intellectual property). As a result, some ISPs simply ignore the letters the IP enforcers send, while some of the bigger ones count “strikes” against the subscriber with that IP address.

If you use encryption (I always change the settings from “prefer” to “require” encryption on every install), the ISPs literally can’t identify what you’re downloading.

So the IP enforcement companies send the ISP a letter saying “this IP was illegally downloading our stuff. We don’t actually have proof, but trust us and punish them.”

Big surprise, a ton of ISPs just ignore them.

Edit: to be clear, I’m only saying encryption prevents your ISP from seeing what you’re downloading. IP (intellectual property) enforcers who participate in the torrent are the ones who inform your ISP, but their letters to the ISPs have no teeth. Some ISPs care, but a lot just ignore the letters. You still definitely want to use a VPN for all public trackers.