SatanicNotMessianic @ SatanicNotMessianic @lemmy.ml

Posts

4

Comments

930

Joined

2 yr. ago

Please forward this plot outline to GRRM.

There’s two things that apply in this situation. The first is that like several other states, they’re not making getting an abortion in another state illegal, they’re making traveling on their infrastructure for the purposes of obtaining an abortion in another state illegal. Is that an unconstitutional restriction on interstate commerce? Who the fuck knows anymore? I don’t think it will hold, but I didn’t expect Justice Thomas to rise like Cthulhu from his eternal and well grifted slumber to kill Roe, so I’m not offering an opinion on that.

The second way, and this is also worrying me, is that while they can’t make flying to California to smoke pot illegal, they can make having pot in your system when you land back in Texas illegal. If they can’t make having an abortion in CA illegal, can they still use medical records to track that your pregnancy was terminated out of state, and prosecute you on a charge after returning to the state with a terminated pregnancy?

To be honest, I think that will fail too, but I’m sure it’ll land on the books someplace.

I’m also sure that these will all become national level laws because people still think politics is a team sport, and if it does not terrify you that the worst president in the history of the US and with openly fascist statements of taking full control and going after his enemies is running neck and neck with just a regular pre-2000s style politician, you’re either not paying attention or you’re privileged as all fuck.

I had exactly this happen to a friend of mine in NYC in the 90s, minus the stabbing part. He was walking in midtown and got jumped by a handful of guys who gaybashed him. Two cops were across the street and just kept drinking their coffees while watching.

I mean, I did it and quite a bit more when I bought a house. That down payment check was the largest I ever wrote.

I do agree with you that it’s been more stable than I expected, but it’s not like everything’s been fine. They’ve throttled usage a few times, there was that weekend where they pretty much just shut down. Although lately it’s been a bit better, there were a few weeks there where I couldn’t get twitter links to work more than a third of the time, and videos are still iffy. Plus, we don’t have visibility into all of their operations. I’d have no way of knowing if Twitter Japan was down for twenty minutes on Wednesday. Most people just retry, and small outages are forgot to g about by everyone except the ops center.

Isn’t that the same woman who has a currently circulating stock photo with a very badly gripped .45?

Not coincidentally, an entire literature has been written on this by constitutional scholars and historians in the past few years.

Unless I am misremembering, they had what they thought was a pretty firm link between the suicide-by-piloting crash in Europe and a pilot’s relationship/divorce.

I mean, “intentional pilot crashing” is probably not in the top ten list of causes of air fatalities, but I wonder if they should have an additional level of screening because of the possibility of job stresses and responsibilities clashing with the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune.

No, they think it’s part of a woman’s anatomy and so can’t find the option.

I am happy for the guy, but I think I would have picked one of the other contestants.

Do you think this is outside of the expected number of deaths at this point?

Israel usually kills 10-20 Palestinians for every Israeli killed, so we can expect about 15-30k total Palestinian deaths from this, most of whom will be civilians.

I expect the number of deaths per day is going to ramp up once the hospitals and food centers run out of resources.

Has anyone said anything about a motive yet? I haven’t seen anyone say why they think he tried to do it.

What I’m saying is that their pre-IPO valuation dropped by 2/3 before the additional user drop post-Spez closing everything down because he literally said he’s trying to do what Elon is doing to Twitter.

To be even more clear, what Elon is doing to Twitter has cratered them from the $44B that he paid for it (which was at the time probably overvaluing them by about 10-15%) to what was in April (as I recall) a $15B company as per the write down from their major bank investor. It is now widely considered a $4B company post the X transition and I think they’re still somehow bleeding valuation. Even that might be generous, since it has come out that Dorsey only kept his $1B stake in the company under the agreement that they’d buy his shares from him at the original $54.20 offer, so you can count that as yet more debt - this time for a quarter of the worth of the company. The Saudis also agreed not to sell and hold another $1.5B iirc, so if they have a similar deal Twitter is a $4B company with an additional outstanding and not on the books debt of $2.5-3B.

Spez did what he did because they crashed from a massively overvalued IPO estimate - what the bank that will be writing their IPO expects the company is worth - to about a third of what they thought. That’s why Reddit freaked out - Spez was watching his (hypothetical) money being set on fire. He really thought he was going to be the next Silicon Valley multimillionaire based on that site. His attempt at Eloning has not, based on anything I’ve read, increased the value of the site.

I think most of the cratering is because, as we all know, the money went away. That’s the same cause of the 500k layoffs in the tech field or whatever we’re up to. Literally everyone but Apple has cut tens of thousands of people because the covid boom and the free money went away. He’s still chasing the dragon and lashing out in a panic.

Spez thought he was going to be the next Elon. He’s going to be the next Tom MySpace if he’s lucky at all, and even that is more than he deserves.

On social media sites, the users are the ones who create the value. The company provides the structure to expose that through developing the software and the algorithms, and obviously paying to host everything. But unlike, say, a newspaper, everything that makes the site worth visiting at all is the community.

The moderation is the product. That’s it, 100%. When they get confused about that - that is, when they lose sight of the fact that 100% of their real value is being created for free, and their job is to just get it to people - their community starts to fall apart. A fall in KPIs, pre-IPO, is deadly. I would be shocked if they go through with it at this point, because they’re going to get killed. spez needs to show ballooning numbers to justify anyone institutional investors staying involved.

They should sell themselves to anyone willing to write a check at this point.

Just as a note, losing 2% (and there’s a lot of different and more meaningful KPIs) is a really big deal if you’re supposed to be growing double digits. The ridiculous valuations built into tech companies is based on massive growth, not current numbers. If you’re expected to grow at 30% and instead you lose 2%, that’s a massive loss. Reddit, last I checked (before the rexit) had come down something like 66% in the estimated IPO valuation. That’s why they freaked out and basically banned third party apps in favor of controlling advertising and subscriptions. They said they want to emulate what Twitter is doing.

If they do go through with their going public, the short side is going to kill them. I think the appeal of Reddit is different than Facebook and that they’re going to do a slow run of Digg and MySpace.

No you literally cannot. I’ve done this for a living. This is beyond the pale in scientific ethics and would be absolutely fatal for a career.

This is not the FBI or the NYPD. There is no court. There is a panel of your peers who have been through exactly all of those questions, and who consider the entirely morally offensive.

And the think is that it’s not even needed. If you’re in a position to work with this kind of data, there are legitimate sources of the data that will be made available to you which are documentable.

And you literally can’t sneak stuff in with parallel construction because you have to meticulously cite everything that you’re basing your research on. I don’t know how to be more plain than saying I would see a student expelled for this faster than I would for plagiarism. And now that I’m working more in the commercial side, working with stolen data would get you fired. There is a zero tolerance policy.

We have access to this level of data and more. If we need it, we will write a check for it and jump through the hoops to get it, and it will have gone through review for ethical research by people whose entire careers are grounded in studying scientific ethics so that we don’t repeat the mistakes of the past.

I’m sorry if I’m being a bit enthusiastic about defending this point, but it’s something that the western scientific community has quite honestly fucked up for centuries and it involves something that makes almost all of us extremely concerned about companies like 23 and Me even existing. It’s a thing that we’re still figuring out, and that’s even under the legal and licensed access to that data. This is like talking to Richard Stallman about Palantir.

No, you will not be able to get a grant by stating you’re going to do a population study using stolen data.

When you do research involving people or data about them, you have to go through your institution’s Human Subjects Board (or equivalent). They’re looking for things like informed consent and that the study population in particular (as opposed to humanity in general) will see some benefit and will not be harmed. Your proposal then goes through similar reviews by the grants committee, and will probably have been looked at by your department.

Even to access survey data that’s already been collected and has been used in hundreds of studies already, you have to jump through those very necessary and important hoops.

I can’t even see commercial researchers being allowed to use stolen data if they want their work published and accepted by the scientific community. There’s not even a grey area there - it’s just straight up unethical.

There was a study done by Facebook about a decade ago where they pushed negative articles to some users and positive ones to others and then looked at the emotional content of later posts by those people, finding a small but statistically significant correlation. They were excoriated in the literature for not securing consent and for running an unethical study that, for instance, could have led to episodes of depression or self-harm in parts of vulnerable populations. I’m not sure if the authors received a penalty for their work, but it violated scientific ethics pretty severely.

You have to go through training, sometimes multiple times per year, if you’re permitted to work with human subjects data, whether you’re conducting the study or using existing work. I could see accessing a cache of stolen data to be a career ending offense.

At this point, an imposed solution is not possible given our political realities.

What probably should have happened is the replacement of the colonial government with a UN mandate.

There would have likely been a fight. It would have involved the UN in an actual war. In the peace agreement, a constitution would have to have been introduced that created a democratic government in Palestine that guaranteed representation for both the Jewish and Arab populations with an allocated number of seats for each and a rotating executive. I’m obviously not going to write a constitution from scratch as a lemmy post but the major features would have been an occupation by an international military force (we’re assuming a democratic UN with actual military power rather than what we ended up with), and a legally mandated power sharing agreement, plus statutory enforcement of something like the universal declaration of human rights. The country would not be allowed an independent military, but would instead have its territorial integrity secured by the UN, which would be legally obligated to defend it with any necessary level of force, including the full commitment of the major powers.

Hypothetically, the US could commit itself to secure the territorial integrity of the West Bank and Gaza, demand the withdrawal from Israeli settlements in Palestinian territories, and start funneling a crapload of aid for the construction of civil infrastructure and industrial development. It would involve very strong diplomacy and possibly military deployment and engagement.

I think what’s more realistically going to happen is about 2k Israeli deaths, and 20k or more Palestinian deaths from direct and indirect causes. I also suspect that Hamas will cease to exist as a viable political entity and that at least part of Gaza will be occupied by Israeli forces, which will see persistent levels of resistance despite what I expect will be lockdown conditions.

I would think this was fake, except for the fact that the person performing looks exactly like someone who would recreate Neolithic musical instruments and perform on them.

From America’s wang to Vera Wang in one easy step.