Guess what. Apple can dent physical sims too though

Why do you think you a physical sim for different providers. Because they only work with that provider. Apple can turn the tap off on a class of Sims as it is

You make good points but at this point esim is incredibly awesome. it is super easy to use

The original was awesome but the first external mods to the PS1 also has some nifty stuff to hack around with just an lpt1 port away

How do those camera work at night with a peep wearing a ski mask? Or even an IR hat

They manage just fine. About 8-9 months ago they were used to find a couple of vandals who were destroying bus stops at night. The cops traced them from camera to camera and sent a patrol car as a welcoming party.

I don't think that is an overreaction. When looking for a place to live. Gas stove and induction oven are a hard requirement

If it doesn't have that...pass immediately

Do you mean convection oven?

People eating food and heating/cooling their homes is what consumes the most energy.

There is nothing actual web3. It's just a meaningless term used by snake oil salesmen

Is that sarcasm? The Israelis spying on the us is hardly anything new

There's a pretty big difference between israel, the country spying on somebody out of national interest, and israel allowing what is essentially an arms-dealer based in israel to help random other people spy on countries they are allied with.

I highly doubt that israel the country wanted this turn of events, for the simple reason they are not stupid and the cost-benefit ratio of this seems bad for them.

The state of Israel is already one of the most prolific arms dealers in the world. Something like 10% of weapons (everything from rifles and ammo to tanks and precision guided missiles) sold every year globally are made in Israel. They will sell to anyone (through intermediaries if the political optics don’t align), and have ample opportunity to combat test weapons thanks to the low-grade civil war they’ve been waging against the Arabs for the last 70 years.

They won’t want to be seen as reining in Israeli military overreach because there’s a feeder pipeline from the Israeli military into both politics and the weapons industry. It’s the same people running the country that are selling these weapons.

History has shown that the two are tightly involved. Plus it's not like they will ever really be held accountable. Pollard the traitor is a hero to Israel

> Pollard the traitor is a hero to Israel

Well… obviously? How else could Israel treat him?

> There's a pretty big difference between israel, the country spying on somebody out of national interest, and israel allowing what is essentially an arms-dealer based in israel to help random other people spy on countries they are allied with.

Yes and sort of and no.

The thing with weapons is that occasionally you sell them to people you end up fighting. Take the Falklands war - Argentina was using American, French, and British weapons to fight the British. It happens, it's a bit of egg on everyone's face, but it is what it is.

When you're a major arms dealer, you'll eventually end up selling guns to an enemy of your ally, or supposed ally.

A bit of both. I assume they can spy on the US through 5-eyes, 9-eyes, 27eyes, etc. But to allow Uganda to do it was a bridge too far. If NSO had been in almost any other country there wouldn't be a building left standing. The US regards cyberattacks as an act of war.

If the US really regarded cyberattacks as an act of war, it would be actively shooting missiles and bullets at China right now. The US regards cyberattacks as acts of war when convenient, nothing more.

"Act of war" is a legal and diplomatic nicety that, like essentially all international law, you talk about when it happens to align with your realpolitik. It doesn't mean you immediately launch the nukes whenever someone arrests one of your diplomats.

Nuclear powers can't make full-scale war on each other. If they ever do, the death toll would make WW2 look like a skirmish. So any attacks are at the edges (respond in kind, or proportionately, rather than escalate to a shooting war).

So the US regards cyberattacks as acts of war if it comes from a non-nuclear country, and tomfoolery from a nuclear one?

I don't disagree with your point, simply saying that IMO the US doesn't take cyberattacks seriously precisely because it leads down a dark path with China (and probably Russia too if we're being honest).

It doesn't mean they don't take them seriously, it means that responding with missiles isn't an option if the other guy has the ability to massively retaliate. Other options, like sanctions or retaliating in kind, plus shoring up defenses, are a better bet. Even retaliating in kind is problematic if the result is that the Internet becomes almost unusable.

All during the Cold War the USA and USSR engaged in various kinds of low-level sabotage against each other. Fortunately for us all, it didn't escalate out of control.

But Israel isn't a part of any of those agreements, it would be just as likely they spy on the US via a direct partnership with US agencies

Those jurisdictions are few