To add to your comment, IM, uncensored and file sharing just screams CSAM network to me; either by intention or by who it’ll attract. This place has a TOS and had to wrestle with that shit in the early days on the main comms.

Lmao “looting”. Humans on the verge of starvation fight for survival? No fucking kidding.

Thanks for the correction, I lumped in other parties with independents.

Y’all have first past the post / winner takes all, don’t you? There was a vote recently and “labor” won from what I’m reading?

We have a (ranked choice voting) preferential vote system. You number your choices (1-8 for house of rep and 1-6 or 1-12 for senate). If the absolute majority isn’t obtained on first count the preferences are distributed until a majority is gained and that majority forms government.

Labor, coalition, independents, etc. what kinds of parties are these?

Centre-left (progressive), centre-right (conservative) and varied respectively. Independents can be anything from legalise cannabis through Kitkat Palmers (billionaire) wannabe Trump party [wrong, I lumped alt parties in with independents]. Ranked choice allows for support of smaller parties but still picking one of the main two if it comes down to a close call.

I thought Albanese was a “cunt” yet his party seems to have won again? What’s going on?

Im not a fan of Albanese due to him largely coasting on important issues; like housing but Im not aware of the broader population thinking he was a cunt. After Morison (deeply moronic conservative who was last PM) he got the job and at least was professional.

Problem is Dutton, the opposition leader just had that bad a platform. Marking yet another attempt for the coalition attempting to bring US/Trump bullshit over here, being a cop who’d disobey an international court warrant, nuclear power saga and in general just being super scarce on details for his plans as PM.

Even if I’m centre left inclined, the coalitions performance this cycle still somewhat disappointed me. A weak coalition means it’s more likely for a complacent Labor party.

There is a language filter available

Holy shit you’re awesome. I must have missed this due to never using the site. Thanks!

Man, leave ants outta this, they’re already having a hard time.

Having grown up around similar dipshits, I can definitely understand. It happens.

You two didn’t even have to read the article it’s in the OP about Palestinian Christians. Your reactions are also to criticise Christians instead of “checks out for Israel’s regime”? They’re also Christians in Israel. Assuming everyone in a religion is fundamentalist/extremist would sure make you fit in with the Israeli government ironically enough.

Self promotion isn’t allowed; kindly stop spamming this AI rubbish.

The end product image is AIgen. Couldn’t even cook and present their own meal for this “blog”. The call to action is literally called call action as is the SEO shit. Could not have been less effort put into this if they tried.

So AI generated thumbnail, AI generated article and click bait (and likely also AI generated) title. All pointing to your own site (by the looks) to get clicks. Nice one.

I’ve not used it extensively but never had it crash and it’s also undergone several large patches in recent times. Give it a go, it’s free after all.

Checks out. Got to capitalise on having his asset installed in the highest office of the US before things risk stabilising.

The soldiers still aren’t accounted for from my understanding.

That sure is one way to represent what happened. Also damn BBC is a rag.

Ms Jones posted an Instagram reel of herself on an unidentified roadside picking up the baby wombat and running towards the camera with the joey in her arms as its mother ran after it.

The footage featured the joey squirming and screeching before Ms Jones put it back on the road.

Ms Jones deleted the the video after animal welfare advocates criticised her over her treatment of the joey

Lol at this post after reading an article about this company being on the verge of going out of business.

It’s a preposterous claim with absolutely no evidence supporting it. Any idiot can see it doesn’t withstand a moment’s thought.

claim with absolutely no evidence supporting it

I work in tech

Multiple sources including a fucking Microsoft researcher

Bayesian filtering is a legacy strategy and Microsoft, for example, does not use it any more (because it’s inferior) except for legacy on-prem setups. Given you’ve attempted to be insulting, put words in my mouth and failed to provide supporting articles for your opinion I’m out. As I get enough of these sort of conversations at work and unless I start billing you… Lol’d at “Mr exchange server admin” though ngl.

Never claimed that, said that because that’s why I’m aware of it, not that it indicates any authority.

Did you honestly just google “scammer typos” so you could provide me with an expert source?

Not quite but pretty much yep. Given you claimed it was “nonsensical” I had hope me showing sources that weren’t just my saying so might make you reconsider your position. Perhaps unsurprisingly, it didn’t.

It’s a preposterous claim with absolutely no evidence supporting it. Any idiot can see it doesn’t withstand a moment’s thought.

You’re free to google “scammer typos” and check out the results yourself given there seems to be nothing I can do or link to convince you that this is a silly hill to die on.

is that including typos in order to evade filters improves response rates because it improves deliverability and does not discourage a significant number of victims.

What filters are these? I’ll have to keep an eye out for the grammar section in the inbound spam/phishing policies next time I’m managing a client in the exchange section of their tenant. Bad luck for those who don’t spell well, can’t use spell check or are ESL, I guess. Mistyped URLs or domains however, sure are a thing.

Er go, the type of people who become victims are not likely to be discouraged by typos.

*Ergo. I guess you’ve made up your mind, based on god knows what. I’ll leave you with a link from a university’s IT department from your google search terms, feel free to look at the rest of them any time you like.

It’s on purpose. If you can spot it, they don’t want you.

But what would the opinions based on another “Mr security guy”, aka a Microsoft researcher know.

I’m not arguing about this. Especially not with a baby account. This is an opinion informed by expert opinion on the matter, and I work in tech. If you think it’s “nonsensical” that’s on you.

However, the reason why phishing emails have so many typos is simple—they’re intentional and are included by design. The scammer’s goal is to send phishing emails to a very gullible, innocent victim. If they have typos, they’re essentially weeding out recipients too smart to fall for the scam.

Source.

Because you’re selecting with people who lack experience with scam/critical thinking to figure out they’re scams.