Given their performance during my lifetime, the CIA isn't capable of decent counter intelligence. Perhaps to save its own skin from its own country would be different.

Did not detonate. But it was an explosion.

No True Scots man would say this.

The gap between the haves and have-nots is growing.

Big Tobacco knew cigarettes were harmful when they published A Frank Statement to Cigarette Smokers in 1954.
They harmed people. And published misinformation campaigns to cover it up. The industry used its money to influence elections and hire lobbyists that frequently used bribery schemes to sway politicians.

If someone believes in absolute freedom for corporations to do business as they please, then perhaps all the above just seems like a smart business strategy.
If for some strange reason you believe that the government is answerable to the people and not to which ever business has the most money, then the above is probably very troubling to you.

If society is harmed by people that exploit people's weakness. Then why shouldn't we band together to restrict such activities?
What's the point of being in a society if not for mutual benefit, including protection?

If weakness included not locking your door, then by extension we shouldn't prosecute burglars. Obviously nonsense.

Nobody forced Meta or advertisers to hack the human mind in order to extract what they wanted from them. And demanding personal responsibility from children and the elderly is nonsense, like squeezing blood from a stone. People's susceptibility to being manipulated isn't going to go away just because you think they are weak-minded.

Needs to be fired. It's simple, if you don't vet people hired into a senior position of a federal agency, then you ought to be terminated as well. Actual qualified people apply for jobs and are skipped over to hire conmen. The process is broken and people should be deeply disturbed, both in terms of violating the public trust but also for the implications to national security.

Well nobody is forcing you. You could always drive to your bank or department store instead of using their website.

I disagree. Spinning media is not random. It's not random in behavior and not in what is observable from file system drivers and application layers. Timing is a disk spinning at a nearly fixed rotational velocity is a physical phenomena and you can trivially model and predict it. And indeed you had to predict when bitbanging certain floppy formats. And of course old MFM itself was tied to a track's velocity. Which again, you can probe from software because an access on the same track will take twice as long if you don't issue the command in time.

consistent timing in the software that is predictable is more interesting for a statistical attack than a high resolution one. Which is why a lot of this low-level disk access could be done on the 1 MHz 8-bit CPU. But you can still see the behavior at the higher layer in modern times even though SATA.

It's a side channel so big you could drive a truck through it. And it kind of always has been. The statistical analysis was hard to do much useful with it, but perhaps we could have done this decades ago without CNNs ("AI"), perhaps Kalman or Bayes filter.

It might be easier to track the larger seek times of spinning platter media for such a side channel attack.

Letting people run unsigned, unvalidated, turing complete code on your browser is the source of many problems.

I added OPFS to my toy emulator. So now you can drag and drop stuff into an extra drive with me having to host any kind of backend or see your files. (Hosted as a static website on github.io)

So this is why we can't have nice things. Perhaps adding random nanosleep() calls to the I/O paths might be something Chrome might try to mitigate. Hate that we are in an arms race. One side trying to use computers and the other trying to ruin them.

The future is now. And that future is endless scrolling while drool dribbles down our chin.

We all win when we step away from the YouTubes because of the world wide slop fest. Making money shaving away hours of our life will become less viable the less we engage with it.

Each central bank has a different definition of what a recession is. In some cases the vague definition is: we'll declare it when we see it.

Don't expect the new Fed chair to ever declare a recession, given his Greenspan idolotry.

Not widely accepted by scientists or the public. And rather quickly debunked.

Playing a social and economic experiment with our society is precisely what the AI hypemen demand of us right now. And any questioning is met with accusations of anti technology leanings to ludditism.

So no, your arguments are not very compelling because the very first premise is sorely misrepresented.