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/)G
Posts
63
Comments
4738
Joined
3 yr. ago

  • A researcher bought noreply.net. Companies started sending him secrets.

    Jump
  • ...

    If a corp is sending your personal information to random email addresses, it is in your best interest for them to stop.

    This person, is trying to get corps to stop, because it's bad for people.

    They are not trying to save corps at the expense of people, which is what you seem to think is happening

  • A researcher bought noreply.net. Companies started sending him secrets.

    Jump
  • Sounds like this guy knows way more than me...

    “It is too much,” Solovewicz says, emphasizing that people shouldn’t assume a domain is unmonitored. “I’m at the point where this would now be a full-time job to handle every single one of these—that’s part of my motivation to talk about this, it is my responsible disclosure. You guys need to fix your systems and not do this and not leak your customer data and your employee data and your own internal data.”

    But couldn't he just set up an "out of office" so that every single time he gets an email, a response is sent saying:

    Hey bro, this is a real email address, you just sent me stuff you probably shouldn't. No big deal, but you're going to keep getting this automated emails. Please fix your security.

    If you get stuck in a loop of automated messages (likely) that's going to flow a massive flag up at the company, and someone is going to look at it why it's happening.

    It's impossible for a human to handle it, but that doesn't mean it can't be handled.

  • On my soap box...

    Waiting to go to the ballot box...

    But this is America and there's a couple other boxes.

    It is what it is. But yeah, people need to understand options

  • What do you mean?

    If you're lonely because you don't have people to hang out with, you need more friends.

    If your existing "friends" are shit, you need to not be friends with them. If that puts you in the situation above, then you now need new friends to compensate for losing the shitty ones.

    But most people have the drive to meet new people in their teens and twenties, and by 40s you're fullon in prune friends mode, no new friends.

    Occasionally that also leads to needing more friends. Especially if you got pruned instead of pruning.

    But it's really that simple.

    If you're lonely often, you need new friends. Doesnt automatically mean get rid of the old ones.

    Like Senor Chang said:

    Silver and gold ladies, silver and gold...

  • Which comes full circle to the headline...

    The solution isnt giving union leaders more power.

    The solution is electing decent politicians who know what life is like for average Americans.

    Something that we've made huge strides to in the last year and a half.

    What needs to happen, is happening.

    If a progressive becomes president in 2029, and we've got the best shot since FDR, then they name the new DNC chair.

    Literally the only thing that can stop us, is if people get tricked into not supporting the Dem party right now. Because if a Dem doesn't win the next presidential, that means the ~420 voting members of the DNC get to pick again.

    There's a slim chance they go back to neoliberalism again, and then we're fucked and really need a third party again.

    So we need to make sure we don't even give them a chance, we need to get a progressive in the White House while we can.

  • Buddy...

    No one is defending capitalism either

    You're very passionate about this, but you're not understanding anything.

    For fucks sake, I'm saying that the government should hold the means of production, not unions like what was suggested.

    That is communism, I'm literally saying we should do communism

    I'm just saying if we don't do it right, it's not going to solve anything and we'll end up exactly where we are today, with all the problems and all the wealth inequality.

  • Favorite one so far was El-Sayed rattling off all the Republicans who made up "white names" to hide their ethnic backgrounds when asked about "identity politics".

    As much as Republicans are hung up on "legal names" there's a shit ton of them that just made up white sounding names and their voters don't recognize them by their legal names.

    Rafael Cruz is the obvious one, but there's a shit ton of others doing it too.

  • Buddy...

    We've overthrown oligarchs before...

    Giving that power to unions, just guarantee that what little unions are corrupt, would become corrupt.

    I don't think you understand how much a factory would fuck over non-workers. If the question is "should a factory increase their workers compensation to the detriment of consumers and environment"...

    Every factory will have its workers pick the person who lies about what they can do for workers and how that will effect others.

    Because the honest ones won't lie about either.

    Just to be clear:

    Simply put, the Epstein class needs to be overturned and eliminated.

    No one is disagreeing.

    I'm saying your plan might buy us a decade or even two, then it'll be a new class of oligarchs, likely compromised of 90% the same people.

    Like how after the communist revolutions in China and Russia just ended with new oligarchs, neither actually fixed anything, it just shuffled the people at the top, that's all your plan will do as well.

    We can't waste an opportunity like we have now to do something history has shown us repeatedly won't work.

  • I want to see unions collectively take over means of production

    That is a wild idea...

    Like, I don't think you actually understand what a union is, the problem can't be that you're not aware a union is corruptible.

    Like, the government should take that from capitalists, we can influence a government and hold them accountable. Not to mention we'd gain long term planning again instead of chasing profits one quarter at a time.

    Like, if unions controlled the means of production, a union is very easy for the oligarchs to corrupt.

    You've got the right spirit, but that is just an awful idea.

  • The problem with unions is selfishness.

    People vote for whoever they think will take care of them, and at a certain point a corrupt person is willing to do more ( or more likely to just lie), so they start electing corrupt union leaders.

    Those corrupt union leaders, care more about themselves than the people they represent.

    Don't blame unions as a concept.

    A sandwich is a magical thing, but if someone poops between two slices of bread, that doesn't mean every sandwich is shit, or that we can never eat a sandwich again.

    We just need to look at it before biting in, because we know some assholes are shittingnin sandwiches.

    Informed voters is always the solution, that's true for unions as much as Senators.

  • The main lesson of the Graham Platner fiasco isn’t that we should never run outsiders for office (the momentum he generated proves the exact opposite), but that they need proper vetting and roots in democratic membership organizations like DSA or a union.

    Planter was vetted...

    By the Maine state party, it went so far that "vetted" is a poor word choice, they picked him.

    Then when he said things about Israel they didn't think he would, they took their own pick out and replaced him with someone more conservative.

    If the Maine state party wasn't filled with idiots from Florida's party who have shown they completely incompetent....

    A cynic would say they picked Platner with the intent from day one to throw him under a bus after a primary so they can make a candidate.

    But if that was actually their plan, they would have fucked it up somehow.

    People need to understand now that we're back to a bottom-up power structure, we really need to work on state parties

  • So do the citizens...

    That's why they brought a fucking guillotine.

    Like, this is the result of all the shit they're pulling with bribing politicians and having them arrest anyone who talks back at meetings.

    People aren't just going to lay down and take, at a certain point when the 0.01% keep violating the social contract, everyone else adapts to the new reality

    It's like a little kid who cheats at Monopoly and loves the game, nothing can make them stop cheating and they always insistnon playing.

    You fix that by cheating back just as hard, ruin the kids game, and teach them that if everyone plays by the rules we all have fun.

    If a few refuse the rules, everyone else refuses the game.

  • It's Apple...

    Not everyone with an iPhone is tech illiterate, but everyone who is tech illiterate has an iPhone

    Those people might think that the only way for their data to get from one phone to another, is them typing a password onto the phone physically.

    If they were offered this, they may realize that Apple could just clone their phone and everything on it.

    Don't forget how many social media savvy young celebrities had nudes leak a few years ago because they were iPhone users and iphones back everything up to the cloud by default. Most users most likely never realize that's happening.

  • The non-American accounts make sense at least, most Americans can't even understand our system...

    But politically "active" Americans who spend lots of time commenting about it, but have never tried to learn about it anywhere besides social media are just the fucking worst.

    Like I get it, for 30 years "DNC bad" was good enough.

    But shit finally fucking changed, and there's a never ending stream of very ignorant and very loud accounts, with a noticable uptick as soon as the primaries were over and the general is rapidly approaching.

    And I stead of paying the slightest bit of attention, they only want to tell people that the DNC is trash and somehow the best way to stop Republicans is not vote for the progressive Dems running against them in the general.

    None of it makes logical sense, but they just keep repeating the same shit the oligarch owned media does.

  • Yeah, I assumed it was "breaking news" like the AP does...

    But OPs link is a random blog that quoted two sentences from a whole ass article:

    https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/trump-loses-21-straight-court-battles-state-voter-rolls-midterms-near-2026-08-07/

    Edit:

    It's a bot that reposts what people post to a different smaller aggregator, here to Lemmy.

    So obviously it's going to end up with people spamming posts there, to get them to show up on Lemmy with this bot as a go between.

    Even if that's not what this bots owner intended, I'd be surprised if it's not already happening.

    I'm just gonna block the bot

  • The Democratic party accepted the leftwing shift when instead of doubling down on Biden's pick (Jamie Harrison) they elected a chair with a decade long track record of running fair primaries who immediately drained the "victory fund" the neoliberals accumulated and gave it back to state parties...

    Blaming Martin when he assumed office in 2025 for what Harrison did 2021 to 2025 is fuckign stupid. At this point after this long, there's no nice way to put it. If you think you're politically engaged and you haven't figured this out, it's because of your critical thinking ability.

    The reason oligarch owned media pretends none of that happened, is they're trying to manufacture outrage against the new DNC.

    They'd rather let Republicans win by depressing the vote.

    Because if a progressive wins 2028, they name the chair in 2029.

    And obviously progressives are winning under the current DNC. Because the current DNC doesn't have a boot on their necks.

  • Buddy, really?

    But because no one was buying 32gb machines and a machine without that sticker will end up with Linux…

    They just dropped it,

    Did you not understand it or just assume none of the later text kept explaining it so you immediately stopped ready?

    It's not just you, I see this shit all over these days, what the fuck are you people doing?

  • I mean...

    He ran thinking he would never win...

    Won...

    And the refused to run in the re-election he was guaranteed to win...

    So yeah, any rational person should be able to figure this one out chief.

  • The money is micro transactions and the whales have $7k gpus...

    Everyone else is just fodder so the pay to win accounts have someone to feel better than.

    COD a while ago got caught out for juicing the matchmaking odds right after you buy a new skin. Didn't matter what you bought or how much. A purchase made your next couple lobbies be filled with scrubs on one side, and you and some above averages on the other.

    After X amounts of games it wore off, and since those games pushed you up in the normal metrics, you're now in lobbies above your skill level. So even if you get a "fair" game, you're going to do badly, until you buy a skin again or lose to your actual skill level.

    That's why everyone started complaining about COD matchmaking, even if you bought nothing, everyone was on the same micro transaction maximizing rollercoaster.

    A cynic would say that's why it went free on Xbox, they need a population of players to make the whale milking work. Even if those people only fire it up a few hours a month and never buy anything, getting matched with someone above your skill level who just bought a stupid skin makes you the product they sell to the whales.