____ are not something you need AI for as there are already tools that explain ____ for you. Use Wikipedia or a similar tool.

deleted by creator

Los Angeles has one of the highest costs of living in the world

Nice retort. It’s okay to be wrong friend, we’re all here to learn and grow.

Not every actor is George Clooney you twat. Most of them are working in cafes and coffee shops on the side

I’ve always, always been a intuition only guy. Meaning I almost never use any thing other than blind guessing on how languages and libraries work. I genuinely don’t feel I’m missing out on anything, my farts already smell better than the rest of my peers and I just don’t feel the need to learn the modern tools of my trade.

Not quite. This might be a better explanation than I’m providing: https://chat.openai.com/share/c77fc7ed-9d68-4076-ab70-e953a3896bb6

If I understand the question, the traffic in your local intranet will basically always be encrypted with your root cert. So client -> proxy with your cert, then normal internet encryption from proxy -> internet.

For the apps, it depends on the app, but you can usually insert your cert into their store, it might just be different than the systems store. This could be hard to do on an non-rooted iPhone, idk. My experience is with Linux desktops. For example, in chromium based apps, there is a database in ~/.pki/nssdb that you can insert your cert into. Again, this is something I do at work where we have a very tightly controlled network and application stack. I would not recommend a MiTM proxy for your home environment, it will only cause headaches.

I think it’s important to understand how a typical SSL certificate is generated. Basically, there are a handful of companies that we have all agreeded to trust. When you download Chrome it comes with a set of trusted root certificates, so does your OS, etc. So when Amazon wants to create an SSL for amazon.com, the only way they can do that is by contacting one of those handful of trusted companies and getting them to issue a certificate that’s says Amazon.com. When you go to the site, you see a trusted party generated the cert and your browser is happy.

When you create a new root certificate and install it on your computer, you become one of those companies. So now, you can intercept traffic, decrypt it, read it, reissue a certificate for amazon.com (the same way Amazon would have gotten one from the third parties), reencrypt it, and pass it along to the client. Because the client trusts you it’s still a valid certificate. But if you inspect the certificate on the client side the root signer will no longer be GoDaddy or whatever, it will be you.

The expected value of a ticket goes up. At some point it’s higher than the cost of the ticket.

Oh, I didn’t realize, that’s a hassle

Depending on your tech skills, tail scale works, but you could also set up a relatively simple reverse proxy: https://serverfault.com/questions/753105/how-to-reverse-proxy-to-different-places-depending-on-subdomain-in-nginx

That mans laugh really did it for me

I don’t think your trolling is helping the overall discourse

Go on

Why do you think inflation is getting so bad, specifically? You think it could have something to do with the $5 trillion trump handed out during COVID or nah?

I’m literally arguing against privatization in the adjacent post. Again, this is not productive discourse. “Burn everything down” isn’t a realistic or helpful suggestion.

I’m sure long-term they will improve the system and things like this will happen less and less. I’m sorry that happened to you, but it doesn’t mean the idea as a whole is bad.

I read the article second article, the first is paywalled. I still think cameras are a good solution. The argument in the article sounds a lot like “some police are bad, we shoud disband the police” or “some government officials are greedy, we should disband the government”.

Frankly, it sounds like the real issue if that they have privitized the production and configuration of the traffic cameras. If there was legislation in place that ensured fair and consistent implementation of the devices much of the issues identified by the author would be moot.

Any system that we put in place to enforce rules can be abused by those in power, but that doesn’t mean the system is bad or wrong. The reality again is that cars are dangerous, and I argue we should prioritize protecting the public.

It’s easy to hop in a discussion and say “no that’s bad”, but a lot more productive to say “here’s an alternative”.

What you’re describing may be an issue. I suspect it is a tiny minority of the speeding tickets written. The above poster is advocating for well advertised limits and automated ticketing. I think this is a very reasonable solution to an undeniable problem: driving is dangerous, speeding more so.

The situation your describing a contrived edge case and is not a valuable contribution to the discussion at this stage.

“Just don’t speed” is, by and large, a very reasonable thing to ask of drivers.