Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)T

testfactor

@ testfactor @lemmy.world

Posts
1
Comments
449
Joined
3 yr. ago

  • Mike Waltz Left His Venmo Friends List Public

    Jump

  • It says none of their actual transactions was visible, just their friends lists. And Venmo has a long history of trying to be the "social media" of paying people.

    So, like, I'm no fan of the guy, but ik confused why this is news? I can probably see his followed people on Twitter too, but that's not a scandal. If there aren't any sketchy payments or anything, what's the issue?

  • Fuck... is this checkmate??

    Jump

  • Or they make it where if you have exact flag placement you're good. So you can try putting a flag on each one in turn.

    A little annoying when you end with 3-4 50/50 splits, but not too too hard to just brute force the 8-16 combos.

  • isInHell = 'true'

    Jump

  • Probably, but if you're interpreting user inputs as raw code, you've got much much worse problems going on, lol.

  • Using the honor system

    Jump

  • If I saw this, I think I'd take and eat one? Like, I do love a good raisin...

  • Removed

    Does 'attempted murder' require a viable method?

    Jump

  • It kind of depends on the facts and your jurisdiction. With the button, maybe? With a death note book, almost certainly not.

    When proving the elements of attempted murder (or any non-statutory crime), the state has to prove both "mens rea" and "actus rea" (that you intended to do the thing and that you tried to do the thing), but when you're being charged for something "attempted" you have the defense of "impossibility," when the actions you are trying to take couldn't have possibly worked.

    Now, that doesn't cover cases where you were only wrong in point of fact. For instance, buying fake drugs from a cop. But it does cover instances like using a voodoo doll.

    There's more detail on all the above in the illustrated guide to law, which is a pretty solid resource for stuff like this. Here are the relevant sections:

    Actus Rea Explanation: https://lawcomic.net/guide/?p=261

    Attempted Crimes: https://lawcomic.net/guide/?p=344

    Impossibly Defense: https://lawcomic.net/guide/?p=416

  • Removed

    Indiana is a great place to hire child labor

    Jump

  • I should have been more clear I suppose. I support all of the restrictions that were in place, and I think it's bad they were rolled back.

    My response wasn't intended to say the changes were bad, but was rather in response to a general sentiment that I was seeing in the comment section. Both on this post and others when the topic of minors in the work force comes up.

  • Removed

    Indiana is a great place to hire child labor

    Jump

  • My brother in Christ, I literally say in the comment you replied to that all of the protections that were rolled back (including all the ones you just mentioned) are important, and that it's a bad thing they were removed.

    Who are you even arguing against?

  • Removed

    Indiana is a great place to hire child labor

    Jump

  • That's not the only comment taking a similar position though. Just an example. I made my own top level comment to address something that seems like a more general trend when this issue comes up.

  • Removed

    Indiana is a great place to hire child labor

    Jump

  • I agree. Children shouldn't have to work to support their families.

    None of the regulations that were stripped away have anything to do with that though, as far as I can tell.

    So that problem exists in any world where we let kids work at McDonald's for some spending money.

  • Removed

    Indiana is a great place to hire child labor

    Jump

  • I mean, the comment literally right above mine is about how if we let kids work then they're gonna be molested by their bosses. That has nothing to do with any of the restrictions being rolled back.

    And look, I'm not campaigning against any of the protections that got rolled back. I think it's bad they did, and would be totally for them being reinstated. 1000%.

    And maybe I'm just off base. I feel like I have seen a lot of "children shouldn't be allowed to get jobs" rhetoric of late in this context. But it's entirely possible that most people are totally on board with 16yo's having jobs, and what I'm seeing is just a vocal minority.

  • Removed

    Indiana is a great place to hire child labor

    Jump

  • I think teenagers having a first job in highschool is an important milestone that we should encourage.

    There should clearly be protections in place. I'm not arguing otherwise. But I don't get this sentiment of it being tantamount to child abuse to let a 16yo get a job at their local movie theater after school to earn some extra pocket change.

  • 70 Christians beheaded in church: What we know

    Jump

  • Are you saying this didn't happen?

  • Help the homeless, go to jail: Fremont passes hard-line law criminalizing encampments

    Jump

  • I mean, I agree that it's unaffordable, and that building up is a solution to that, but homelessness is rarely caused by housing costs being too high.

    Most people who can't afford the rising cost of living in an area either add roommates or move somewhere cheaper.

    To end up in a tent in an encampment is almost always correlated with drug use or mental illness.

    Which isn't to say we shouldn't take care of those people. We should. But lack of housing is almost never the limiting factor there.

  • I love open-weight models, especially when they steal from proprietary models (OC)

    Jump

  • I mean, I think "improperly obtained OpenAI's data" with reference to China, probably means internal trade secrets were stolen. Wouldn't be the first time China hacked a US corporation and stole all their IP, lol.

  • US teacher put on leave after allegedly calling Palestinian child an extremist

    Jump

  • I really, genuinely don't. You may not believe it, but those feel equally charged to me.

    But I think that's at the crux of our disagreement. My lived experience is that that phrase is uncharged, and your lived experience is that it's terribly charged. This is probably due to regional or cultural differences, and honestly, that's fine.

    We could debate who's lived experience is the more generalized one. Who is more representative of the average American. But honestly, I don't know that it matters.

    And even if you found out that 95% of people think it's uncharged (which I'm not saying is the case), it still wouldn't make it feel any different for you I'm sure, as again, in your lived experience that phrase is tantamount to a slur.

    But all that said, I appreciate the discussion about it. It's always interesting to come across these things that, due to fluctuations in region or age or whatever, both seem so obviously true to each side, while being so polarizing.

    And I know I see you around here a lot, and I generally agree with you on stuff. So like, I know you're not an unreasonable person or whatever. I respect your opinion on the issue even. We just disagree this time.

  • US teacher put on leave after allegedly calling Palestinian child an extremist

    Jump

  • I'll do that as soon as you find me one example of a teacher saying "hey there buster brown, why don't you sit down!”

    You probably can't, because it's not news worthy, as this wouldn't be 99.9% of the time. The only reason this is, is because the kid in question was one, Arab, and two, offended. If either hadn't been true, none of us would have ever heard about it.

    But I recall people using that phrase in highschool. I remember teachers using it. That was back in the Bush era, to be fair, but it was pretty normative. We didn't really have any Arab population, so not much chance of anyone being offended though.

  • US teacher put on leave after allegedly calling Palestinian child an extremist

    Jump

  • The issue with your counter example is that there's plenty of times a teacher might use the word terrorist in a classroom. Any history lesson covering the past half century for example. There are precious few times a teacher should be actively swearing in a classroom, in any context.

    But if it's a power dynamic thing, I'd be equally fine saying "I don't negotiate with terrorists" to a subordinate at work if they were being a particular kind of dick, same as I would with a buddy. Because it's a normal phrase people say.

  • US teacher put on leave after allegedly calling Palestinian child an extremist

    Jump

  • Dang, the closest I could find in the NYC white pages was "Terrarese," which like, sounds pretty close, but not quite there, lol. Some people's parents give out some wild names, lol. I wouldn't be shocked if there was a Terrorist Jones out there somewhere. But you're right, that was largely tongue-in-cheek (which isn't a racial epithet against people with big cheeks, and I'm sorry if you happen to have big cheeks and feel insulted).

    But, to answer your question, no. Again, if the kid was like, "Mrs Marples, can I change seats," and the teacher responded with, "screw you, you little terrorist," then that's clearly wildly out of line. But there are reasonable times to use the phrase "I don't negotiate with terrorists" that aren't racially charged. If I say that to a buddy (ethnically white American) who's being a dick, I'm not some raging racist who hates Arab people. I used a reasonably common phrase, in the zeitgeist, at a time where it made sense to do so. And I'm not saying that's definitely what happened here. I'm saying it could be the case, and I'm willing to give reasonable doubt until I see an article that's more than 3 sentences long with less detail than was in the headline.

  • US teacher put on leave after allegedly calling Palestinian child an extremist

    Jump

  • I mean, clearly it's sometimes okay to call a kid a terrorist.

    What if a highschool decides to do a stage production of The Hurt Locker, and one kid has to play a terrorist. Can the drama teacher call them "the terrorist" when blocking a scene?

    What if a kid brings a gun to school and says, "I'm holding this school hostage as an act of terrorism!" Could a teacher refer to them as a terrorist then?

    What if a kid's first name is terrorist? Terrorist Jones they call him. Is a teacher not allowed to refer to them by their name?

    It's clearly okay to sometimes call a kid a terrorist. We're just quibbling over when it's okay to call a kid a terrorist.