I feel like this a cultural thing because that sounds wild to me.

The penalty for burglary where I am is not death, nor am I a judge or executioner.

We’ve been broken into a lot and it’s usually just some poor asshole who wants to steal things to buy meth. It’s horrible and scary and feels like a massive violation but shooting someone in that scenario just feels like straight up murder.

Not American, or really knowledgeable about it but from the outside, I think this looks like ordinary politicking.

IVF is a proxy war for abortion. Dems want the talking point that abortion bans hurt/block IVF. Republicans/Trump want to remove that talking point by saying they love IVF “we want more babies right?” and will support laws to protect it as a separate and unrelated issue to abortion.

Dems put forward a bill that not only protects it but makes insurance companies pay for it. Trump is fine with that because it benefits him but Republicans in Congress get big money from insurance lobbyists and so they can’t vote for it. They also have fears that they’ll piss off their homophobic supporters by making them pay for something the gays might use (insurance costs will go up to help someone who isn’t me!").

Republicans put forward another bill that protects IVF without hurting their insurance company buddies but the Dems block it. Republicans then have to vote against the IVF bill and the Dems can now say “see! They really don’t care about reproductive rights at all!”

Feels a bit like nobody involved actually cares about IVF at all and just wants votes and lobbyist money.

In case this take comes across too centrist: Republicans and Trump are really quite shit.

You forgot interrobang‽ The most important and incredulous reason for a compose key.

This is called “semantic satiation” which are both pleasingly weird words now that I think about it…

Yeah, that’s fair enough, though I’m not sure it’s very different from malicious instances creating normal user accounts?

You can see when users from an instance are all suspiciously voting the same way at the same time regardless of whether they are usernames or IDs.

There’s lots of legitimate users that only vote but never post so doing it based on that doesn’t seem very effective?

The second problem is solved using public key cryptography, the same way that you can’t impersonate someone else’s username to post comments. Votes and comments are digitally signed (There would need to be a different public key for voting to maintain pseudonymity though).

How about pseudonymous as a compromise? Votes could be publicly federated but tied to some uuid instead of the username. That way you still have the same anti spam ability (can see that a user upvoted these things from this instance at this time) but can’t tie it directly to comments or actual user accounts without some extra osint.

It might be theoretically possible to correlate the uuids with an account’s activity and dox the user in some cases, especially with some instances having a single user, but it would be very difficult or impossible to do on larger instances and would add an extra layer. Single user instances would be kind of impossible to make totally private anyway because they can be identified by instance.

It does sound very strange. What kind of anti-China content would ever help a student’s application process? Most of the application documents are about things like English language competency, visa requirements and prior qualifications, not political opinions.

Haha, the internet did not fit on a 1.44mb floppy in 1998. Curious to know what was on this‽

1998 was well into the CD-ROM era and the internet was full of .mp3s and .isos by then.

It’s not that it’s on the 172.16.0.0/12 range. That’s totally normal and used for all kinds of stuff.

It’s that it’s in 172.16.42.0/24 which is the default dhcp settings for a wifi pineapple. It’s the /24 mask given on the .42 that’s a little suspicious because that’s not a common range for anything else.

Being assigned one of those specific 253 hosts with that subnet mask would definitely make me think twice.

Pretty sure it’s an autocomplete (like copilot or something)

They were typing

progress != “Hold”

And the ai autocomplete suggested

progress != “Hold onto your butts!”

Hence why the completion part is in grey (it’s a suggestion)

It sounds like they controlled for that and did a bunch of different statistical models to break it down by different demographics and economics. That said, I’m finding it hard to find the original paper. It’s not linked to in the article or any of the AP versions I found. Nature has a link to Google scholar but that comes up with nothing and it’s not referenced in the researcher’s publications on the Oxford site yet. Maybe it went to the press already but the actual article isn’t out yet?

It does sound very broad though and difficult/impossible to draw any causation. Still interesting through as it does kinda show that any negative causative link that might exist between well-being and internet use is not strong enough to outweigh other positive factors that are correlated with it (even non-causative ones).

Looks more /usr/bucket/cat