What are you scared of?

If you are worried your parents will see your browsing history, that is you threat model.

If your concern is government surveillance, you need to do more than just clear your browsing history.

Looks like this happened:

OpenSSH server has had built-in support for WebAuthn keys since 8.2.

What type of key do you have. Yubikey 5 supports multiple protocols including some you can use with SSH:

• Multi-protocol: YubiKey 5 Series is the most versatile security key supporting multiple authentication protocols including FIDO2/WebAuthn (hardware bound passkey), FIDO U2F, Yubico OTP, OATH-TOTP, OATH-HOTP, Smart card (PIV) and OpenPGP.

SSH would need to implement webauthn to support FIDO.

I like S3 because I only pay for what I use and it has auto storage tiering.

You should name it Hawk, so people can call it Hawk-Tui.

This is the relevant part of the article:

“That is why on several occasions, the agency has sent agents to train at an 80 percent-scale mock White House in Atlanta, built as a movie set by the filmmaker Tyler Perry. That was built in four months.”

Nothing more than that in the article. It is really just one part of the overall story about all the problems the secret service is having. So the point us they are underfunded?

It must be for wifi that they operate.

I run Emby and MythTV on a Beelink Mini PC. It is a little pricey compared to some of the options you mentioned but not by too much. It works really well and is very quiet:

https://www.amazon.com/Beelink-SER5-5560U-500GB-Computer/dp/B0B3WYVB2D

I would go past underrated and day much maligned.

Passkey is FIDO2.

Change is hard. It has been a long road to get where we are today: major OS and Browser vendor support. Users now need to change their behavior.

Passkey is resistant to these attacks, but user adoption is not widespread enough for Discord to be able to mandate it.

A lot of legal detail in this post. Here are three key points I pulled out the aricle:

• Internet users have a First Amendment right to speak on social media—whether by posting or commenting—and that right may be infringed when the government seeks to  interfere with content moderation, but it will not be infringed  by the independent decisions of the platforms themselves.

• Underlying these rulings is the Supreme Court’s long-awaited recognition that social media platforms routinely moderate users’ speech

• This term’s cases also confirm that traditional First Amendment rules apply to social media