geosoco @ geosoco @kbin.social

Posts

393

Comments

226

Joined

2 yr. ago

Moderating

---

Even if they did, do you really want to pay more taxes to throw them in jail for 50$ worth of food? For the homeless folks, that's basically a paid vacation.

When you have folks on the street committing crime just to try and get into jail and off the streets, the system is broken.

straws ... grasping ...

if i had to guess, it's setting power limits on the cell/wifi radio chip.

Sure, but you shared the clarification the journalist used, so they've actually spelled out that it's not just school massacres in the article. It also doesn't necessarily imply the core title isn't true.

The more you read, the more you start to realize there are never clear definitions for anything. You always have to look for the author to clearly define what they're talking about.

They hired the same marketing firm to come up with a name that McDonalds' used.

It's already a sad state of affairs that you hear the phrase "school shooting" that your mind goes to the Columbine style shooting. That the concept has happened enough that people have a mental model for it.

I hear your desire to better classifications, but as the other reply noted to a parent, even someone shooting at a stop-sign is a red flag. None of that should be happening with any regularity. The fact that kids are carrying around guns and can even have them on school property is enough for parents to want something done to ensure their children are safe. It's enough for parents with money, to leave an area for fear of losing their children.

I hear you, that would definitely make the case more interesting, if it ever gets to that. That money also means he's way more likely for him to hire lawyers to get him off on some technicality so judges never have to take that on.

Looks like all those thoughts and prayers are working

wtf are you smoking? They all literally get right to the point of the article.

huh? I'm guessing you didn't mean to reply to me.

I was asking why the OP changed the title of the article to add "son of the president". As if it'd somehow make people care more about this total non-story.

What's with the title change here?

There's several other posts from other news articles that just get to the point and are less click-baity.

"Child poverty increases sharply after tax credit expiration" (PBS)
"Many Americans facing hardship as benefits created during COVID-19 end" (PBS)
"US Child poverty jumped and income declined in 2022 as COVID benefits expired" (modified slightly from the AP title)

Tech companies wouldn't exist. It's literally most of their business plans.

Yeah, i got that too. wtf is that shit.

I couldn't find another source so posted it anyway.

lol. it's not false info. It just doesn't apply anymore, and it still has important info.

You still don't get misinfo.

Great points! Yeah there's definitely a lot more variety and skill involved in Starfield. Most of the NMS ground combat is in the open and is easy to cheese, but it is satisfying to hop in your ship and start shooting things (though now they have it trigger incoming aircraft).

Neither of those are about network security, but are about the ability to collect data on individuals or to influence campaigns.

THe bans on university networks do not stop any of that, as this article points out.

Additionally, the app can still collect data on the university networks. It just has to wait to send it until they connect to a different network (eg. cellular)

If this was such a security concern, top-tier universities would be blocking it. Not 3rd and 4th tier universities with nothing to steal. If the Chinese government wanted data from a US university, they'd send someone over as a student to join the research labs it cared about.

Additionally, from the same article you linked about why your response and the bans themselves don't make sense:

TikTok is hardly the only company swallowing a lot of data on Americans, from car makers to smart doorbell firms. Consumers’ credit card purchases, contact lists and recent GPS locations are hawked by hundreds, if not thousands, of companies in the so-called data broker industry, Germain noted.

“If the Chinese government wanted it, they could just go out and buy it because it's for sale,” he said. “...I think people, when they're worried about TikTok doing something, they should ask themselves whether they should be worried about American companies doing the same thing.”

Was it? Which specific security concerns would this have addressed?

This doesn't stop that at all. It just wouldn't be able to send it to TikTok's servers while connected to the network, but that doesn't necessarily stop it from collecting shit.

Besides, if they wanted to 'spy' on universities, the ones that banned it almost certainly weren't the targets, and there's more effective ways to get important data like having stuff on people's laptops.

I don't think the IT teams were ever brought into that discussion, nor was security genuinely a concern. I think this was purely performance art.