The title is not mine and the paper the article is responding to was published last month, not two years ago as you claim. The only mention of Musk in the entire article is in this one sentence:

Unlike self-serving warnings from Open AI CEO Sam Altman or Elon Musk about the “existential risk” artificial general intelligence poses to humanity, Google’s research focuses on real harm that generative AI is currently causing and could get worse in the future.

Why are you defending Privacy Tools so hard here? Literally anyone can look at the website and see within seconds that it is absolutely loaded with ads and affiliate links. The owner sold out years ago, the privacy community moved on and now he's mad that he can't AFK farm money from his shit website. He has absolutely zero credibility and writes stuff like "fuck fame, fuck money, fuck dishonesty" in that post when he himself literally used the fame of his website to make money by dishonestly recommending sponsored shit on it. It is absolutely bizarre to me that you hold this person up as some kind of moral authority and believe everything he says.

There is, it's the exact one that user and the delusional founder of Privacy Tools have a hate boner for. Privacy Guides is non-profit with no ads or affiliate links.

"There's no doubt, some of the bleed from online will go to Amazon," he said, describing the prospect as worrying.

How many major competitors remain?

Always funny when people try to pretend this PrivacyTools guy is some brave whistleblower when in reality he destroyed his own website going for a cash grab and then got butthurt when people created better alternatives that actually gave genuine advice instead of ads.

Can you please read the rest of my comment before replying? Literally the very next sentence after the one you quoted answers your question.

I don’t like people who exempt themselves from the rules they preach

Techlore isn't about preaching rules or activism, though. Their aim is to provide balanced and nuanced information for people with lower threat models. Often that means that the products or services they discuss or recommend to certain viewers are nowhere near the most private or ethical overall; they're just the ones that have the right balance of privacy and convenience for that person.

This is all made even more irrelevant by the fact that they actually did close their Discord earlier this year, now that their official forums are in a better state for real-time communication.

Darwin resident David Ciaravolo said his partner was hit when a group of teenagers were shooting fireworks at people celebrating Territory Day at Dripstone Cliffs.

"It's a bit of a tradition for us to head down there … we really love Territory Day, but unfortunately the vibe down there was absolutely terrible this year," he told ABC Radio Darwin.

"This was people hiding in bushes and attacking people with fireworks and running away and setting up and doing it again. And you honestly had no idea where they were.

"My partner copped a direct hit. Luckily she turned just in time and copped it in the back. If that was in the front, or in the face, it would have been the loss of an eye.

"She was bleeding … it's quite a nasty wound."

Mr Ciaravolo said he saw people putting fireworks under cars and lighting them towards cars, including a ute with people in the back.

NT Police Watch Commander Clinton Stewart said emergency services responded to multiple spot fires across the territory.

"The behaviour overnight has been good … We've had less fires than we've had in previous years … and people have been abiding by regulations better this year than we've had in previous years."

The NT is a bit special, isn't it?

They didn't move from Matrix to Discord, that's a very misleading way to frame it. They had Matrix, Discord and their forums, then they closed Matrix and encouraged people to use the forums instead. They left the Discord open for people who require real-time privacy advice. Here is their detailed reasoning behind the change, if you are interested.

This is a discussion on the physical components and environmental impact of these units, not the health issues they cause.

The article is about both. It's predominantly about the environmental impact but there is also mention of the unknown health effects of the e-liquid, with a link to another article that goes into a lot more detail on that aspect. It seems fair to discuss both the environmental and health impacts to me.

Great attack by Pogacar, the descending was pretty scary. Evenepoel seemed to be struggling with it on the more technical section with the switchbacks but once it straightened out he looked extremely strong once again. He is impressing me considering this is his first time racing at the Tour.

Carapaz getting dropped early on Galibier with his teammates up ahead was very strange. I'm not sure if the team was hedging its bets or there was poor communication but it looked pretty bad considering they ended up dragging him to the finish line anyway. Contrast that with how quickly UAE sorted out their issues when Ayuso was shirking his team responsibilities on the final climb.

Interesting article. The results of the author's research is consistent with my understanding of the social media landscape in countries like the Philippines, which I believe are extremely toxic and partisan. However, I'm not sure the additional studies linked support the argument that social media does not increase polarisation. I've only read the abstracts of each so it's quite possible I'm overlooking something, but they immediately seem flawed due to their reliance on consenting participants. I would have thought that anyone who agrees to take part in such a study is clearly an outlier within society and therefore not a reliable test subject. Polarisation via algorithm relies on people being unwittingly exposed to content; if they're switched on enough to deactivate their social media accounts or disable re-shares as part of a study into political polarisation, they are clearly not representative of society at large.