On the contrary, if you don’t have business in a country and they just spam you or try to hack you why not block the whole IP range. China, India, Russia, Subsaharan Africa, SEA
I can assure you I am as white as they come, my family being a mix of Quebecois and Irish I'm "wears sunscreen in the winter" pale.
I'm at a loss for why you would assume something about my racial background from my view that voting should be made easy and convenient in a democracy. I'll go even further, in addition to being able to vote digitally you should automatically be registered to vote when you establish residency, voting should be compulsory*, and it should be a national holiday. But outside the bigger picture I selfishly want this because I don't want to bother driving to my polling place when I could voted in less time than it took to type this reply.
* I wouldn't have any punishment for not voting, that would be a huge mess. But I would have it on the books in the hopes that people would follow it simply because it's the law.
English is not my native language, so maybe I'm losing some context. How can that comment not be racist? I'm being genuine. Did something get over my head?
I don't know either. But it was the first time I'd ever seen this phrasing and searching the internet for it didn't turn up much. So I came up with what I thought the best-faith interpretation of it could be—that due to my (perceived) racial background I was deploying motivated reasoning to advocate for an action that appears neutral but was chosen because it would favor people who share my same political interests.
But I'm not sure that logic is sound even if it was my motivation. Old folks and rural folks would probably benefit most from voting access that wasn't tied to a physical location. So I don't know. I want to expand voting access because our turnout is so low, not because "the right people" aren't voting or whatever nonsense.
I know people involved at Trenchant and have trouble believing that anybody who worked there was shocked by this threat. Maybe things have changed post-L3Harris but "it" (it's more than one company) was an incredibly paranoid IT shop prior to the acquisition.
I read this article with a healthy amount of scepticism and read two separate stories:
1. This guy was targeted by spyware.
2. This guy was an iOS 0-day exploit developer and is involved with a bit of drama with his previous employer.
Everyone seems eager (including himself) on connecting the two, but why would the ex-employer go after him using illegal methods when they've agreed to a settlement and termination? Unless there's more to the story (which I strongly doubt) it seems to be combined mix of legitimate but misplaced paranoia and lashing out.
Firefighters recently resorted to breaking a Tesla’s window to free a 20-month-old child locked inside after one of the vehicle’s batteries died. The emergency rescue is the second of such incidents reported on this week by Arizona CBS news affiliate KPHO and reiterates the potential dangers of the EV company’s ongoing, under-addressed battery issues in extreme heat.
In July 2023, a 73-year-old man was reportedly forced to kick out a window in his Model Y after becoming trapped. A similar emergency occurred for a mother and her daughter in Illinois a few weeks later after renting a Tesla, while a California driver last month claimed she found herself stuck in her EV while waiting on an over-the-air software update that shut down her car. In the 40 minutes it took to complete the update, outside temperatures rose to 115-degrees Fahrenheit.
And yeah, if you know how, and can go through multiple steps:
The only other workaround to battery issues appears to be a step-by-step solution in the owner’s manual that only opens a dead Tesla’s front hood by ostensibly hotwiring the car using external jumper cables. If this is the case, then people who find themselves locked out of their EV may need to continue relying on EMS—and their axes—until Tesla decides to address the glaring safety hazard.
Right. I was talking about passenger safety. But sure, if you purposefully designed a vehicle that has poor pedestrian visibility and end up getting hit by that same vehicle due to that poor visibility, you shouldn't be surprised.
I agree that car analogies should be taken seriously.
Sure, cars are useful. But aiming to sell as many cars as possible is no more ethical than selling as many yachts as you can, especially if it involves making the living conditions worse for anyone who doesn't own a yacht, for example by bribing politicians, or destroying non-yacht-capable waterways.
How is that genocide? No one is being killed, no culture is being erased, no community is being wiped out. People might be persuaded to change their viewpoints but they are not forced to or sent to re-education camps.
This seems identical to saying that convincing someone with anorexia that they aren't overweight is "social death", and "social death" is (somehow) genocide.
To say nothing of using the same word as what happened in the holocaust or to the Armenians or native Americans or Rwanda or is happening in Xinjiang....
dysphoria is certainly a mental illness, transitioning is merely one possible treatment for it (though, pushed as one of the first rather than as one of the last options, which I personally find concerning.)
Being gay is not generally recognised as mental illness, although it has been in the past. Being trans is less well defined (historically even being gay was not well defined, or defined the same way).
That is why my solution is to be selective in who I socialize with, find a like-minded partner, and have lots of children.
My intent is to create a new society and culture free of the rot that infects every public space today.