like they require actual news articles, but for this, apparently some video on what looks to be a german website is fine though?
CCC is a left-ish hacktivist group. They're kinda radlib at times, but they're reliably pro piracy, pro privacy, pro whistleblowing and feature leftist activists in their conferences. I haven't seen the vid about Red Star, but there's at least a chance the speaker is much less biased than your average mainstream news outlet.
Their vids are often very dry and the speakers tend to be on the dorkier side, but they're a good source for OpSec and what the surveilance apparatus both public and private have been up to lately. Their vids all have English subs afaik, too, but i don't know how good the translations are.
Oh that's actually based, hell yeah. Still a weird for it to be the only source on wikipedia, i've seen wiki remove links to what to similar sites and say it doesn't hold up to their standards. To be clear, that's on wikipedia for being arbitrarily selective, not this group.
Maybe it's just a result of the interests of Wikipedia's dedicated userbase, or maybe it's just because it's harder to find relevant, informative RS, but I've found that articles on tech and especially FOSS-related topics have significantly more lax editorial standards.
There's still a chance the speaker is just a huge STEMlord, but it could also go along the lines of "so there's this backdoor and that tracking feature, but Western OS have these as well, it'll just be the CIA instead of the DPRK spying on you."
CCC is a left-ish hacktivist group. They're kinda radlib at times, but they're reliably pro piracy, pro privacy, pro whistleblowing and feature leftist activists in their conferences. I haven't seen the vid about Red Star, but there's at least a chance the speaker is much less biased than your average mainstream news outlet.
Their vids are often very dry and the speakers tend to be on the dorkier side, but they're a good source for OpSec and what the surveilance apparatus both public and private have been up to lately. Their vids all have English subs afaik, too, but i don't know how good the translations are.
Oh that's actually based, hell yeah. Still a weird for it to be the only source on wikipedia, i've seen wiki remove links to what to similar sites and say it doesn't hold up to their standards. To be clear, that's on wikipedia for being arbitrarily selective, not this group.
Maybe it's just a result of the interests of Wikipedia's dedicated userbase, or maybe it's just because it's harder to find relevant, informative RS, but I've found that articles on tech and especially FOSS-related topics have significantly more lax editorial standards.
I've noticed that as well.
There's still a chance the speaker is just a huge STEMlord, but it could also go along the lines of "so there's this backdoor and that tracking feature, but Western OS have these as well, it'll just be the CIA instead of the DPRK spying on you."