I like this idea on the surface, but most attacks against these devices are not persistent. Using a rom will only slow the upgrade process when bugs are found and prevent wasteful bricking attacks. For botnets, it's worlds easier to just reinfect when the device comes back online.

Google already does this through demonetization, and those systems are being constantly improved upon. It's is a tough problem though, lots of content may disappear if creators can't get an income for the videos they produce, and that could lead to knock-on effects where even unaffected users and creators decide to leave the platform.

Wow, that's quite the screw-up for an operation like this. Thank you for clarifying.

If you have something with high discover-ability like a Firefox exploit(high because a couple have already been found, patched, and people are presumably actively looking), why would govt need to hide this evidence? Seems to me that it doesn't matter how they identified and took control of a given hidden service, what should be relevant to the case is the bit of JS sent to the perpetrator's browser that pings the government server revealing the user's real IP.

What am I missing? Is it that that exploit has somehow gone unnoticed and is so valuable that it can't be released? Is it that using exploits to gain evidence is not admissible? Seems weird to me.

I think your mixing me up with a loud, annoying, ignorant minority. Nazis are a very specific group of people who operated under Hitler until '45, and neo-Nazis are are another very specific group that helpfully self-identify as such. I'm not really sure what "Islamophobia" is or even if the idea behind it makes any logical sense. I'm against hate insofar as I believe some boundaries must be set if were to live in a multicultural society. I only mean to say that language matters, otherwise how are others meant to know what it is your taking about?

I like your persistence, but unless the author or sources are making up details it's not fake. Sensationalist reporting on the opinions of an arguably bad father, sure, but framing != fake. This doesn't mean we shouldn't mock bad journalism, but "fake mocking" makes you come out as just another ignoramus latching onto and misusing the latest "craze phrase".

Non of those are quite as bad or bias as Breitbart, and it comes up in Google news results...