UK Police let 45 men who admitted rape walk away with a caution
Police let 45 men who admitted rape walk away with a caution | The Independent
Over 1,500 adults cautioned for sexual assaultSamuel Osborne (The Independent)
Austrian far right leader receives mandate to try to lead a government for the first time since World War II
Austrian far right leader receives mandate to try to lead a government for the first time since World War II
The anti-immigration and euroskeptic Freedom Party, which opposes sanctions against Russia and is led by Herbert Kickl, won Austria’s parliamentary election in September.PBS News
Doctors Against Genocide Hold Worldwide Sick-Out Vigil to Highlight Atrocities in Gaza
Doctors Against Genocide Hold Global Sick-Out to Highlight Atrocities in Gaza
“We are sick from genocide, sick from complicity, and sick from silence,” says a statement by Doctors Against Genocide.Chris Walker (Truthout)
like this
Endymion_Mallorn likes this.
The Blood in Our Phones - Truthdig
The Blood in Our Phones - Truthdig
A lawsuit by the Democratic Republic of Congo seeks to hold Apple and its suppliers to account for decades of profiting off conflict minerals.James North (Truthdig)
Chinese scientists vow to launch breakthrough open-source chip in 2025
cross-posted from: lemmy.ml/post/24503345
A team from China’s top government research academy pledged to produce this year a processor based on the open-source chip-design architecture RISC-V, as Beijing advances its semiconductor self-reliance drive amid escalating US restrictions.The Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) will be able to deliver its XiangShan open-source central processing unit in 2025, wrote Bao Yungang, deputy director at the academy’s Institute of Computing Technology, in a Weibo post on Sunday.
Chip war: Chinese scientists vow to launch breakthrough RISC-V open-source CPU in 2025
Efforts by the Chinese Academy of Sciences form part of Beijing’s push to reduce reliance on foreign semiconductor technology.Xinmei Shen (South China Morning Post)
like this
Dessalines likes this.
Sounds very interesting.
Im not sure how open it will actually be, if they just mean its using RISC-V's open design and its just lost in translation or if they are actually trying to make an open hardware ecosystem.
edit: I read a bit more, it seems to be a apache-like licensed software only processor that one needs to implement first, so basically something inbetween pre RISC-V and an actual chip. Still cool, but I was hoping it was a finished chip.
Except if they were halfway intelligent they wouldn't have it go automatically to the site.
And when you do this and something goes really wrong criminal charges get laid.
Not if it incites violence, causes harm or any of the other carve outs in the first amendment of the USA.
I am aware that the post is supposed to be funny, and you are most likely making a joke, but this is the internet and these sort of disclaimers tend to be necessary.
Claiming you didn't know it could cause harm isn't a defense in court in Canada.
Anymore bullshit?
Christ you're a cordial fellow
I was, I thought quite clearly, having a joking poke. Obviously "didn't know lol" isn't a defense.
is it always running, looking for barcodes in all the photos you take?
Has Google's camera app added that yet? If not it's only a matter of time.
I think as a precaution, barcode scanners stopped automatically going to links.
Even if a link isn't malicious, you can still get someone's IP address or device fingerprint.
A friend sent me this. Doesn't work on most phones now, just older androids I think. It's meant to teach you not to scan unknown QR codes by causing androids to restart on scanning.
The largest QR code can hold up to 3 kb of data, which is more than enough to write a nasty virus in an injectable script if aimed at specific devices/apps.
The main hurdle is breaking the app to execute the code instead of treating it as a string. It's the Drop Bobby Tables joke. Developers hopefully don't fall for this anymore.
Anyway. Making a shitty link and leading people there isn't a new idea. You don't even need a t-shirt. Hackers already place their own printed QR labels on top of otherwise real codes, and the user might not even notice, because they'll be redirected to the right site after the dirty deed is done dirt cheap.
X5O!P%@AP[4\PZX54(P^)7CC)7}$EICAR-STANDARD-ANTIVIRUS-TEST-FILE!$H+H*
Probably the closest you're going to get
Correct 
Has been done:
web.archive.org/web/2021011610…
EICAR test QR
It seems there is something of a standard test string for anti virus ( wikipedia has more on this). The idea is that systems that look fo...web.archive.org
So I thought I pulled a great prank once. I made a QR code that directed to lemonparty. I used an online sticker service's free trial to print a bunch up with my friend's Instagram at the bottom. I travel all over for work so I was going to put them everywhere.
My problem was I printed them in yellow and they wouldn't scan. I told my friend and he thought it was a funny idea just like I knew he would, not a malicious prank. Wish it had worked.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialis…
Socialism is an economic and political philosophy […] characterised by social ownership of the means of production, as opposed to private ownership.
I’m not gonna lie, I don’t think a common-good healthcare regulation or whatever housing plans fall under the definition.
Edit: there’s some merit to this you could’ve brought up, e.g. Germany’s mandating by law of some (limited) worker control in firms ≥500 employees in size (wikipedia link). But even that’s breaking with the definition, since it’s not about ownership, but rather a say in leading the company.
don't like this
Dessalines doesn't like this.
Here's a nice quote from The Communist Manifesto:
What are the common wages of labour, depends everywhere upon the contract usually made between those two parties, whose interests are by no means the same. The workmen desire to get as much, the masters to give as little as possible. The former are disposed to combine in order to raise, the latter in order to lower the wages of labour.It is not, however, difficult to foresee which of the two parties must, upon all ordinary occasions, have the advantage in the dispute, and force the other into a compliance with their terms. The masters, being fewer in number, can combine much more easily; and the law, besides, authorizes, or at least does not prohibit their combinations, while it prohibits those of the workmen...
We rarely hear, it has been said, of the combinations of masters, though frequently of those of workmen. But whoever imagines, upon this account, that masters rarely combine, is as ignorant of the world as of the subject. Masters are always and everywhere in a sort of tacit, but constant and uniform combination, not to raise the wages of labour above their actual rate... Masters, too, sometimes enter into particular combinations to sink the wages of labour even below this rate. These are always conducted with the utmost silence and secrecy, till the moment of execution, and when the workmen yield, as they sometimes do, without resistance, though severely felt by them, they are never heard of by other people...
A man must always live by his work, and his wages must at least be sufficient to maintain him. They must even upon most occasions be somewhat more; otherwise it would be impossible for him to bring up a family, and the race of such workmen could not last beyond the first generation.
Ah shit, never mind. This was from Adam Smith's The Wealth of Nations
Wow, that was smooth. Points for impact!
I wish these minds could have been put in charge for arguing for and hashing out a combined sensible economic system,
as they might have had differing ideas, but all clearly wanted a system that was optimal for human beings to thrive in.
Instead, these fellows are deified as proxy prophets, excuses and motivations for wars and slavery, by those who seek to enrich themselves entirely at the majority's blood, sweat, and tears.
Could it be that you just don't want to admit that you can't do anything about it?
As for me, I don't have any responsibility to push onto others about it. I accept the things that cannot change, and I have adapted to survive in the environment that I live in, and things are going generally well.
All implementations are always twisted to suit the greed of individuals.
So it would be best to live under a system that doesn't encourage and reward such behavior, no?
I'd love one, I don't think humans are capable.
In very small organization sizes it's possible but as people come and go eventually someone will get control to make decisions that put their interests or their connections interests ahead of the masses.
Based on your comment history and how negative you are about absolutely everything... have you looked in the mirror lately?
Also keep in mind that I have simply made a hypothesis that humans are incapable of not being corrupt in organizations at scale. How in the fuck is that any one political leaning? The system itself is irrelevant. Even in communes where everyone "shares equally" there's usually someone in leadership getting special exemptions and special treatment.
In what way does this graph say humans are not corrupt and taking advantage?
Even under communism the 1% had 4% of assets, that's not 1% of assets like true communism should be. That in and of itself proves corruption to me. The fact that the USSR fell and a handful of 1%ers got the majority of industries for pennies on the dollar is egregious corruption. None of this is a criticism of communism. This is criticizing the actions of individuals who decided to be corrupt.
It's just human nature. Some people call it "enlightened self interest" others call it nepotism, some call it survival of the fittest. Some call it gaming the system. In all cases it's the same problem. Sometimes things can go well for a while but on a scale of even just a hundred years when an organization has more than a couple hundred people it simply goes sideways.
Getting everyone to be involved and knowledgeable about absolutely everything and to fight to make things right is beyond the capabilities of current humans. The more I know the more I understand I don't know a lot about so many things beyond what i've experienced. Ignorance drives so many reactions (including the personal attacks from my comments here.)
I have met many individuals in this world who get very, very angry that someone else is doing x, y, or z - even if it has zero impact on them. Some of the reactions to my comments here about a very logical challenge that could have solutions with technology are attacked with illogical non-arguments and are a perfect example of how impossible it is to get humans to think critically about things when they have their own biases.
I do agree that human nature is a huge problem. For a utopian government, I do think that is fairly impossible at the moment. As you have said we will need some novel idea or technology, or human nature will have to evolve in some way (that could take a very long time though).
As for citizens advocating for themselves, you seem to be thinking of peaceful ways to have a government that avoids becoming corrupt. While ideal, as we know humans are far from that and why eventually corruption turns to revolt if the needs of citizens are not met. I am not saying this will solve the issue either. As far as I can tell it just renews the cycle at best, or continues the corruption under a new group at worst. I only say this as technically this is a way citizens will eventually advocate for their rights if the government becomes too corrupt.
As for the desires of laws for each individual citizen, this is essentially impossible as only very small groups will have ideals and values that are homogeneous. In a populace large enough, human nature will lead to conflicting ideas on which laws should exist and how governments should run. In democracies, this plays into the hands of people or organizations with nefarious political goals. These groups can exploit human nature to get citizens to focus emotionally on a small subset of policies and laws. This tactic can be very powerful in places that don't regulate this kind of propaganda, such as the United States.
I would argue this form of political propaganda being pushed by powerful groups that don't represent the majority of citizens, towards citizens in other groups is one of the main cause of citizens being politically inactive. This creates biases and causes a lot of people to make decisions based on issues whose prevalence is artificially amplified. While that issue may be very important and should be advocated for, this should not be left to powerful groups or organizations that are not representative of the citizens. This also creates a ton of noise, making other issues that may directly affect or be advocated for by a large portion of the population to be obscured. All of this leads to information overload, fatigue, and complacency which leads to ignoring politics and possibly being politically inactive. I say possibly because people will still vote because it's their civic duty but will be uninformed which can be even more dangerous than not participating in politics. This also turns politics into a sport based on what the current political "hot topic" is, which a lot of people don't want to participate in and turns them away from being active politically.
In my opinion, the best solution to get citizens politically active is the need to make politics less biased and present legislation and policies in a fairer fashion. This will not get every citizen involved, but it will encourage more unbiased and informed decisions which will further fight corruption. Politically active citizens can look at legislation and policy proposals and make the sometimes difficult decision of which is the best choice in the present moment. This should also help with "political fatigue" which can cause citizens to not participate. Of course some people will never vote (unless forced to by law), but the best we can do is try to make the process simpler and use less of peoples time and resources.
All this being said, it will still be an uphill battle for democracies such as the United States to undo the influence of powerful groups in politics, and make their democracies fairer and more representative of the people. I wouldn't say it's impossible, but to do so peacefully will take a ton of perseverance, hard work, and most likely a bit of luck.
Not everyone. Capitalists love capitalism. It's the people who aren't capitalists but think they are because they love capitalism.
Sort of like how people think they are Christian's because they go to church believe in Jesus, but don't actually follow the teachings.
People think they are all sorts of things they are not and make themselves and or other miserable because of their fantasies.
We haven't had capitalism in any sense of the word for about 60 years at this point. What we have seen is government interventionism in a protection of certain businesses that align with the interests of the sitting politicians - in other words, a form of Oligarchy.
What has transpired is an increasing degree of government deficits to fund entitlements, that drive inflation, which create more dependency on the entitlements and a call to do things like raise minimum wages.
The actual solution is: Trim federal spending, go into deflation, and drive the buying power of the currency up. This would allow people to pay down debts while maintaining standard of living, and allow for a reduction of dependency on hand outs - which would allow for a further reduction in government spending. The problem here is that the first step ABSOLUTELY SUCKS for a LOT of people - but it needs to be done.
From here: The big hedge funds, and such need to be ripped apart systemically.
Trim federal spending, go into deflation, and drive the buying power of the currency up. This would allow people to pay down debts while maintaining standard of living.
My problem with this logic is the same problem I have when suited clowns claim they'll just raise prices on everything 300% if the minimum wage goes up by $2.
Say we "trimmed federal spending" (which is kinda its job as an entity, to spend towards the people, ideally), and somehow magically our already-printed simoleons became worth more per dollar...
What, besides intense federal regulations, would prevent bosses from just spinning this as some kind of crisis, and making it an excuse to pay us less because "each dollar is worth more now so you're making too much"?
"Entitlements" and "hand-outs" are necessary not because people are lazy, but because from a business perspective, jobs aren't worth doing anymore , but we do them anyway because we're forced to, if we want to participate in society at all.
TL;DR:
Basically, the solution is to tell the rent-seeking neo-gilded-age robber-barons of our day "Fuck you. Pay me."
If they actually paid a fair wage for the profits their employees generate, we'd be able to "pay down debts while maintaining standard of living, and allow for a reduction of dependency on hand outs - which would allow for a further reduction in government spending."
This graph does not say that no-one is corrupt, correct. It does however show that the soviet system had much less inequality than what came before (under the Tsar) and after (capitalism). This is an improvement. This graph does not prove corruption either. Some having more than others is not corruption.
The soviets did not reach communism, they were building socialism.
Under capitalism, the vast majority of people must labour, by getting a job... if they can, to get money to have a house, food, medicine, etc. They take actions in line with how capitalism functions, to the extent they are doing so to survive, this is "human nature", yes, but I don't think this is the way that you are using those words. Under socialism, you are guaranteed a job, housing, food, there is free healthcare, etc. The actions the same person would take under socialism are different. So what you call "human nature", but is just actions taken within context of capitalism, is not actually human nature.
That was a brilliant read.
I appreciated the nuance, and it even added a lot of perspective to the notion that Adam Smith's "capitalism" concept was not the evil and inhuman machine we experience today.
I've noticed this move to "technofeudalism" everywhere but didn't have a name for it. It's exhausting seeing how many services, products, businesses, whatever, all simply want to coast on monthly payments and lock-ins for what amounts to merely keeping the lights on.
The PetsMart thing was insidious. This surely solidifies the definition of "human resources": Seeking to control people as "assets" that generate profits like (proprietary) batteries.
It seems it should be a priority goal to undermine the corporate and wealthy's dominion over "assets." They'd be terrified of this, as they might actually have to do something besides acquire everyone else's hard work for a change!
It's just that the right blames the capitalism on the left and the left blames the capitalism on the right, and the actual liberals end up being barely opposed
I don't know what the takeaway from that should be, it's just an observation/simplification that feels generally true
Even under communism the 1% had 4% of assets, that’s not 1% of assets like true communism should be.
In the US, the top 1% has over 30%. Don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Just because a socialist state hadn’t yet reached some Platonic ideal doesn’t mean it should be thrown out with the bathwater. You can’t go from a decimated, war-ravaged, illiterate, feudal agrarian backwater to some socialist utopia overnight.
Lol I see what you're getting at, but I'd argue that those (incredibly fun!) movies seem "prophetic" only by the same quality that makes them relatable and profound:
They're inspired by history. Just one example being how the prequel trilogy bears heavy resemblance to the governmental structure of ancient Rome, before, like Rome, collapsing from the inside from in-fighting and profiteering in an attempt to control the whole Galaxy, before becoming basically like various monarchies throughout history, that almost succeed in ruling the world (galaxy) by monolithic force.
It's why Firefly was such a success, when it flipped and futurized the American civil / revolutionary wars concept. It gives us something familiar enough to attach to, with twists that make it unique.
Edit: I welcome historians to correct any errors in my rather generalized understanding of history. I tried to get the point across while resisting research rabbit holes. ;)
I think "it's human nature" is an excuse made by the ruling class to quell challenges to the system that benefits them.
Sociopathic hoarding and anti-social manipulation is an abberation that our system artificially elevates and rewards.
If we were culturally more hostile to attempts to rent out our lives and natural resources back to us, and didn't put zero-empathy profit hoarders on the front of magazines, things could be better.
I agree with you on group sizes though. When people are treated like hyper-specialized insects with ID numbers instead of identities, funneled into highly-specialized roles, every one a stranger to the other, something has gone horribly wrong.
those can’t exist in actual human communities of more than about a dozen people.
this is a lie.
You were two steps away from discovering libertarian socialism/democratic confederalism
Riiight, a tried and true political/economic system which is sure to work perfectly as soon as it's tried, just like communism.
If your political system is based on hierarchy
If you're human, your political system will involve hierarchy as soon as more than about a dozen individuals are involved.
This is literally capitalist propaganda
Suuure... it's capitalist propaganda to acknowledge that all mammals act in ways that are hierarchical and unfair.
I think the flaw is human nature. All governments and organizations are corrupt. All implementations are always twisted to suit the greed of individuals.
Please take your nickname seriously for a moment and do some critical thinking about what you just said.
"Human nature" being greedy and corrupt is a completely horrible and wrong argument that only serves to keep us desillusioned about change. Saying that human nature is greedy and corrupt while currently living in a capitalism system is the same as studying human nature inside a coal mine and coming to the conclusion that it must be human nature to cough your lungs out. Our environment have a deep influence on us and you can't just ignore that.
If you really want to argue about human nature, the simple fact that we are social creatures that often help each other out of empathy and compassion already negates your argument.
It's entirely possible to create policy and enforcement mechanisms that would mitigate or eliminate excessive greed but nobody with anything votes for it because they'll lose out on their own personal greed by their measure.
Voting will not change the system, you cannot change it from within. The capitalist class might give us a few breadcrumbs here and there to keep us from revolting, but they will always do everything to keep the system as it is because it benefits them as a class.
This is not an individual issue. As much as some individuals are horrible pieces of shit, these interests are collective and shows the class struggle in society.
redsails.org/anticommunism-and…
In the United States, for over a hundred years, the ruling interests tirelessly propagated anticommunism among the populace, until it became more like a religious orthodoxy than a political analysis. During the cold war, the anticommunist ideological framework could transform any data about existing communist societies into hostile evidence. If the Soviets refused to negotiate a point, they were intransigent and belligerent; if they appeared willing to make concessions, this was but a skillful ploy to put us off our guard. By opposing arms limitations, they would have demonstrated their aggressive intent; but when in fact they supported most armament treaties, it was because they were mendacious and manipulative. If the churches in the USSR were empty, this demonstrated that religion was suppressed; but if the churches were full, this meant the people were rejecting the regime’s atheistic ideology. If the workers went on strike (as happened on infrequent occasions), this was evidence of their alienation from the collectivist system; if they didn’t go on strike, this was because they were intimidated and lacked freedom. A scarcity of consumer goods demonstrated the failure of the economic system; an improvement in consumer supplies meant only that the leaders were attempting to placate a restive population and so maintain a firmer hold over them.If communists in the United States played an important role struggling for the rights of workers, the poor, African-Americans, women, and others, this was only their guileful way of gathering support among disfranchised groups and gaining power for themselves. How one gained power by fighting for the rights of powerless groups was never explained. What we are dealing with is a nonfalsifiable orthodoxy, so assiduously marketed by the ruling interests that it affected people across the entire political spectrum.
Step 1: workers collectively own means of production
Leads to Step 2: yanks attack you
Leads to Step 3: Establish a state with a monopoly on violence to kill all the yanks
uh huh and what side of the fence is that? and what side am I on apparently? and who precisely is wallowing in self pity?
it’s a matter of ‘violence costs lives’ and you don’t change a system to one that you prefer and most other people don’t without organised and persistent violence
uh huh, and who are most people in this situation? because most people seem very fine with mr thompsons death. otherwise the media moguls wouldn't be spending their breath trying to tell people it wasnt okay.
who precisely is snowing in self pity
I dunno, you're the one who talked about it. Don't ask me what you mean, lol, not my fault if you don't understand yourself
Took today off work because I can't deal with it
Needed to see this, thank you
Justin Trudeau stepping down as Liberal leader, to stay on as PM for now
Justin Trudeau to step down as PM following Liberal leadership race
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is stepping down as Liberal leader, and is proroguing Parliament as the Liberal Party of Canada embarks on the journey to replace him.CTVNews
Azerbaijan's state oil company to invest $7bn in Turkey
Azerbaijan’s state oil company Socar plans to invest an additional $7bn in Turkey's energy sector in the coming years, a company executive revealed during a press briefing on Monday.
Socar also recently faced criticism following revelations by rights and transparency groups that Azerbaijani oil continues to be sold to Israeli buyers despite the ongoing war in Gaza.
Azerbaijan's state oil company to invest $7bn in Turkey
Azerbaijan’s state oil company Socar plans to invest an additional $7bn in Turkey's energy sector in the coming years, a company executive revealed during a press briefing on Monday.Ragip Soylu (Middle East Eye)
Grandwolf319
in reply to Melatonin • • •like this
Badabinski likes this.
DreamButt
in reply to Melatonin • • •LaGG_3 [he/him, comrade/them]
in reply to Melatonin • • •