matter

You've misunderstood. With the client code you can be sure that your messages are properly encrypted before leaving the device. If that's done correctly, you don't need to trust the server, because it can't read your messages just like some attacker couldn't. Signal is pretty similar, they didn't update the public server source for a few years, and even with the source, we can't know that that is what they're actually running. But with a verified build of the client code we can know that our messages are encrypted such that, even if they held on to them until quantum computers became mainstream, they'd still be properly protected.

Only the client. Though that's probably enough to make sure messages leave your device suitably encrypted. Depending on the algos it could be quite vulnerable to hndl attacks, though, or (less likely) any undiscovered backdoors in the implementations. Of course, even for Signal one has to trust they're using the public server code anyway, but at least we know they're folding in a quantum-resistant algo.

You don't understand why people might more frequently discuss the actions of someone with enormous power and influence, than they would those of Darryl from high school?

I thought this was the most common opinion

Ok, but not every random asshole is the richest guy in the world...

when usually the purpose of a question like that is more like "what was the result when you talked to them?"

But then say that? There's a clear distinction in tone between those two wordings, even if they express similar thoughts.

Your idea of cool/dorky is a conservative psyop

My knees get really sore and stiff sitting bent for a long time, I need to stand up when I can. I'm not in a rush to get off the plane 95% of the time (unless late for a tight connection obviously) but I can see how it'd look like that.

Yeah, it is also just a philosophy word. But antisemites use it to refer to "dialectical materialism", which is a real term for Marxist philosophy, but by which they mean "cultural Marxism", a thing they made up by which they in turn mean "the Jews are going to impose communism on us through psyops that convince us it is good, so we have to exterminate them."

Basically, like much of their coded language, it is a reference to a conspiracy theory.

I don't think that's right, context matters. It spreads when it is shared uncritically and people come across it in a context where they don't have their guard up. I believe it is preventative, to some extent, the other way around, when it is shared in a context ripping it to shreds.

People will come across antisemitism in the wild, and it is important that they learn to recognise it. This quote is pretty extreme, but it is important that people know that antisemites use words like e.g. "dialectical" as a dog whistle. The next time they hear someone say something about it when one of their facebook friends share something they might notice that they talk about "Hollywood elites" or whatever in the same way.

Without a good understanding of how antisemitism works we are all susceptible.

In a just world it would be, but the consequence of being labelled and perceived as a "natural leader" is that one can get away with shirking their responsibility, avoiding sacrifice, and abusing their position without much repercussion.

Wrong, this is something almost universally acknowledged in feminist circles.