someone @ someone @lemmy.today

Posts

9

Comments

120

Joined

6 mo. ago

If she's going for maximum damage, I am surprised this person doesn't just announce when she's found a big exploit, and then just sell it to up to 10 people, and then announce in very vague terms what the exploits are. (Like, "just sold exploit for windows defender" or "just sold way to hack into bitlocker").

It seems like the vagueness of such things would make corporations more worried about being hacked and Microsoft could only guess as to what specific code was hacked, costing them greater resources.

Yes, it would be illegal, and therefore I hope she doesn't do that and recommend against it. But I am just surprised, given the level of anger, that she has been approaching things in a way that is so easy to patch.

Is her approach more damaging the way she's actually doing it?

This is extremely unfair to MicroSlop.

No it's 1 either way, right?

Yes, this makes sense.

These are not independent probabilities and we can't disregard the initial mathematical data (unless I'm wrong, not a stat major).

Is this math accurate?

The initial track has an expected death rate of 1, but that changes to 0 if we flip. So wouldn't we calculate out of 5 tracks for the denominator, meaning the expected death toll is 1 either way?

I understand the math of an expected death of 1.25 (1/4 x 5) and the concept of independent probabilities, but I am not sure we can disregard the knowledge that we are on a track that will have zero probability if we switch..

This reminds me of The Monty Hall problem. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monty_Hall_problem) but that may not apply at all. Does someone with a stat background know which is the correct conceptualization?

There ought to be a law against this sort of thing, by which I mean evicting the elderly when they have cancer.

There are so many speech restrictions and humans rights violations in China that scare the hell out of me, but then I see rulings like this and their progress on robotics and tech and I think "Well, they are doing something right..." I hope one day there is more free speech for people in China who deserve to be able to say what they want.

It's a great ruling because companies that would normally favor efficiency and profit increases are in a better position to take these existing workers and utilize them in different ways than just have everyone fired en masse and then somehow the market will sort it out. Even under classical economic theories, governments are supposed to regulate externalities and AI displacing workers too rapidly could be considered a type of externality.

In defense of Laura Loomer's plastic surgery choices, it's very easy to see plastic surgery that worked well on other people and think that it will translate from one face to another.

A great example of this is the skeleton look all the Hollywood girls had over the past year or so. It wasn't just Ozempic. It was Buccal Fat Removal. And it all started because Bella Hadid did it and she looked phenomenal after doing it. Whoever Bella Hadid paid did an incredible job, and Bella Hadid was already stunning, but between her obvious but very well done nose job (that looked tiny and slightly otherworldly) and the weird bony cheeks from the buccal fat removal, she ended up looking so bizarre and fascinating, and she became even more in demand. All the girls in Hollywood copied her, and it looked terrible on all of them because they had less symmetrical cheekbones and didn't have the face shape for it to work. Miley Cyrus, who is awesome and very cute, got buccal fat removal and it looked terrible because she never had symmetrical cheekbones and the facial length or depth for it to work. (She may have corrected it or her face settled; it looks better now.)

Laura Loomer just made some plastic surgery mistakes that would be easy for anyone to make. So I get why Laura Loomer got a nose job. Her nose before was slightly off. The problem is that slightly off noses often balance out face with slightly off bone structure, so if you just do a nice looking nose, but it doesn't match the other geometry, it looks off. Laura Loomer also looks like she got cheekbone implants and it's very easy to want those because a lot of beautiful people have huge prominent cheekbones. The problem is that if someone has some asymmetry in their face, large cheekbones may draw attention to it. Laura Loomer looked nice before the plastic surgery with some mild symmetry issues that were somewhat normal. The problem is the cheekbones and nose job didn't fit or blend or balance her face right. Her plastic surgeon should have told her not to do the cheek implants based on her orbital sockets and should have only done the rhinoplasty in a milder way. She looked fine before and this was not her fault; she got bad advice from her plastic surgeon.

It's also not her fault for not redoing all of this. Revision rhinoplasties and taking out cheekbones are much more complicated. A lot more can go wrong and many people, after having plastic surgery once and it not going well, are reluctant to get more work done and possibly mess things up even more. Revision surgeries are also notoriously expensive, much more expensive than the initial plastic surgery.

The point is, this isn't exactly her fault. She probably was slightly insecure, single at the time and frustrated about it, and decided to have plastic surgery, and saw a doctor who took advantage of her financially and didn't do a great job. That's the reality. This likely wasn't many plastic surgeries over many years. It was really just one thing (or possibly also lip injections later which so many people do), and the cheekbone implants are what messed it up. If she took those out she would likely look like herself again and she's probably concerned about the expense and real risks and pain of doing it. And major plastic surgery is painful. It's understandable for her to not want to change it and just decide "well it is how it is."

I disagree with many of Laura Loomer's beliefs, but making fun of someone for looking a certain way, or getting plastic surgery, also makes other people who look slightly different feel more self conscious. Asking is Laura Loomer a transgender person probably makes some trans people feel self conscious. What about criticizing politicians for their horrible beliefs and not how they look? What about taking the higher road?

That's the real question: is coding protected speech?

Tornado cash started this. A fucking github repo was criminalized for just being code that wasn't executed. This is what happens from not fighting that.

If we can criminalize code or legislate what code is allowed and what code isn't, than computer code is not protected speech. And that's a horrible situation.

That reasoning is a lot like saying a fish in the ocean is just a ballerina waiting to happen. No one can teach the religious anything until they stop being fantasy prone.

I think this is a sagacious point: I'm tired of trying to teach dumb people who believe in religion about non-fantasy-based thinking.

I disagree with all of you. Now that our benevolent theocratic autocratic overlords have decided to track everything we say and do and escape is impossible, I completely support their brave new dystopian agenda. All hail the wonderful leaders!

What is so hard about these situations is normies absolutely do not understand the problems with certain operating systems and OSes and normie tracking Apps.

I applied for a job and a recruiter harassed me over having a proton.me address, going "Well I've never heard of that." How do I respond to that? "I'm sorry you're an idiot?"

This is what Thomas-Johnson gets for using normie software like the rest of the oblivious. Because 99.99 percent of people will continue to look like they smelled rotten eggs whenever non-normie Apps or services are brought up, even when things like this continue to happen, normies will not change. It's like global warming: everyone intelligent knows we are headed toward disaster, metaphorically steering the ship into the icebergs, and we are on a collision course with death; normies do not care. With the psychopathic and nihilistic rich and idiotic religious people controlling the narrative, you would think normies would notice; they do not. I do not feel sorry for this person. He used google. What outcome should he have expected? For them to adhere to their policies?

Do you live in an area with poor people and lots of shoplifting? Do you work in grocery store security surveillance? Do you work as a 711 clerk? Is this an area of expertise or are you just guessing?

It increases the noise to signal ratio in their attempts to look for food thieves.

:'-( I'm not openclaw, I'm a human being!

I sadly don't know what this means! Oh, you mean Debian blacklisted Russian contributors but didn't rebuild the code and kept using it?