« It has altered all of its addresses from beginning "HTTP" to "HTTPS", which is widely considered to be a more secure connection »
Widely considered, I love it.
Didn't get this. Any technical issues/anecdote to make this more interesting?
There's no subjectivity at stake, here: One is designed without security, the other is designed with security.
It's like saying the Atacama Desert is widely considered to be drier than a thunderstorm.
But if you think about that, the statement is about as good as it can be.
Explaining why may be beyond a particular audience, but that doesn't justify weakening the truth with weasel words.
The statement is not as good as it can be, because it introduces uncertainty where in reality there is none.
Out of curiosity: how do other news outlets fare ?
Does the Chinese government refer to it like that as well?
The Xi => Pooh comparison is (to my understanding) a common one in China, and one the Party tries to suppress.
I find it amazing how very powerful people can end up with such delicate egos. Here in the West we mock leaders all the time and it rarely undermines their authority.
Is there any more information about such instances or is that insider knowledge?