lilboiluvr69

Are you me?

My ex had that same thing happen to him, police showed up, got tazed and arrested after defending themselves. Now they have a criminal record.

So, obviously there is some bias on my end, its probably why I'm so skeptical regarding justifications of 'implicit consent'.

I mean what justification do hotlines have about not warning of this possibility at the beginning of the call in a 5 second automated message aside from people not agreeing and hanging up. But if they don't agree, it obviously isn't consent.

If you're assuming they are giving you permission, couldn't you just ask "I want to send emergency services your way, is that okay?"

If they say "Yes", you have permission. If they say "No", you do not and have to grapple with whether or not it is okay to send services.

Regardless of if it is or is not okay to perform an active rescue without the caller's permission, its easy to just ask the question

Speaking of anonymity, I wish suicide hotlines would be upfront about the possibility of 'active rescue', that is, calling the police if they think you're about to kill yourself. It seems like a disclaimer they would run at the beginning of the call, but they'd probably lose callers that way.

Still, it feels like a violation of informed consent regarding a service that bills itself as anonymous.

It's so strange to me that a culture would encourage people to remain silent during something like this. I can't imagine having a stranger put their hands down my pants on a crowded subway and not turning around and slugging them in the face.

“I told them that I would accept the resignation as he wished but would like him to contact me first to confirm his safety.”

Am I being jaded or does anyone else doubt the employer's motivation was entirely altruistic? I mean your employee pays a third party to avoid ever having you in their life again, and you show up at their fucking parent's place?

“I thought that if someone cannot resign without using this kind of service, it is their own loss and that they are an unfortunate personality who sees work as nothing more than a means to get money.”

Isn't that why most people work though?

“Our world is not that easy to fix or change,” he added. “We have been running this company for six years and the number of clients is increasing, so I guess that means nothing has changed. I don’t think it will change for the next 100 years.”

Jesus that's depressing...

I'm surprised and confused somebody would use a public-facing website like Instagram to do something so illegal and taboo. Wouldn't they use Tor or at least a private Telegram chat? What, do they just paypal the money?

Seems like a recipe for getting arrested.

EDIT: The article says a lot of the accounts are supposed to be run by kids themselves so maybe that has something to do with it?

But it would also mean bringing Steam to Mac in a way that doesn't suck.

I'm not arguing that extorting people or making them feel violated is right. I'm arguing that our social norms are what allow this sort of exploitation to happen and we should examine our collective responsibility for it.

I suppose not. But if I was in a very Muslim centric country and people were complaining that this software allows pictures of women without a hijab, my first thought would be the same: why is that such a bad thing?

I mean the article itself says people are willing to pay extortion money than risk even fictional depictions of their naked bodies.

Maybe its time we reassess our culture...

But that's my point. Why would I care if somebody saw me naked?

I'm surprised they haven't worked directly with Valve for Proton support...

I guess as someone who lived in a long time in a clothing optional community, the idea that people being naked is a bad thing (we are all naked under our clothes) really confuses me.

I wonder if the Internet and AI generation will lead to a culture change where a picture of someone (real or fake) in a sexual situation will no longer be extortion worthy.

Seems odd that a picture of someone naked can lead to a loss of their job or social circle. I don't think that's a good thing.

"The world is not close to full"

...yeah?

Is mainstream porn extremely violent? I am legit asking as someone who typically only looks at furry porn.

I didn't say any means. I'm not at the point where I'm willing to degrade democracy like that.

But its sort of like asking if it would have been okay to assassinate Hitler (he was elected remember) before the holocaust took place, but the writing was on the wall.

What does a politians life, your life, or my life mean in the face of untold suffering of millions of people for countless generations?

What about you? Where would you draw the line? Would you say that George W's life outweighs the trillian dollars in national debt and 150K-1M civilian casualties? If you knew you could have averted all that from just killing him, did it, turned yourself in, when you were executed would you be a villain or a hero?

At what point is this a public health issue though? If the policy failures during this era end up leading to a state of mass famine, emigration, and death rivialing the disruption caused by COVID, is it a public health issue yet?

How can you say who cares when every republican member of congress either disputes or outright denies the scientific consensus on climate change and attempts to prevent all meaningful action? I'm still young, and it feels like my future, and the futures of future generations, are evaporating in front of me.

In my more jaded moments I wonder if at this point assassinating certain politicians could justified as self defense...

By the 'academic elite' you mean 98.7% consensus among experts?[1]

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_consensus_on_clim...

I am...very surprised by some of the discussion here. Maybe I'm just not that familiar with the harms of social media as someone who chooses not to use it. But support for anynomity and free access to information was always part of what I interpreted as the 'hacker ethos'.

It's been odd to see this pushback against social media transform into actual legislation for a flat out ban. Not forcing social media companies to end the use of tracking and dark patterns mind you, a flat our ban. It seems like admitting that humans just can't have unfettered access to each other's lives on a global scale. We can't stand to talk and exchange controversial opinions and see each other's best highlights without falling into toxicity, envy, and tribalism, nihilism and depression.

I don't like that thought, it doesn't bode well for our species.

I can't imagine what my childhood would have been like if I wasn't able to break out of the box my parents and society out me in and really reach out to conversations and ideas that many people would find dangerous. I don't think its an exaggeration to say I probably would have killed myself. And I mean that in a very real way. Society doesn't tend to be very kind to people like me. I realized I was a MAP from a young age and grew up thinking no matter what I did I was going to be a monster. I can't imagine what it would be like not to have anyone to talk to about that. Being at such a vulnerable age and not finding anyone who would listen.

The other commenters are right, this law is going to harm marginalized groups in Utah. Replacing the parents and preventing children from freely exchanging ideas isn't going to fix the core negative incentives that make these platforms addictive and toxic. Nor is it going to address the societal changes that would reduce people's dependence of social media. It's not going to make kids suddenly go outside and meet one another again. Maybe I'm wrong, I mean I hope I am, but I doubt it.

God I remember how much it sucked being a kid. Getting treated as property of my parents, as if they knew what was best for me when they couldn't even take care of them selves. All that unfiltered internet access led me to a successful InfoSec career, it led to an escape from my shit-hole life.

But my biggest concern is the possibility of stifling online anonymity through some aged verification system. A second-order effect that basically chills free speech without directly legislating on it. I'd hate for my kid to inherit a world like that, a world where they have to supply an ID to comment on Hacker News.

It seems like something worth fighting against. It makes me feel like being violent.

What about furry porn? Does that abuse anyone? Do you find fuzzy animals having sex to be dangerous to children too?

Fucking. Preach.

Just so you know you can fix EA games on the Steam Deck by logging into EA with your steam account and linking it. All the EA launcher games will work again.

Go to EAs help page. https://help.ea.com/en/contact-us/ Click login, and choose the Steam option. Link your steam with your ea account. Then try launching your game again. You’ll get the gray screen but give it time and it will go away.

That was beautiful.

I just want to say, I really appreciate Matrix and all the work your organization has done, Arathorn.

I'd like to hear more about your idea of unifying themes. Can you give me some more concrete examples. How would nationalism (or did you mean patriotism) and shared heritage work in the United States?

What do you think is the best way to combat them?

I am familiar with the research cited in that article. I am also familiar with the United States' prolonged history of foreign interference and human rights abuse.

But in the United States I can openly kiss my same-sex husband in public. In Zambia I would be arrested.

The average citizen of the United States still enjoys a relatively high standard of living. Sanitary conditions. High wealth (compared to the rest of the world). Human rights. I find comparisons to banana republics to be hyperbole which ultimately distracts from your arguments.

If everyday citizens cannot be trusted to tell truth from fiction, or to choose democracy over fascism, how can they be trusted to elect their rulers? Why believe in democracy at all?

And while I believe wealth disparity, healthcare, and fascism are all real, sadly neglected problems in the United States, I would strongly caution you against hyperbolic criticisms. You should reflect on what you think of when you think 'banana republic', and in what ways day to day life for the average citizen of the United States are comparable to say, the average citizen of Zambia.

I'm not entirely sure I agree. I mean, maybe I do. I think one could argue that the internet is a lot more moderated in this day and age, but maybe you were referring more to the addictive and destructive effects of social media.

Do you care to elaborate?

Preventing people from accidentally dying from overdose seems like a pretty worthy goal.

While I agree with the sentiment behind your post, especially regarding reexamining our society, I think you're coming off as a little overly cynical.

This vaccine seems to be a promising tool to preventing people in treatment (or people who come across fentanyl by accident) from overdosing. In principle at least, that seems like a positive thing for me. It's not a silver bullet, but what is? Addiction is a hard problem...