Why be a bum when you can be an FBI agent? It would only had been a full investigation if they had to investigate surfing, beach life, and women in bikinis.

"Sir! We have reason to believe the pinko bastards are posing and infiltrating beach life! Therefore a hundred million dollars is required to interact and investigate with bikini clad women, as well as surf, and take copies amounts of drugs. All in the name of fighting pinko bastards!"

"Well Pinkos you say? Here's two hundred million! Now get in the case!"

Many of these articles are missing an easily exploitable position. The key term is "bandwidth" which is the resource at stake. What is being fought over is how to define this "bandwidth" in a way that will be enforceable against the citizen and favorable to the corporation (i.e. "government").

One way they could do this is to divide it like they did the radio spectrum by way of frequency, where frequency is related to "bandwidth". The higher the frequency, the greater the bandwidth. With communication advances, the frequencies can be grouped just like they did with radio, where certain "frequencies" are reserved by the government/military, and others are monopolized by the corporations, and a tiny sliver is provided as a "public" service.

This way would be the most easily enforceable for them to attack NN and the first amendment, as it already exists by form of radio.

* It is already being applied by cable providers through "downstream/upstream" where your participation by "uploading" of your content is viewed inferior to your consumption of it. i.e. Your contribution (or upload) is a tiny fraction of your consumption (or download).

* Also, AWS, Google and other cloud services charge your VPS for "providing" content (egress) and charge you nothing for consuming (ingress). On that scale, the value of what you provide is so miniscule it is almost non-existent to the value of what you consume.

tldr; NN is already partly destroyed.

Bandwidth doesn't have a frequency. Net Neutrality is literally the concept of treating all bandwidth the same, no matter the source.

Net neutrality simply means that all content is treated equally by the ISPs, backbones, etc...

As for the massive monopolies, that was born of US businesses. US tech monopolies are not original. Monopolies are a traditional form of how the US does its business. Just because the founders and their employees where shorts and shirts instead of suits, it was sold as "radical and new" when it was in fact the same old game.

Now that these major monopolies have established a significant foothold, they find it in their interest to remove net-neutrality to prevent anything disruptive from occurring to their bottom-line.

Why is it as the US' population went up, the US' health and food services quality degraded? Observe that the US' own stand-in for government/communist style supplied food services through the fast-food chains of McDonalds, Burger King, etc... as well as the food stuffs supplied by their groceries, contributed immensely to the degradation of US health.

The US "beef industry" irresponsibly used antibiotics to artificially fatten their cattle, causing everyone who ate their products to also consume those antibiotics. Also, the US' own companies push sugar saturated products to their youth without any disposition to responsibility, where sugar is known and has been known to cause serious health deficits.

The US practices culling of their population to reduce density.

edit: People have trouble viewing it in this light. A simpler way is to view it through its parallel in warfare. European and "civilized" warfare is the sudden loss of large portions of the population and able bodied men through massive violence organized by their "ruling parties". "Jungle" warfare is one where the losses on the participants isn't high per encounter, but is very high over the duration of their "war".

Despite the West criticizing Mao and Stalin of killing off many of their citizens, the US can also be found to have killed off many of their own citizens through the use of subtler methods.

For example, as the US' population became aware of the detrimental effects of tobacco (whose mortal danger to health was known in the West's "ruling class and educated" for centuries), the population loss related to tobacco induced health deficits dropped, while other issues began to surface and increase. The observable culling of the population is far more active in the US than it is in Russia or China for example (once one becomes aware that it is more subtle, and more like 'jungle/islander warfare')

Either way they're going to be digging through the emails. NSA and I think the US military is allowed to hack into any communication traversing boundaries between countries. And Germany is also part of the alliance of the many eyed spies. You're either going up against NSA/Military grade surveillance that feeds into FBI, DHS, CIA, etc... databases, or going up against "internal" politics and services that does the same.

If your threat model includes NSA you're fucked.

For everything else, use Signal.

GraphQL looks cool, kind of fancy but simpler way to do some complex SQL without the SQL.

Using the business as the root query would be a bit cumbersome, but more like:

   business(id: "garaje-san-francisco") {
    
      reviewers {

      user {

        name

        favorited_businesses

        favorited_businesses(name: "garaje")

      }

    }

  }

If they provide user queries, then something like:

      user {

        name

        favorited_businesses

        favorited_businesses(name: "garaje")

      }

> It has to do with maintaining the integrity of the communication

This requires secrecy, or else any adversary can do exactly what you did and fake a message.

Note that it doesn't require secrecy of the method, but it does require secrecy of at least some of the input (a key). Therefore whatever method you use should preserve the secrecy of that input to be suitable for cryptography.

Well, 'they' allowed door locks to be easily broken by anyone with minuscule knowledge in lockpicking because that is the type of locks 'they' like on doors.

It's going to be no different for "crypto" solutions.

*Part of the FBI's job was to harrass anyone they considered a dissident or counter to their view of what US citizen should be or how they should behave. I doubt they changed at all. It's already documented and well known one of their favorite tactics was to break into people's homes while they're sleeping, or away, move things around... mess with their belongings or persons, etc... Expect it to be the same for crypto solutions "post quantum", if not already "pre quantum".

Picking locks requires physical presence. Stealing bank credentials online can be done from another continent using public wifi. It's not a great comparison because the number of criminals with access to your computer is much higher than the number of criminals with access to your front door (multiple orders of magnitude), and their ability to distance themselves from the act (both geographically and forensically) is also orders of magnitude higher.

We're talking about the security of the lock guarding the door irrespective of the criminal history of a person with the motivation to break-in. The FBI, who have been known to break-in to people's residences were not found guilty and therefore are not considered criminals by law.

The US only values lawyers.

Doctors, programmers, chefs are significantly imported from other countries... particularly India and China.

Over 50% of the doctors and specialists visited by myself and friends were Indians. Also, over 50% of the highly skilled software personnel and upper management I worked with were Indians.

* However, none of the lawyers were imported. The position coveted by the US is simply lawyer. A friend of mine had a father who was educated as a lawyer in the country he immigrated from and is one of the poorest person I know. Shame, had they been educated as a doctor or software engineer, then they and their adult-son would not have found poverty as quickly if at all.

It's either ALOT harder or very different now-a-days. Anything that you could run on a consistent basis as a bread-winning norm is already or quickly in the process of *aaS or being integrated into one or other.

One way to sell a remote-style work is to make it part of a perk you want in the position or job. There is a ton of talent and skill already willing to move right into the company's parking lot and LIVE ( literally ) there: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KG0_KiM9Mv8

You're not competitive with them at all if it comes to just comparing apples and oranges. The way the market is, offering remote-work can be sold as a perk by the company, or something you need to negotiate for. But expect to either fly to the office or meet them atleast once a week, maybe less or more depending... most likely more than once a week.