I tried to use it to write software to rotate my screen in a way that would please me and if I wasn't an experienced sysadmin the code it produced would have destroyed the computer's battery in a year or so.
That was this year.
Everything it makes is bad, the prose is awful, the orthography bland, the code mediocre. Any factual query I have made has had at least one critical error a non expert would miss. They are machines for giving idiots false confidence, atrophying your own skills, and producing the sort of aggressively mediocre writing one finds on reddit.
I think it is fucking hilarious to be proud about making yourself dependent on an industry that literally 450 billion dollars in the hole and 2 companies. I am sure that'll work out well for you.
It happened the other way because the vast amount (97%) of convicted offenders are men, and that expert consensus is men are vastly more likely to offend. People have limited time and money, so research is funded when it is able to clearly state its impact.
I wish we had infinite resources in the academy, but we do not.
There are many requirements in the police training manual. For instance anyone being searched at all is meant to be taken somewhere private and their dignity preserved. I assume most people have seen this not happen.
At least one Australian expert says between 3% as likely as men to 25% as likely as men to offend. See below.
You can just look stuff up you know.
Joe Sullivan has spent 26 years counselling child sex offenders in the United Kingdom and is visiting Australia to attend an international police conference at Bond University on the Gold Coast.
While experts agree the majority of paedophiles are men, Dr Sullivan says women are responsible for more offences than previously thought.
"What I can say for certain is that it's way more prevalent than people fully appreciate or understand," he told the ABC.
"There's some research to suggest it could be as high as 25 per cent.
"However, when you look at the representation within the criminal justice system it could be as low as 3 to 4 per cent of overall convictions."
Well it's hard to say. Their sampling is pretty good, although mostly reflects the white population here as they discuss.
We don't really have better stats than self reports, and this is a good study of self reports. You could dive into the data to see exactly what are the major areas, they indicate it's CP, CP when also a child, sexual chats online mostly. With about 3% assault or worse.
Keep in mind it's not uniform, the wierdos and freaks are amusingly less likely to. It's more likely to be the well dressed guy with a family. So social elites. Depending on your crowd you might be pretty unlikely to know someone who does this.
To call China fascist is definitely an... adventurous take. There are lots of criticism you can make of their government but fascism? It's not just a word for when the government does oppressive stuff. Their military spend is small, they don't have ambitions of military expansion and government control only really of Taiwan. While Han culture is promoted China is very clearly a multiethnic state and there are active efforts to preserve some diverse cultural heritage, they definitely don't promote violent political struggle and stratification of the strong over the weak - really I would levy criticism towards the intense pursuit of order.
They are culturally very conservative, a massive surveillance state, censorious on some things, and harsh towards certain kinds of political dissidents but this doesn't make a government fascist.
It's obviously more important to judge people on what they do but just the prevalence is wild.
Some no doubt is power, given wealthy men are more likely. I think power destroys human minds and no amount is safe.
Even so, when I look at like 20 year olds they look and act like, well, children. Definitely not people I'm attracted to. I'm only 35, and I would say healthy 45-30 ish is what seems hot to me. Although I will admit I've always been drawn to people based on if they're clever (and how much they're across RAAC ;p) more than their body.
You should read the study if you want to know why it was done the way it was done. Scientists are very good at explaining why the criteria they selected are the criteria they selected.
From the summary report
This report is part of an international survey that included men in Australia, the US and the UK, where the age
of consent varies from 16 – 18 depending on the region and the offense. Accordingly, we used 18 as the age
of consent for all sexual offences, although the age of consent for sexual activity is 16 in Australia. Therefore,
some of what is noted as sexual contact with a child in our findings may be consensual activity (for instance,
a 19 year old having sex with a 17 year old), which is a limitation of the survey. However, it is unlikely that our
contact offense findings were significantly impacted by this limitation due to the following factors
Our survey included a question on whether participants had intentionally viewed “pornographic material”
containing people under the age of 18 (that is, child sexual abuse material). Participants could answer
whether they had never done so, had done so when they were under 18, or had done so when they were over 18. Since this was a forced option, those who accessed child sexual abuse material as a child, but continued
offending as adults, may not have been included in the adult offending analysis. As a result, our data on child
sexual abuse material offending may be an under-estimation.
That's probably the most heinous sexual offense there is. I've been at a work function where a guy pinned me against a wall and insisted I come home with him, everyone just looked on with a couple of awkward laughs. I'm not saying your friends are all bastards, but you've gotta have a pretty narrow or pretty small social circle to avoid running into predatory men.
My wife has done courses on warning signs for abusive relationships as part of some mental health first aid certification stuff.
2 biiiiiig red flags are insisting on surveillance and not letting people have separate finances. We have a combined account sure, and also pocket money accounts and whatever else. For all I know she's set up a trust. I mean I don't think she has because she'd probably tell me but she has the freedom to do so.
naevaTheRat @ naevaTheRat @lemmy.dbzer0.com Posts 40Comments 1,547Joined 2 yr. ago
Votes are public though, pretending that they're not is just deceiving users.
Anyone who admins a federated instance, and any of their friends, knows vote counts.
This is literally just reddit and hackernews, some of the worst and most astro-turfed socmed. Twitter post nazification too I guess.