Besides the point but are you able to get around it with internet archive?

Yeah it had other stuff that probably is not in his books (for now) like digital preparedness and OPSEC practices. Haven’t read his books yet but I plan to at some point

If there is I would love to know. They’re all off his site and SoundCloud.

I actually combine a password manager with a password book, don’t like storing data for sensitive accounts on servers that can be breached and I’m too lazy to self host 😬 and I can remember my password phrases for sensitive accounts I use normally.

Did you download his podcast? As far as I know he deleted all his stuff several months ago.

You might be able to get a large part of google functionality with a degoogled device running microG or something similar.

I grabbed a display TV and haven’t hooked it up to the internet, so far so good. Could look into that.

I know some folks who have problems running onlyoffice- apparently LibreOffice is the fork/spiritual successor to it. Haven’t used it a lot but so far it’s run decently.

I like guerrilla mail (short term email generation) but I’ve found that a lot of their domains are blocked by these sites I’m trying to sign up for >:(

I also second this, has basic smartwatch features and if you want to get in the weeds and install your own OS just get the developer kit. For 30 bucks I said it’s worth a test at least.

Not sure what difference that makes since the military uses the MS office suite for everything

Bitwarden has a password generator that you can set criteria for, been really helpful with one of my janky logins

He gets some hate but Rob Braxman on YouTube/Odyssey was one of my gateway drugs into the privacy community. He is kind of obnoxious at times but lays out a lot of technical and basic advice pretty well I think. Learned about degoogled phones and Bluetooth risks from him as a couple of examples. I also second Luis Rossman on YouTube/Grayjay, he’s more on the philosophical and legal side of things.

Well, I can’t say for sure. You probably know most of what I know about the issue now and the rest I’ve gotten is hearsay. I’m not interested enough to dive into the research much further, which is why I encourage(d) folks to do their own homework. Either way, I hope this issue is under enough scrutiny that there will be a clarified true story at the end of it and justice done. I’m thinking it’ll drag out though, which is the frustrating part of the legal system. Not a good era for American politics when the two leading presidential candidates will probably both still be under investigation come next election. I’m all for a bipartisan swamp drain but idk if one could read that in the cards at this point in time. America’s citizens need to keep demanding accountability of their leadership, and the results of all these ongoing investigations are very important to that for everybody.

I’m not read up on specifics of what is and isn’t appropriate for a politician (especially president) in business dealings with foreign entities, there might be a technical issue there. Here’s some stuff written about “the other side” that could apply: https://lifehacker.com/is-it-illegal-for-a-president-to-make-money-from-outsid-1837982914 And https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/does-the-constitution-put-limits-on-a-presidents-private-business-ties

Regardless, there does seem to be a problem with honesty in how Joe has handled this (denying his profit from Hunter’s dealings), which leads to questions of what else has possibly been fabricated or covered up. Which is one reason why there continues to be an investigation. As far as it being partisan, sure, everything is these days. So is the Trump investigation- I’ve seen rhetoric that mirrors what you said but flipped for him. Doesn’t mean these investigations should be brushed off though, especially since there are breadcrumbs. I hope justice treats everybody equally- and quickly, though I know that’s uncharacteristic for the system.

Frosty the swoleman

I’m curious in general. I’ll decide that after I read it.

I hadn’t heard of that but if you’ve got a link to a sauce I’ll check it out.

So like I said in my original post I only casually scrape news most of the time, but the only way I heard about this issue being as progressed as it is was from right wing sources (which is why I try to keep partisan sources of multiple persuasions in my feed). I’m not super invested in this story, more stuck around in this thread because I was, while unsurprised, still a little baffled by some of the responses. A google search found a couple mainstream results, though not a lot, most of the Hunter Biden stuff is more about gun charges.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2023/dec/11/hunter-biden-tax-evasion-indictments-shields-presi/ This one is one of the most recent I found

https://www.cnn.com/2023/05/11/politics/hunter-biden-investigations-what-matters/index.html This one’s a little older but provides some background

And then I had to do some more digging to find this:

https://oversight.house.gov/release/comer-releases-direct-monthly-payments-to-joe-biden-from-hunter-bidens-business-entity/ Here’s a press release from this month, and the link to the video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUrYp8EFwXo

Tangent is that we can also assume we may not get the whole picture because of stuff like https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Countering_Foreign_Propaganda_and_Disinformation_Act But that’s just my hypothesis and I haven’t looked more into that. But definitely some unpleasant implications if it’s true that search results and news are being censored by the government.

Anyways I appreciate your response being so level, especially considering its peers. I would like to hear your thoughts on this if you feel inclined to comment but I am also a little tired of the discussion now, so no pressure.

I use AP as one of my news sources. Admitting when used facts were incorrect is definitely respectable but there’s always an affected narrative in the stories they choose and how they pitch them. Not to mention the opinion articles and whatnot.

Anything that’s legitimately less biased is usually sharing a news story and labeling the bias (ex. the ImproveTheNews community here), and if it sources its own articles the organization is often niche enough that people don’t really lend credibility to them. Removal from events could also provide a form of credibility, like the BBC on America’s dealings, but BBC definitely has their own slant too. I agree it is a shame media literacy isn’t taught much because that’s what’s required more and more in an increasingly connected and fast-paced world.