harlekin.me

A video of an accor­di­on folk dance, and some cap­tures of the video­ga­me Arma 3. A video from an air­show. Oh and an embarr­as­sing mista­ke by bild.de. Oh, and an explo­si­on video. Be care­ful what you share!

No serious­ly, be care­ful what you share.

edit:

Wäh­rend in der Ukrai­ne hef­ti­ge Kämp­fe mit unge­wis­sem Aus­gang toben, hat sich das Blatt im vir­tu­el­len Raum bereits gewen­det. Die gefürch­te­ten Cyber­trup­pen Russ­lands spie­len in die­sem Krieg bis jetzt kei­ne Rol­le, in den sozia­len Netz­wer­ken sind die rus­si­schen Troll-Armeen samt ihren rechts­ex­tre­men Alli­ier­ten aus dem Wes­ten rest­los in der Defensive.

src: click (Autor ist Moechel)

edit:

Rus­sia has appar­ent­ly ren­de­red Face­book lar­ge­ly unus­able across lea­ding Rus­si­an telecom­mu­ni­ca­ti­ons pro­vi­ders amid rising fric­tion bet­ween Moscow and the social media platform.

The London-based inter­net moni­tor Net­Blocks reports that Facebook’s net­work of content-distribution ser­vers in Rus­sia was so bad­ly restric­ted Sunday that “con­tent no lon­ger loads, or loads extre­me­ly slow­ly making the plat­forms unusable.”

Rus­si­an telecoms regu­la­tor Rosk­om­nadzor on Fri­day announ­ced plans to “par­ti­al­ly restrict” access to Facebook.

[…]

The Twit­ter and Face­book restric­tions can be cir­cum­ven­ted insi­de Rus­sia using VPN software

src: click

edit: 28.02.:

Meta has blo­cked an influ­ence ope­ra­ti­on with ties to a rus­si­an net­work in the Don­bas regi­on, that was sprea­ding the ide­as, that the west was betray­ing Ukrai­ne, and Ukrai­ne being a fai­led sta­te. The net­work reached appro­xi­mate­ly 4500 followers.

Addi­tio­nal­ly Meta is warning, that some accounts might be com­pro­mi­sed, with no fur­ther details on num­bers or impact.

“We do have a sen­se that Ghost­wri­ters did suc­cess­ful­ly com­pro­mi­se some accounts on the Face­book plat­form,” Glei­cher said”

src: click

edit: Mimi­ka­ma arbei­tet in die­sen Tagen laut dem Stan­dard auf Hoch­tou­ren, hier der direct link auf ihre Fak­ten­check Kategorie.

dass die Ukrai­ne sich zum Ver­zicht auf Atom­waf­fen durch­ge­run­gen hat, und die Inva­si­on ihr Geschenk war… (sie­he: click)

In 1993, Inter­na­tio­nal rela­ti­ons theo­rist and Uni­ver­si­ty of Chi­ca­go pro­fes­sor John Mear­s­hei­mer publis­hed an arti­cle inclu­ding his pre­dic­tion that a Ukrai­ne without any nuclear deter­rent was likely to be sub­jec­ted to aggres­si­on by Rus­sia, but this was very much a mino­ri­ty view at the time.[8]

A stu­dy publis­hed in 2016 in the jour­nal World Affairs argued that, in the opi­ni­on of the aut­hors, the denu­clea­riz­a­ti­on of Ukrai­ne was not a “stu­pid mista­ke”, and that it is unclear that Ukrai­ne would be bet­ter off as a nuclear sta­te.[9] The stu­dy argued that the push for Ukrai­ni­an inde­pen­dence was with a view to make it a nonnu­clear sta­te.[9] Accord­ing to the aut­hors, the United Sta­tes would also not have made Ukrai­ne an excep­ti­on when it came to the denu­clea­riz­a­ti­on of other post-Soviet sta­tes such as Bela­rus and Kazakh­stan.[9] The deter­rent value of the nuclear wea­pons in Ukrai­ne was also ques­tion­ab­le, as Ukrai­ne would have had to spend 12 to 18 mon­ths to estab­lish full ope­ra­tio­nal con­trol over the nuclear arse­nal left by the Rus­si­ans.[9] The ICBMs also had a ran­ge of 5,000–10,000 km (initi­al­ly tar­ge­ting the United Sta­tes), which meant that they could only have been re-targeted to hit Russia’s far east.[9] The air-launched crui­se mis­si­les (ALCMs) left by the Rus­si­ans had been dis­ab­led by the Rus­si­ans during the col­lap­se of the Soviet Uni­on, but even if they had been recon­fi­gu­red and made to work by the Ukrai­ni­ans, it is unli­kely that they would have had a deter­rent effect.[9] Had Ukrai­ne deci­ded to estab­lish full ope­ra­tio­nal con­trol of the nuclear wea­pons, it would have faced sanc­tions by the West and perhaps even a with­dra­wal of diplo­ma­tic reco­gni­ti­on by the United Sta­tes and other NATO allies.[9] Ukrai­ne would also likely have faced reta­lia­to­ry action by Rus­sia.[9] Ukrai­ne would also have strug­gled with repla­cing the nuclear wea­pons once their ser­vice life expi­red, as Ukrai­ne did not have a nuclear wea­pons pro­gram.[9] In exchan­ge for giving up its nuclear wea­pons, Ukrai­ne recei­ved finan­cial com­pen­sa­ti­on, as well as the secu­ri­ty assuran­ces of the Buda­pest Memo­ran­dum.[9]

src: click

Das zu wis­sen kann man von Fried­rich Merz natür­lich nicht erwarten.

Das Buda­pes­ter Memo­ran­dum wur­de jetzt gebrochen.

Ursu­la Plass­nik zurück aus der Pension.

Such­spiel gibts hier: click

Ohne digi­ta­len Euro droht EZB Ver­lust der Währungshoheit

Jo, war­um nicht. Ist ja grad pas­send. Bes­tes Argu­ment? Putin. Oder doch Infla­ti­ons­brem­se durch neue Tools für Geldpolitik?

Ein Gut­ach­ten legt der EZB die Ein­füh­rung einer digi­ta­len Aus­ga­be des Euro nahe. Sonst könn­ten pri­va­te Vor­stö­ße für Digi­tal­geld an ihrer Wäh­rungs­sou­ve­rä­ni­tät rütteln

Na wenns das Gut­ach­ten sagt.

(Btw, das war die PR Posi­ti­on seit Tag eins, die glaub ich sicher, wenns mir ein von der EZB in Auf­trag gege­be­nes Gut­ach­ten sagt.)

Bonus: Kar­tell­bil­dung im Fami­li­en­mi­nis­te­ri­um.

Zuck exp­lains that Social Media is not causing pola­ri­sa­ti­on and the fas­ter dis­se­mi­na­ti­on of nega­tively con­no­ta­ted con­tent, igno­ring the respon­si­bi­li­ty part of the gate­kee­per model (“that would be a fasci­na­ting dis­cus­sion though, to go over with you what we are doing here, so lets not do that”), but he has a sci­en­tist, that doesnt belie­ve thats the case.

Mean­while:

Stan­dard: Putin is Hit­ler, other­wi­se her care­er is over. So is that now socie­ty in gene­ral - or… Let’s talk about deplat­forming next. Gre­at or just won­der­ful? Self cen­so­ring, becau­se of sin­gu­lar (vir­tu­al) identities?

But no, Zuck has found a fix, bio­metric secu­ri­ty on head­sets, eye­tracking for adver­ti­sing pur­po­ses, spa­cial audio, becau­se Play­sta­ti­on did it, vir­tu­al mee­ting rooms, becau­se of the pan­de­mic, and a future whe­re peop­le arent sup­po­sed to tra­vel any­mo­re -- but hes not about making money short term, no - hes thin­king hard about com­plex issu­es. NFT vir­tu­al clot­hing would be worth more, when it can move across dif­fe­rent plat­forms (sure, in agree­ment, thats why NFTs are pushed, and will com­ple­te­ly remo­ve unau­the­ri­zed dis­tri­bu­ti­on, if con­nec­ted to bio­metric ID), and if AI could morph it to fit all ava­tars ima­gin­ab­le, the desi­gner job would be so much easier! (And lower cost.) Sor­ry, are we tal­king about socie­ty here, or about the future of the quick fashion industry?

Is the­re any buz­z­wor­dy trend he didnt pick up to exp­lain how socie­ty will look like in the future?

Oh, lets clo­ne Tik­tok, the value add of our ser­vice is just grand­mas pics of their grand­child­ren and ecom­mer­ce pre­sen­ces (I’m sure Tik­tok is the best plat­form ima­gin­ab­le for socie­tal… Sor­ry, cant think of what word comes next.) - and look at the value add, of mili­ta­ry stra­te­gists pos­ting their ana­ly­sis on Lin­kedIn - becau­se thats the only form of mass com­mu­ni­ca­ti­on they are signed up for, so Jour­na­lists are now craw­ling that, and then may­be print our own cur­ren­cy. While tracking your emo­tio­nal expres­si­ons and eye­mo­ve­ment. And then play the ent­i­re - “I think peop­le are making logic jumps”, when they are say­ing social media enab­led fake­news, trumpism, the popu­la­riz­a­ti­on of aut­ho­ria­nism (Hold the Line - Maria Ressa’s Nobel Pri­ce Speech)… - or that you had a team of 7 peop­le to do human rights vio­la­ti­ons miti­ga­ti­on across your ent­i­re platform.

What could go wrong, real­ly - when you now have the metric “smi­les not enough” and sell that against ad-revenue. Oh, oh … and peop­le buy­ing NFT trinkets.

Oh, and I love the com­ment, that you focus on doing the mee­ting expe­ri­ence right, and “bet­ter than Zoom”, you know, with pres­su­re sen­si­ti­ve gloves, to feel the table. To get it to the main­stream fas­ter. Becau­se thats just what Gates ack­now­led­ged. That this is the future growth sec­tor. And you are ful­ly thin­king about social implications.