abraxas @ abraxas @lemmy.ml

Posts

1

Comments

387

Joined

2 yr. ago

LOL. Looks like the 2013 study decided not to ask anyone they knew for sure would answer that they were glad they were free from the USSR.

Really depends on the country. In the US, death rate is really low. There might be a couple instances of getting shot at, but you're so much less likely to die of other causes it ironically makes up for it.

Of course, you get these spikes in death rates in the military, like if you're sent to an active warzone. We just measure "dangerous jobs" by year.

That "Blue Lives Matter" wasn't ever about caring about police lives, only a counter to Black Lives Matter. Black Lives Matter was formed because innocent black people kept being killed. Blue Lives Matter was formed because being challenged with that fact offended them.

When a police officer shoots a black man because he's intimidated by his skin color, the defense "his life matters, too" is bullshit. Since Blue Lives Matter didn't actually have anything to do with violence against police officers, it's bullshit.

Ironically, I would say Blue Lives Matter caused people to target police officers, who really hadn't been targeted before. One could argue it is more accurate that Blue Lives Matter caused more unjustified police incidents against black people, which caused more misguided vigilante-style violence against police.

Bingo! And it's kinda hard to make a soundbyte explanation for why something is too complicated for a soundbyte :)

I'll give a different angle, as I see it.

A problem is that reality is complicated and makes shit for soundbytes. That means your options are to lie to constituents, or to actually have policy ideals that are just harder to explain.

Defund the Police is a great example. We simply lean on the police too heavily. We DO need to defund them. They should not be the first line for mental health breaks, the first line for non-physical domestic disputes, etc. I know other countries do this, but in the US I would argue the current format of police shouldn't be used for situations where violence is unlikely... and yeah, I mean things like driving infractions. Not only are they not great at it, but they are also not TRUSTED. In a country where someone getting a ticket for pulling through a stop sign literally fears for their life because they're black, we should be offering a justice system that makes such a danger impossible because it won't be kill-trained people with guns giving them their ticket.

Similarly, our police are over-equipped. Too many SWAT teams, used too lightly in situations without elevated risk or without enough red tape to require better information-gathering. And not unlike a bad comic book, SWAT team members have to hide their identity because they know the masses hate and fear them. I've known spouses of SWAT team members, and the rule is that nobody but those closest to you can know that's what they do. Not unlike drug dealers.

So stepping back, all those things are a nice ball of "what I fucking want to vote for". If you had 5 seconds to explain it, what would you say? I would say "defund the police". Because it's strictly accurate in a dozen ways AND it isn't even pretending to say "abolish the police" because that would be "absolish the police".

So yeah. The Right looks at Defund the Police and says "see, they're trying to abolish the police. Let's back the blue" and it's all over.

I'm gonna say BLM was the same. BLM had clear numbers, clear figures, a clear message. Stop killing black people. They had people marching with (posters of) unarmed black people who were killed without any reasonable suspicion of a crime. They had everything you could need. But then you had an orange fascist prick saying "All lives matter". NO SHIT all lives matter. But how many white people do these idiots know who have been wrongfullly abused by police? Post-BLM, we are way down on black deaths by cop; it's only TWICE their representation.

You say you're not an American, so I get it. But the real problem with BLM is exactly what we have complained it is... full-on-racism. BLM became a riot in many areas because White Supremecists working with the police started the riots to give an excuse to end the protests. The message was trampled on, not because it was bad, but because we are a horrible country right now. And yes, innocent people only see the fallout and the sound bytes on TV. When the most powerful man in the country has this message that "all lives matter", anyone who is not politically savvy is going to just nod their head and agree.

Yeah, but a lot of dumb people who could have supported BLM were swayed by Blue Lives Matter or All Lives Matter bullshit, especially if they work in or around emergency. There's a lot of non-conservatives in emergency fields that are especially succeptable to that kind of bullshit despite being otherwise good human beings.

I've talked at least two away from the "Blue/All Lives Matter" ledge. You have to do it delicately, but the whole problem with all this shit is that there ARE people who are not really racist who can be convinced that "there's a lot of cops dying in BLM riots" because that's what they're being told. When you have black friends who says "I don't want to be anywhere near BLM because they just make us look bad", you know that people are spreading some real fake shit. But instead of hating on them, you can just show them that BLM is not riots and Blue Lives Matter is not about stopping cops from being killed.

And then, the ones who aren't racist... they do listen.

And yet they do, statistically, die more than most other jobs. Pilots have every business being on here because the comic creator just literally took a "top X dangerous jobs list" and turned it into a meme.

Passengering is safe. Piloting, less so. Just like riding in a bus is statistically safer than being a career driver. Because you get off the bus, and that driver does 7 more runs. Alongside a long-haul truck driver carrying zero people. Etc. But Piloting is more dangerous than driving a truck.

Oh I followed that one, too.

The thing is, unless there's a great breakthrough, individual behavior is dramatically less predictable than mob behavior. The Target algorithm was a great case study, but they sent those ads/coupons to EVERYONE who fit the algorithm, and much of the time they were EITHER right OR wrong. Target dropped that particular style of campaign because it had too low a match rate (hitting too many non-pregnant folks and missing too many pregnant ones). When it had that "shocking success", was it truly a great moment for predictive AI's, or just the chips falling right with the AI simply adjusting odds a bit?

But no, the predictive technology is harder; I say that as someone who has worked in a predictive data science division. The tuning required to make a model work better than control is hard. Ultimately, if you get ads for something you've never searched for before the same day you SAY you want that something, it's the voice recognition. I'll be clear, most models we'd work on would fail to prove themselves, get thrown out, and be picked up again. If we'd had the abililty to buy voice matches for the word "insurance" from Amazon/Google, we have been in bloody paradise.

"Oh, you wanted me to make a soda fizz, right? We should get St. Germain because that's good in it." .... starts getting St. Germain commercials every 5 minutes. Didn't even know they had commercials. Fucking St. Germain.

EDIT: And I have tested it. Came up with stupid things to say in front of speakers a few times, and some have definitely shown up in really bizarre TV ads. I get it, I know why Chewy is advertising to me. But what about the Plant Based Burger commercials I got in a sudden storm for a month? I'm a meat-lover, but decided to talk about plant-based burgers in my living room where the speaker is.

Not sure if you're in the US. But if you are, you should leave this anonymously on the security team's desks.

> Verifiers SHOULD NOT require memorized secrets to be changed arbitrarily (e.g., periodically). However, verifiers SHALL force a change if there is evidence of compromise of the authenticator. - NIST control SP 800-63B Section 5.1.1.2

Basically a fairly widespread standard of security. All kinda of complaince you can fall out of if you do business with anyone who cares about NIST controls.

I do. This still happens to me regularly. Companies love to fuck with their password algorithms way too much.

If I recall, a few (most) security experts now support written-on-paper passwords. Why? Because it is the solution for users who would otherwise commit far a more egregious security faux pas otherwise.

In most circumstances, it is easier to keep the notebook secure than your wallet, your car, etc. And let's be honest, the list of suspects are REALLY short if someone breaks into your house, opens the third drawer, grabs the notebook and runs. And if it's more than that and somebody ransacks your entire house, I guarantee having to change your passwords is the least of your headaches.

Ultimately, physical compromise is the lowest possible security risk for most people throughout their lives. Yes, it happens. Yes, it sucks. But having your bank password out in the wild with nobody realizing it is possibly far more dangerous.

They shouldn't be storing the old password hashed, either. Expired password hashes should be destroyed like any other potentially-sensitive information that is no longer business critical.

There is a reason hackers look to get users tables even though the passwords are hashed. Because with enough of them and enough time, they can usually figure out plaintext. Giving them 10 previous hashed passwords for each user is just increasing the hypothetical risk.

I've had arguments with clients' IT security about this in the past where they demanded forced password resets. Citing NIST controls that insist you should avoid them was apparently insufficient.

I never could get far in it. I have absolutely terrible hand-eye coordination for the exact type of action the game presents. I've never gotten past the second round of pony levels. I've lost at least 30 times in stage 4 (the second stage with floating demon heads). I just can't do both things at once.

Which is a shame. The puzzle part of the game is great. I wish there were a way to skip the action parts. I forgot all about it til your comment here. I might just have to give in and watch a let's play of it.

You are actually a little bit incorrect.

In the vein of words like homophobia, these words' definitions are not strictly in line with their etymology. Per every dictionary (but quoting Webster), transphobia is defined as:

irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against transgender people

And this might create some linguistic ambiguity, but I cannot seem to find actual documentation on a medical or psychological fear of transgender people at all. It seems this behavior is entirely (or almost entirely) a learned bigotry.

The other word, "transmisia", has not really been officially adopted in any circle I can find. The only place I could find it with any prominance is a site called the "Trans Language Primer", and I know nothing about it (except that it looks like geocities) so I won't be linking it directly. Suffice to say, they speak negatively of the term (despite defending it as having a good intention) and favor "transphobia" for reasons of clarity.

Yeah. Only a Senator would be dumb enough to realize individualized predictive AI is harder tech than voice recognition.

NGL this is driving me crazy. Without searching for things, just talking about them, they start showing up in ads. Even in places that don't have google/alexa speakers.

At this point, I'm reaching full-tinfoil and think they have a voice chip installed under my skinl...

I said it elsewhere. Basically, it combines low nutritional value with a high density pack of too-easily-digested carbs.

The effect is that it increases blood sugar and hunger, which very easily leads to higher weight. Higher weight alone is not immediately unhealthy, but it can get unhealthy pretty fast if you get heavier and heavier.

And the only objection is "well, better than sugar, so it's not THAT bad"... But we have a lot of added sugar in bread here in the US.

Hell yes.

My method is smoked pork bellies and hold the hamburger till next week. I'm a huge pork belly fan. I know they're horrible for me, but I don't eat em often.

If it's about cruelty, it might be time to eat better meat. I eat all local and organic meat and produce. The cows I eat? I know the lives they live before slaughter and I feel no shame in supporting the farms that give them those lives.

All it takes is more people fighting for better meat and the companies will oblige. They'll come up with their own promises of humane treatment (with their own markups, I'm sure) and they will be able to be held to them even if they lie at first.

The real problem isn't eating meat, it's eating McDonalds hamburgers not once caring where they came from or what's in them.

Again, just if it's about cruelty and federal oversight of free range laws. If you just don't want to eat meat, don't eat meat (but watch your A, B12, Iron, Zinc, etc)