On a completely unrelated note, I think it’s important to take some time every now and then to remember important historical data security techniques such as steganography: https://hackeracademy.org/steganography-hiding-secret-files/

They draw the pollution map overlay in Factorio

Because we don’t have receptors for them, yes. Science is cool.

Buckle up for the next NYT headline:

RFK Jr is the real vaccination-class hero, not experienced nurses and doctors and hundreds of years of medical science

That’s a little hard to parse, but if you’re asking “What guarantees the FDIC has the money to pay back Americans who lose their savings because of a bank collapse?”: The FDIC does. From https://www.fdic.gov/about/what-we-do:

The FDIC receives no Congressional appropriations - it is funded by premiums that banks and savings associations pay for deposit insurance coverage. The FDIC insures trillions of dollars of deposits in U.S. banks and thrifts - deposits in virtually every bank and savings association in the country.

FDIC insurance is a selling point for many retail banking products (like checking and savings accounts), so those institutions pay for the insurance so people will have confidence to bank there. More importantly, they buy it because it’s required by law currently.

If the FDIC were abolished, the void would be filled by unregulated entities that would charge higher premiums and cover less, and there would probably be kickbacks involved - while the government watches with its popcorn - to disincentivise real free market competition.

That’s if there were any kind of deposit insurance at all, I mean. The idea might be to encourage the American people to put their savings into a form they can retain control over - like precious metals, land, or digital currencies.

Remember that scene at the beginning of It’s a Wonderful Life, where people are all desperately trying to get into the bank because if it fails before they get in, they lose their money? That’s what the FDIC prevents.

Yeah. FDIC insurance is the only reason each of us will be left with up to 100k 250k per bank account, if our banks go under. And most of us have less than 100k in savings, so it’s basically the US government saying

Don’t worry, even if shit hits the fan, you will still have your money.

I can’t even be bothered to hear how his minions are going to defend this one. It’s indefensible.

Where, holding the engine in place?

I’m not rewarding your clickbait bullshit on such a contentious topic, Account That Is Only A Week Old. Summarise the points in the video, say what you found interesting/agree/disagree with, whatever, but contribute something instead of just leaving this steaming pile here for everyone else to step over.

Lol well I took exception to slop but this is all human shit :p while ai allowed me to generate it in like 3 minutes the idea was mine (and apparently a few other people’s as well, I saw some others on the New feed), and I don’t need ai to help me think of shitpost ideas - just to bring them to life in full technicolour glory, and with less effort than mouse-drawing in MSPaint.

Also, I do think it adds a certain dimension of shittiness to do it so carelessly, but that might be too abstract for a shitpost

I’m sorry, you must be lost. This is /c/lemmyshitpost , there’s a sign and everything. If you want effort go elsewhere.

deleted by creator

Hard agree! I just mistook you to mean that it was just a couple of rogue actors without any real support, is all - my b.

I really can’t stand how the modern writers have made Section 31 an official arm of Starfleet. The entire point of the original idea was that it was a parasitic conspiracy hiding within the ranks, but not actually part of the ranks.

They had the unconditional support of a Starfleet Admiral for the operation to discredit that Romulan politician and get their mole into power, though. And they have moles in foreign governments, indicating they have official backing and resources at some level. If they didn’t, they wouldn’t have moles; they’d have corpses who believed they were operatives. It’s hard to believe they’re not “officially unofficial”, given the things they’ve managed to pull off.

I do think that bringing it out into the open with a whole show absolutely kills the effectiveness of Section 31 as a story device though. I feel the same way about the latest season of Stranger Things, giving a face and voice to The Mindflayer. It’s like everyone’s forgetting the power of real mystery.

Would effectively eliminate cases of food poisoning, though.

You’re absolutely right about the danger of giving up your phone, if the police wanted to take it from you. By sticking with traditional documents you remove any pretense they might have to try. It is not a stupid call, it’s just less convenient - but then, security is always a compromise with accessibility.

Yeah fair, I’d have a bit of anger too if I’d been force-fed woodlice as a child.

I regularly say that joining the military for me was like becoming a Storm Trooper. At least most people seem to understand that’s not a good thing.

Man, what the fuck did the roly polys do the the Netherlands?!

That is a valid concern! And it’s the main reason I’m generally against vigilantism, since I’ve grown up. (Also, I edited my comment while you were replying - I didn’t mean to rugpull you, I just realised I wasn’t articulate enough in my point about the trolley problem applying).

But, murder is still murder and this guy is probably going to get caught and put on trial, and punished. I think most people who wouldn’t risk it before this won’t risk it now, and certainly not for petty grievances, but if someone’s situation is dire enough…

I’m not sure you’re right that bullets can’t be a lever, though. Firing the gun is pulling the lever, but nobody ever said it has to be a single lever pull that diverts the trolley.

The point of the trolley problem is that doing nothing results in more deaths to explore the limits of utilitarianism. It starts with the question of whether actively choosing to cause less destruction is worse than doing nothing to stop greater destruction, and you can add context to make it more complex from there.

In the trolley problem, the choice is to kill one to save many by pulling a lever. The lever of regulation has failed, so now the people are going to start pulling levers of their own, to try and reduce deaths. Just because it’s not “the literal trolley problem but in real life” does not mean it’s not the trolley problem.