chicken

Maybe, but I think it is possible that at some point it could become permanently too late for that. If your every move is tracked, if your thoughts and actions are all anticipated and directed, if automated systems can silence or kill anyone, we can lose all possible agency. If the entities retaining agency find a way to be sustainable and stable, things can stay that way indefinitely. People often seem to think that we'll always get another chance, and given enough time things may change, but I think it is very likely that we will lose, with finality.

Are there actually people in the loop? Are you sure it's not all bots? It's not like they will communicate with you at all about your ban aside from template emails.

There's no way that would work either, they can just store the full edit history and auto-curate as needed.

Do you mean the attack only works against people with a split tunnel setup?

Not quite what the article says:

When apps run on Linux there’s a setting that minimizes the effects, but even then TunnelVision can be used to exploit a side channel that can be used to de-anonymize destination traffic and perform targeted denial-of-service attacks. Network firewalls can also be configured to deny inbound and outbound traffic to and from the physical interface. This remedy is problematic for two reasons: (1) a VPN user connecting to an untrusted network has no ability to control the firewall and (2) it opens the same side channel present with the Linux mitigation.

It's a good one

I don't know, but what does that even mean? Does it mean anything beyond a call for engagement, a vague imperative statement reworded as a rhetorical question? I am so sick of being asked for my attention when there's really very little to be paying attention to, or when my input is not needed or wanted.

For me the problem is that virtually all political content and discussion online is very low information. Generally no one is conveying anything I haven't already heard many times, it's mostly remixing slogans and truisms and finding different ways of expressing the same simplified opinion. Questioning that stuff or asking for nuance to be addressed gets met with aggression. The more I'm exposed to it the more I feel like my brain is rotting, definitely does not feel like I'm learning things.

Unlimited free distribution of copyrighted media is something I'm all for, but that's a really tall order in terms of political capital for getting the law changed, a few protests aren't going to do it, basically every elected official would strongly oppose it, you'd have to replace them all first.

Relevant Snowden quote:

Arguing that you don't care about the right to privacy because you have nothing to hide is no different than saying you don't care about free speech because you have nothing to say

I pay for vpn service anonymously even though I probably don't need to, as my main use is torrenting. I can see a remote possibility that vpn payment records at some point end up being used against pirates, even just as some kind of risk factor flagging, in the same vein as what you are saying: "If someone is paying for a vpn, surely they're doing something bad?" In countries that really want to crack down on speech and human rights, vpns get banned outright to varying success, and if you can't pay anonymously in that situation you're pretty screwed, this hurts those people.

In general I think everyone should be trying for some level of actual privacy online as a matter of principle, just because of how everyone being fully tracked and observed puts way too much power in the hands of those watching.

The current administration and its agencies have clear contempt for any sort of crypto privacy they have shown in a variety of ways. The Tornado Cash sanction and criminal charges, recent Bitcoin mixer criminal charges, the proposed rule putting a "Primary Money Laundering Concern" black mark on people seeking crypto privacy in virtually any way... if it's possible to still purchase online services privately after this, I'm sure they will go on to take further measures to try to close the "loophole". They don't want anyone doing things without being able to monitor them.

Cointelegraph might not be for someone who is very anti-crypto, but it's a legit website with well researched articles, not a source of malware/scams/autogenerated spam.