I followed the shooting at Brown University last year very closely. Brown's leadership was heavily criticized for having camera blind spots and not being able to track the shooter's exact movements through campus. I can understand why people with stewardship over the safety of their students/customers/constituents would make decisions to err on the side of tracking. I'm not saying I agree with it, but I understand it.
I got my BS in Computer Science legally carrying a Glock in every class. I think it's very likely I was the only person doing so; Not because I was fearful, but because I like being prepared. It takes very little long-term effort for people to carry pepper spray, a gun (if able), and a first aid kit everywhere they go. You never know who's life you might save.
The criticism around that event, I believe, involved Brown University disablinf cameras trying to protect potential illegal immigrants being targeted by ice. It wasn't the lack of cameras. It was a purposeful disabling of said cameras that already existed.
Yes and so the real issue is that they outsourced to the wrong compan, gave up control of their camera feeds, and violated the privacy of their campusgoers. Had they just had their own CCTV system then this would have not happened.
Correct, whoever made the decision to create ICE, as it became a security risk that lead to deaths. Glad that's what you said, and no other valid interpretation.
While there were deaths, I didn't see any that were the result of a "security risk". I did see a whole lot of stupid people doing stupid things, and none of them were ICE agents, so I'm surprised there weren't more deaths.
> I did see a whole lot of stupid people doing stupid things, and none of them were ICE agents, so I'm surprised there weren't more deaths.
Random masked goons in unmarked cars trying to arrest people is pretty damn stupid, yes. Same goons putting themselves in front of cars, and shooting through side windows of cars driving away, or shooting at random people on the street, is pretty damn stupid.
I'm going to provide a bit of nuance here, but would like to clarify I am not a fan of ICE's tactics in the slightest. Yes, the ICE agent was stupid for standing in front of the car, just as Renee Good was stupid for hitting the gas while he was standing in front of her car. At that moment, he became 100% legally justified to shoot. The limits of human cognitive performance significantly limit how fast your brain can send the signal to your hand to stop shooting, and the stop-signal happened when he was standing by her side window. In a split-second, he was shooting to defend himself against a reasonably perceived threat of being run over. Yes, it could have been completely avoided by both individuals, but "shooting through side windows of cars driving away" is misleading. The Alex Pretti incident, completely, totally unjustified. Just wanted to provide a bit of nuance from the perspective of someone who studies self-defense encounters.
It's a relatively new agency in name (2003), but it's not really all that new. It was formerly known as the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) and U.S. Customs.
A little know fact is that Biden deported more illegal immigrants then previous presidents with smaller budget and without killing them. He also deported higher amount if actual criminals in the set. So, you know, whatever before ICE is now was more effective.
Also, the abuses and violence are staggering. And they managed to deport or mistreat actual citizens, because they did not cared. Again, not effective.
Here is the problem - conservative and right wing people use "effective" as euphemism for "we want to see as much cruelty and abuse as possible".
This is a very common pattern; my university pushed through a ZeroEyes AI camera/open carry weapon detection contract within 2 weeks of a shooting at a nearby school, even though it’s trivial to bypass by hiding it; it’s most probably just (gruesome as it is to think about) a bad press insurance so if anything happened, they can say they had “state of the art AI detection” and they did all they could. No one wants to be the one caught not doing “all they could” against the media cacophony in the immediate aftermath.
Yep, here they admitted there were local revolutionary war re-enactors who were falsely flagged (although thankfully they didn't let it get past the first flag).
I recently did a dive into ASPD (Antisocial Personality Disorder i.e. sociopaths) and unsurprisingly most what's stopping them from outright killing people is the likelihood that they'd be caught. So one thing is clear is that as long as we have sociopaths and the like who treat crime purely as value/risk proposition some sort of powerful detective tooling will always be necessary.
Unfortunately automated surveillance is considered the best detective tool we have but in reality it doesn't seem to be the case with public self surveillance and good ol' park a policeman box in every neighborhood seems to outperform automated surveillance. So there's much more to this than "surveillance is bad or good" discussions we have right now.
With most of these things, people are for state power until they are victimized by it. It's a common pattern.
:D
I've had property stolen. Cameras generally won't help, and didn't help. Limiting ingredient is often not knowing who did it in any case-- in most places most common crime is committed by a tiny number of regular characters. Go look at the mountains of threads online where someone had a tracker enabled object stolen and knew exactly who had it only to have law enforcement do nothing.
that doesn't seem to be the case always, given the data on crime reporting:
"Patterns in police reporting for property crime during 2020–2023 were similar to those for violent crime. A quarter (25%) of all property victimizations in urban areas were reported to police, which was lower than the percentages in suburban (33%) and rural (36%) areas (figure 2).
Similar to overall property victimization, a lower percentage of other theft victimizations were reported to police in urban areas (20%) compared to suburban (28%) and rural (31%) areas."
"For violent crimes, in 1997, 7% of victims
stated that “Police wouldn’t help” as the reason they did not call the police. This more than
doubled to 16% by 2021. For property crimes, the corresponding rates were 12% in 1997 and 18% in
2021"
Police work for the State. The State orders them to work for the Public when it interests the State. Intervening in violent crime and property crime can be seen, cynically, as a PR move.
To be beholden to the State for justice and protection is fine when the State is beholden to the Public for their consent. Today, in the West, the Public has been so thoroughly disarmed, and /disrobed/, that consent is a formality, consent can no longer be withheld.
Look no further than Flock and FISA for the ongoing crisis of consent.
When cops are released from the State apparatus, they'll be given the respect and admiration they deserve. Until then, it's difficult to separate them from their incentive structure.
You mostly jest here i think but that seems to be the actual strategy and logic of progressive activist types so often. I mean all side tend to stick with their groups but progressives seemed to have created an argument that demands disassociation and disengagement with people they deem transgressive to the approved opinions and positions on so many issues.
I guess? Washington Post and others were doing this for a while. As insane as it was for a "neutral" news source to officially endorse political candidates, it was earning them subscribers. And Fox News didn't do this officially, but it was obvious.
If you want to give EFF more credit, maybe they figured at least they can reach people on TikTok who don't already agree but don't already disagree, while Twitter was just flaming.
One of the first signs that a somebody has Alzheimer's is that they'll get lost. E.g., they've been attending church on Thursdays nights at the same chapel for 15 years, but suddenly they forgot how to get home after a recent service. Part of the reason for the findings in the current study is that people quit those professions when they feel themselves starting to struggle.
Yeah my mom would slowly forget how to get to my house, it was sad she would always try but just not quite get it... She eventual died of Alzheimer's a some years later...
Is the profession cached in the data when they leave the job? And does the data attribute 2 entries for someone with 2 careers. That’s the question I think
They explain it in the article. Someone, often the funeral director filling out the death certificate, asks what the deceased did for most of their working life.
I’m a little skeptical of the category “ambulance drivers; not emergency medical technicians” as reliably coded, because people will often say so-and-so “drove an ambulance” when they were actually an EMT or paramedic. But it’s also not clear to me that would invalidate the findings.
A friend of my wife's suffered a stroke recently. One of the first signs something was really wrong was she took a circuitous route around town to get home, then called her husband and said "I'm lost, I don't know where I am". She was parked in her own driveway.
Yes, unpacking a tar file is much safer than piping arbitrary code to bash! You can look at the PKGFILE in the directory--it is only 30 lines long and mostly variable assignments. The build/check/package functions are 7 lines of code total. Compare that to something like rustup (910 lines of code), claude (158 lines), or opencode (460 lines).
I've never regretted buying Legos for my kids. Yeah, the kits can be expensive, but they last forever. We've thrown out or donated lots of old toys, but the Legos will never be given away.
In terms of toys which my son got from my childhood, Duplo and Lego stick out. We kept everything; booklets and parts. We built the classic town square (set 1592) recently, and we've got all the parts, including the statue bits! Only the printed lettering on the sign's 1×8 white brick had faded.
Sure, some puzzles and books survived, but the Lego stands out. If he ever has children they are in for a treat…
As a kid in the early 1980s, I spent a lot of time experimenting with computers by playing basic games and drawing with crude applications. And it was fun. I would have loved to have something like Google's Genie to play with. Even if it never evolved, the product in the demos looks good enough for people to get value from.
I've wasted hours of my life trying to get Latex to format my journal articles to different journals' specifications. That's tedious typesetting that wastes my time. I'm all for AI tools that help me produce my thoughts with as little friction as possible.
I'm not in favor of letting AI do my thinking for me. Time will tell where Prism sits.
This Prism video was not just typesetting. If OpenAI released tools that just helped you typeset or create diagrams from written text, that would be fine. But it's not, it's writing papers for you. Scientists/publishers really do not need the onslaught of slop this will create. How can we even trust qualifications in the post-AI world, where cheating is rampant at univeristies?
Lessons are learned the hard way. I invite the slop - the more the merrier. It will lead to a reduction in internet activity as people puke from the slop. And then we chart our way back to the right path.
Seeing things like, "<h2 id="new-driving-model">New driving model</h2>" on their list of latest releases does not inspire a lot of confidence. Yes, the HTML tags are displayed on the page. Some basic quality assurance on the website would help me trust the quality assurance applied to their product offering.
I took meds for depression a few years ago. I don't know that they did anything other than signal to myself that I wasn't ready to give up. They may have served as a kind of "dumbo's feather" that helped me get through a rough patch. Exercise might be similar. People who choose to exercise make the statement to themselves that they are worth doing something positive for. Some mental health problems resolve with time and without medication, and in those cases, exercise might be a great way to address them. But if you're struggling, call your doctor and make and appointment. Medication is sometimes the answer.
> Carbohydrate overfeeding produced progressive increases in carbohydrate oxidation and total energy expenditure resulting in 75-85% of excess energy being stored. Alternatively, fat overfeeding had minimal effects on fat oxidation and total energy expenditure, leading to storage of 90-95% of excess energy.
reply