Indeed. The supply of fools with some money they want to desperately and blindly turn into more on the cheap is endless, and they never learn from history.
... at the moment. Fraud abounds, insecurity is rampart, major problems are unsolved. This half-baked idea would never have gotten big, were it not for the widespread greed and stupidity in the human race. For the moment, the idea has failed. It may get a revival when major problems have been solved, but that will take some time.
And unlimited, direct stock-trading? Are you serious? There is a reason major stocks are only traded at exchanges. Also, small-time investors are basically the victims that provide the profits of the large ones. Hence I can understand the desire to separate even more fools from their money, but a good idea it is not.
Indeed. She may have been selected as the scapegoat pretty early in the scheme. Or she could be guilty. But if she was framed, this does not sound like it required more than intermediate hacking skills, if that.
They just have the MAC address to identify her machine? No forensics on the laptop itself? That is crazy. MAC address changes are often as simple as running a single command as root. Finding the MAC address of a particular machine is a bit harder, not is that hard either if you are on-site.
I agree that things sound pretty fishy in her account. If all that was done to her, she would probably have a solid case and would probably sue for damages as well. But it sounds far more likely that there is solid evidence and procedures were followed. That still does not mean she is guilty and she could just remember things wrongly. She could also have been framed. One possibility is that those changing the grades got wind of an investigation and were looking for a scapegoat and she qualified. If you want a scapegoat, you always want somebody that makes a good victim. It is not that hard to hack the laptop of a non-expert and use it to access an already placed backdoor if you have some help on-site to do it. It is also not hard to leave false evidence behind and/or remove the evidence of the intrusion into the laptop.
That said, even a thorough, expensive, expert investigation may still not be able to determine the truth. It is all digital and that allows perfect falsification of evidence if you know what you are doing. That should mean a preference for "not guilty" and all that happens is her grades get reset to what they were before. That they kicked her out may just be because they also saw somebody not really able to fight back or because they thought they had solid evidence.
In the end, who we absolutely know screwed up here is Tufts: They hat IT security bad enough that they could be hacked and grades could be changed. That should definitely not have been possible. Everything else in this is murky at best.
The whole thing was botched badly. The attending doctor should have been there. The expert on the telepresence device should have refused to do this without him.
The person that failed this guy was not the expert on the telepresence device, although he should probably have refused to do this in this way. The doctor that failed him was his own, on-site doctor.
Seems pretty relevant. Although to be fair, in this case here they already knew they would be losing the customer. They will probably not get any business from his family and friends in the future though.
Yes, I get that telling this to a patient is hard. But if you cannot do it in person, then do not be a doctor or do pathology were patients are already dead.
I agree to all of that. But I think censorship will be even worse in its effects, at least long-term. Bit is there any other solution besides these two? I do at least not see one.
You are perfectly right that censorship is only part of the threat. I have long suspected that "controlling the narrative" is done on/. as well, probably by TLAs, and certainly by commercial organizations. (Just criticize Linux systemd and then remember that the US military is the largest Red Hats customer with apparently more than half their business to put the reaction into perspective. Right from a playbook, the PyOps/Marketing folks do not even try to come up with any rational arguments. It is all pure emotional manipulation. Although it has gotten weaker recently, probably not considered important enough anymore.) It is really quite repulsive and it gives too much power with too little oversight to those doing it. It is where western society is headed apparently though.
I agree on dissent. It is the point where people should start to ask "yes, they are wrong, but _why_ are they wrong?" Only a society that questions things is resilient to manipulation.
I am not arguing that this would be ineffective for the problem at hand. I am arguing that the risks of (long term) extreme negative side-effects are too large.
Well, yes. Fanatics are always convinced they have the truth, no matter what and that is pretty much what they are. What education may allow is to prevent others from even considering that these people may be right and it may prevent any laws from going their demented way.
No, I just don't lie to people like you and tell them, this is all perfectly safe and this will not hurt a bit.
And that I did do exactly where? Oh, right, I did not. What I said is that for the discussion at hand (Measles) vaccinations are _necessary_ and that not having them (unless there is a sound medical reason) is dangerous and harmful to others. That is a bit different from what you claim I have said.
Long-term: no. You will get a very bad reputation and lose a lot of business if or as soon as people have an alternative. But that takes a while. With the focus of the MBA-morons on just the next quarter, they only see the short-term and think they are doing things right.
But the anti-vaxxers do harm others and that is not acceptable.
You see this argument a lot. What it leaves is the question of why you don't trust the vaccine you got?
First, the measles vaccine is known to "only" be 97% effective. Second, there are children too young to be vaccinated and third, some people cannot be vaccinated because of medical issues. Also, herd immunity for Measles is at 93...95%, so there is not a lot of margin. Also, who said they would harm me? I find it completely unacceptable that some people have the arrogance to endanger others without any good arguments on their side. I think we need these restrictions on non-vaccinated (by choice) people as well, for example no access to public places like schools, restaurants, shops, etc.
I worked in the oxymoronically named intelligence community. You may or may not be surprised how much of the stuff that's classified is just to cover for a screwup of some sort.
I actually have some insight into that (without ever having held a clearance, don't ask), and I fully agree. One of the most important reasons to classify things is to hide screw-ups.
See George Carlin.
I love that guy. I am currently trying (and clearly failing) to follow his advice to just "not give a shit".
Of course, it's better for ME if YOU get vaccinated with a high risk vaccine...because herd immunity....so this is a case where it's easy for anyone running things to make a case it's the best for the most people, even if there ARE flaws in the current vaccines...you still wind up with fewer deaths.
Well, Measles is not a "high risk" vaccine. It is however an extremely contagious disease and its potential complications are pretty much "high-risk". So yes, medically it makes sense to vaccinate anybody except for a few special cases. You do end up with fewer people maimed and killed and that is what medicine aims for.
It's still the wrong way to get there from here. "Controlling the narrative" is just too damn dishonest and scary, and no power that exists hasn't been abused.
Indeed. Those in power cannot help themselves. They always abuse the power they have, so giving them more is a very bad idea. Until and unless the human race eventually finds a way to select better leaders, that problem will stay.
That is an exceptionally dangerous path you are advocating there. In principle, I would be thrilled if we could just squash all that anti-science, anti-truth nonsense. But history shows this may have exceptionally bad side-effects.
You seem to never have heard about how totalitarianism and ultimately fascism gets established. You should read up on it, there is a ton of historical precedent.
You are very deep into delusion. Nothing of that paranoia you are spouting has any connection to reality. I advise you to seek medical help before you harm yourself or others.
Indeed. While I do not like the term "order" (it is too close to "law" and law is a very dangerous construct that can easily be abused for fascism and worse) society requires some level of sacrifice (which must be carefully limited to sacrifices that actually make sense), and provides huge advantages in return. Anybody not willing to make the rational sacrifices has no place in society and should be removed from it.
Slashdot Mirror
Indeed. The supply of fools with some money they want to desperately and blindly turn into more on the cheap is endless, and they never learn from history.
... at the moment. Fraud abounds, insecurity is rampart, major problems are unsolved. This half-baked idea would never have gotten big, were it not for the widespread greed and stupidity in the human race. For the moment, the idea has failed. It may get a revival when major problems have been solved, but that will take some time.
And unlimited, direct stock-trading? Are you serious? There is a reason major stocks are only traded at exchanges. Also, small-time investors are basically the victims that provide the profits of the large ones. Hence I can understand the desire to separate even more fools from their money, but a good idea it is not.
You should cut back on whatever it is you use to get high. It does affect your mental faculties.
I was being sarcastic. And I may have confused threads, my apologies if so.
Indeed. She may have been selected as the scapegoat pretty early in the scheme. Or she could be guilty. But if she was framed, this does not sound like it required more than intermediate hacking skills, if that.
They just have the MAC address to identify her machine? No forensics on the laptop itself? That is crazy. MAC address changes are often as simple as running a single command as root. Finding the MAC address of a particular machine is a bit harder, not is that hard either if you are on-site.
I agree that things sound pretty fishy in her account. If all that was done to her, she would probably have a solid case and would probably sue for damages as well. But it sounds far more likely that there is solid evidence and procedures were followed. That still does not mean she is guilty and she could just remember things wrongly. She could also have been framed. One possibility is that those changing the grades got wind of an investigation and were looking for a scapegoat and she qualified. If you want a scapegoat, you always want somebody that makes a good victim. It is not that hard to hack the laptop of a non-expert and use it to access an already placed backdoor if you have some help on-site to do it. It is also not hard to leave false evidence behind and/or remove the evidence of the intrusion into the laptop.
That said, even a thorough, expensive, expert investigation may still not be able to determine the truth. It is all digital and that allows perfect falsification of evidence if you know what you are doing. That should mean a preference for "not guilty" and all that happens is her grades get reset to what they were before. That they kicked her out may just be because they also saw somebody not really able to fight back or because they thought they had solid evidence.
In the end, who we absolutely know screwed up here is Tufts: They hat IT security bad enough that they could be hacked and grades could be changed. That should definitely not have been possible. Everything else in this is murky at best.
The whole thing was botched badly. The attending doctor should have been there. The expert on the telepresence device should have refused to do this without him.
The person that failed this guy was not the expert on the telepresence device, although he should probably have refused to do this in this way. The doctor that failed him was his own, on-site doctor.
Seems pretty relevant. Although to be fair, in this case here they already knew they would be losing the customer. They will probably not get any business from his family and friends in the future though.
Yes, I get that telling this to a patient is hard. But if you cannot do it in person, then do not be a doctor or do pathology were patients are already dead.
I agree to all of that. But I think censorship will be even worse in its effects, at least long-term. Bit is there any other solution besides these two? I do at least not see one.
You are perfectly right that censorship is only part of the threat. I have long suspected that "controlling the narrative" is done on /. as well, probably by TLAs, and certainly by commercial organizations. (Just criticize Linux systemd and then remember that the US military is the largest Red Hats customer with apparently more than half their business to put the reaction into perspective. Right from a playbook, the PyOps/Marketing folks do not even try to come up with any rational arguments. It is all pure emotional manipulation. Although it has gotten weaker recently, probably not considered important enough anymore.) It is really quite repulsive and it gives too much power with too little oversight to those doing it. It is where western society is headed apparently though.
I agree on dissent. It is the point where people should start to ask "yes, they are wrong, but _why_ are they wrong?" Only a society that questions things is resilient to manipulation.
I am not arguing that this would be ineffective for the problem at hand. I am arguing that the risks of (long term) extreme negative side-effects are too large.
Well, yes. Fanatics are always convinced they have the truth, no matter what and that is pretty much what they are. What education may allow is to prevent others from even considering that these people may be right and it may prevent any laws from going their demented way.
Yeah, looks like it.
No, I just don't lie to people like you and tell them, this is all perfectly safe and this will not hurt a bit.
And that I did do exactly where? Oh, right, I did not. What I said is that for the discussion at hand (Measles) vaccinations are _necessary_ and that not having them (unless there is a sound medical reason) is dangerous and harmful to others. That is a bit different from what you claim I have said.
Long-term: no. You will get a very bad reputation and lose a lot of business if or as soon as people have an alternative. But that takes a while. With the focus of the MBA-morons on just the next quarter, they only see the short-term and think they are doing things right.
You see this argument a lot. What it leaves is the question of why you don't trust the vaccine you got?
First, the measles vaccine is known to "only" be 97% effective. Second, there are children too young to be vaccinated and third, some people cannot be vaccinated because of medical issues. Also, herd immunity for Measles is at 93...95%, so there is not a lot of margin. Also, who said they would harm me? I find it completely unacceptable that some people have the arrogance to endanger others without any good arguments on their side. I think we need these restrictions on non-vaccinated (by choice) people as well, for example no access to public places like schools, restaurants, shops, etc.
I worked in the oxymoronically named intelligence community. You may or may not be surprised how much of the stuff that's classified is just to cover for a screwup of some sort.
I actually have some insight into that (without ever having held a clearance, don't ask), and I fully agree. One of the most important reasons to classify things is to hide screw-ups.
See George Carlin.
I love that guy. I am currently trying (and clearly failing) to follow his advice to just "not give a shit".
Of course, it's better for ME if YOU get vaccinated with a high risk vaccine...because herd immunity....so this is a case where it's easy for anyone running things to make a case it's the best for the most people, even if there ARE flaws in the current vaccines...you still wind up with fewer deaths.
Well, Measles is not a "high risk" vaccine. It is however an extremely contagious disease and its potential complications are pretty much "high-risk". So yes, medically it makes sense to vaccinate anybody except for a few special cases. You do end up with fewer people maimed and killed and that is what medicine aims for.
It's still the wrong way to get there from here. "Controlling the narrative" is just too damn dishonest and scary, and no power that exists hasn't been abused.
Indeed. Those in power cannot help themselves. They always abuse the power they have, so giving them more is a very bad idea. Until and unless the human race eventually finds a way to select better leaders, that problem will stay.
That is an exceptionally dangerous path you are advocating there. In principle, I would be thrilled if we could just squash all that anti-science, anti-truth nonsense. But history shows this may have exceptionally bad side-effects.
You seem to never have heard about how totalitarianism and ultimately fascism gets established. You should read up on it, there is a ton of historical precedent.
You are very deep into delusion. Nothing of that paranoia you are spouting has any connection to reality. I advise you to seek medical help before you harm yourself or others.
I have no desire to educated the stupid. I just wish I was not on the same planet with them.
Indeed. While I do not like the term "order" (it is too close to "law" and law is a very dangerous construct that can easily be abused for fascism and worse) society requires some level of sacrifice (which must be carefully limited to sacrifices that actually make sense), and provides huge advantages in return. Anybody not willing to make the rational sacrifices has no place in society and should be removed from it.