JustZ
@JustZ@lemmy.world
- Comment on RIP Twitter Dot Com: Elon Musk Moves Social Network to X Web Address 8 hours ago:
Dude thinks the cyber truck is cool, and not the dumbest fucking vehicle ever.
- Comment on China unveils video of its moon base plans, which weirdly includes a NASA space shuttle 2 weeks ago:
Nothing weird about it. They have zero respect for international IP law.
- Comment on 30% of Children Ages 5-7 Are on TikTok 2 weeks ago:
I think you misread me. I’m in total agreement with you.
- Comment on Drone maker DJI facing U.S. FCC ban — the national security risk and part China-state ownership are key issues 2 weeks ago:
They are mapping network infrastructure and gobbling up whatever data they can find, and sending it back to China, that is feeding into an AI that is going to try and figure out the exact networks that need to be taken out to inflict maximum damage.
I’m sure Congress and the FCC are looking at other apps and devs as well and this is probably just the beginning of more and more Chinese tech being frozen out of western economies, I know the US is also approaching this from a diplomatic standpoint, looking at requirements to keep data gathered by the companies out of China. It’s above my pay grade, especially the technical aspects. As I understand there already was a deal with tick tock for them not to ship the data to China, but they kept doing it anyway. This Act of Congress may be a cudgel for those diplomatic negotiations, as if to say if “keep fucking around and we will ban your shit one by one until there isn’t any left.”
“One as an example, two to show we can keep doing it.”
- Comment on 30% of Children Ages 5-7 Are on TikTok 2 weeks ago:
That’s why we have them friend, because it couldn’t. The system is based on punishing antisocial behavior.
- Comment on 30% of Children Ages 5-7 Are on TikTok 2 weeks ago:
Yup.
- Comment on 30% of Children Ages 5-7 Are on TikTok 2 weeks ago:
This is my understanding of it all as well. Like, if your parents never stfu as a kid or you never had a chance to really be alone and quiet and safe as a baby, your brain, your very concept of self, is hardwired for constant stimulation such that it’s uncomfortable not to have it, to the point of sitting their for 14 hours reading Wikipedia pages or whatever because it’s more stimulating that it would be to stop and wash the floors or so the laundry, or maybe just talking your fingers in class or letting your mind read every sign and bumper sticker while you’re driving. It’s also why all the most effective treatments are about emotional regulation.
- Comment on 30% of Children Ages 5-7 Are on TikTok 2 weeks ago:
That doesn’t sound right to me. ADHD is a constellation of shared symptoms, grouped together and given a name for insurance and diagnostic purposes and because the treatment overlaps. The cause of those symptoms are obviously multifactorial, heavily correlated with both genetics and childhood stress. Bad news if your mom or dad didn’t ever stfu when you were a baby, hardwired you to be uncomfortable without constant external stimulation and validation.
Schools at least where I live do a much better job of teaching kids to manage their emotions. And I hope parents of young children are doing a better job as well, seems like it to me, but I’m in a well off rural bubble.
I imagine TikTok sets back any progress and I’m glad it’s banned. TikTok brain is a relatively thing. Human beings are meant to be able to focus intensely in one purposeful thing for several hours at a time and with practice anyone can learn to be highly productive and attentive if they can find a time and place to be free from distractions, and anyone can have a super memory if they set aside time and purposefully train their memory; memory is a product of focus.
- Comment on 30% of Children Ages 5-7 Are on TikTok 2 weeks ago:
Nobody wants to see old people.
- Comment on 30% of Children Ages 5-7 Are on TikTok 2 weeks ago:
We can’t run a society on the things on which we run society!
- Comment on 30% of Children Ages 5-7 Are on TikTok 2 weeks ago:
Childless young people downvoting this, perhaps not able to admit they’re just like mom or dad?
For most of us I’m sorry but it’s true! Kids are mirrors; apples don’t fall far from trees. Not all of them. Some carry.
- Comment on 30% of Children Ages 5-7 Are on TikTok 2 weeks ago:
You can type in coherent sentences so it’s no surprise your kids don’t fall into the reported finding.
- Comment on 30% of Children Ages 5-7 Are on TikTok 2 weeks ago:
Uhh, yes, in fact I’d say most. There’s entire systems of childhood health legislation, education, labor, you name it. This is an availability bias showing through. Think about it for five minutes and I bet you can come up with a dozen examples.
- Comment on Drone maker DJI facing U.S. FCC ban — the national security risk and part China-state ownership are key issues 2 weeks ago:
From the FCC.
DJI drones and the surveillance technology on board these systems are collecting vast amounts of sensitive data—everything from high-resolution images of critical infrastructure to facial recognition technology and remote sensors that can measure an individual’s body temperature and heart rate,” Commissioner Carr stated. “Security researchers have also found that DJI’s software applications collect large quantities of personal information from the operator’s smartphone that could be exploited by Beijing. Indeed, one former Pentagon official stated that ‘we know that a lot of the information is sent back to China from’ DJI drones.
“DJI’s collection of vast troves of sensitive data isespecially troubling given that China’s National Intelligence Law grants the Chinese government the power to compel DJI to assist it in espionage activities. In fact, the Commerce Department placed DJI on its Entity List last year, citing DJI’s role in Communist China’s surveillance and abuse of Uyghurs in Xinjiang. Add to this information the widespread use of DJI drones by various state and local public safety and law enforcement agencies as well as news reports that the U.S. Secret Service and FBI recently bought DJI drones, and the need for quick action on the potential national security threat is clear.
- Comment on Drone maker DJI facing U.S. FCC ban — the national security risk and part China-state ownership are key issues 2 weeks ago:
From the FCC.
DJI drones and the surveillance technology on board these systems are collecting vast amounts of sensitive data—everything from high-resolution images of critical infrastructure to facial recognition technology and remote sensors that can measure an individual’s body temperature and heart rate,” Commissioner Carr stated. “Security researchers have also found that DJI’s software applications collect large quantities of personal information from the operator’s smartphone that could be exploited by Beijing. Indeed, one former Pentagon official stated that ‘we know that a lot of the information is sent back to China from’ DJI drones.
“DJI’s collection of vast troves of sensitive data isespecially troubling given that China’s National Intelligence Law grants the Chinese government the power to compel DJI to assist it in espionage activities. In fact, the Commerce Department placed DJI on its Entity List last year, citing DJI’s role in Communist China’s surveillance and abuse of Uyghurs in Xinjiang. Add to this information the widespread use of DJI drones by various state and local public safety and law enforcement agencies as well as news reports that the U.S. Secret Service and FBI recently bought DJI drones, and the need for quick action on the potential national security threat is clear.
- Comment on Drone maker DJI facing U.S. FCC ban — the national security risk and part China-state ownership are key issues 2 weeks ago:
From the FCC.
DJI drones and the surveillance technology on board these systems are collecting vast amounts of sensitive data—everything from high-resolution images of critical infrastructure to facial recognition technology and remote sensors that can measure an individual’s body temperature and heart rate,” Commissioner Carr stated. “Security researchers have also found that DJI’s software applications collect large quantities of personal information from the operator’s smartphone that could be exploited by Beijing. Indeed, one former Pentagon official stated that ‘we know that a lot of the information is sent back to China from’ DJI drones.
“DJI’s collection of vast troves of sensitive data isespecially troubling given that China’s National Intelligence Law grants the Chinese government the power to compel DJI to assist it in espionage activities. In fact, the Commerce Department placed DJI on its Entity List last year, citing DJI’s role in Communist China’s surveillance and abuse of Uyghurs in Xinjiang. Add to this information the widespread use of DJI drones by various state and local public safety and law enforcement agencies as well as news reports that the U.S. Secret Service and FBI recently bought DJI drones, and the need for quick action on the potential national security threat is clear.
- Comment on Drone maker DJI facing U.S. FCC ban — the national security risk and part China-state ownership are key issues 2 weeks ago:
From the FCC.
DJI drones and the surveillance technology on board these systems are collecting vast amounts of sensitive data—everything from high-resolution images of critical infrastructure to facial recognition technology and remote sensors that can measure an individual’s body temperature and heart rate,” Commissioner Carr stated. “Security researchers have also found that DJI’s software applications collect large quantities of personal information from the operator’s smartphone that could be exploited by Beijing. Indeed, one former Pentagon official stated that ‘we know that a lot of the information is sent back to China from’ DJI drones.
“DJI’s collection of vast troves of sensitive data isespecially troubling given that China’s National Intelligence Law grants the Chinese government the power to compel DJI to assist it in espionage activities. In fact, the Commerce Department placed DJI on its Entity List last year, citing DJI’s role in Communist China’s surveillance and abuse of Uyghurs in Xinjiang. Add to this information the widespread use of DJI drones by various state and local public safety and law enforcement agencies as well as news reports that the U.S. Secret Service and FBI recently bought DJI drones, and the need for quick action on the potential national security threat is clear.
- Comment on Drone maker DJI facing U.S. FCC ban — the national security risk and part China-state ownership are key issues 2 weeks ago:
Delete your post.
From the FCC.
DJI drones and the surveillance technology on board these systems are collecting vast amounts of sensitive data—everything from high-resolution images of critical infrastructure to facial recognition technology and remote sensors that can measure an individual’s body temperature and heart rate,” Commissioner Carr stated. “Security researchers have also found that DJI’s software applications collect large quantities of personal information from the operator’s smartphone that could be exploited by Beijing. Indeed, one former Pentagon official stated that ‘we know that a lot of the information is sent back to China from’ DJI drones.
“DJI’s collection of vast troves of sensitive data isespecially troubling given that China’s National Intelligence Law grants the Chinese government the power to compel DJI to assist it in espionage activities. In fact, the Commerce Department placed DJI on its Entity List last year, citing DJI’s role in Communist China’s surveillance and abuse of Uyghurs in Xinjiang. Add to this information the widespread use of DJI drones by various state and local public safety and law enforcement agencies as well as news reports that the U.S. Secret Service and FBI recently bought DJI drones, and the need for quick action on the potential national security threat is clear.
- Comment on Possible snipers seen at OSU. Administration says they're not snipers but should be treated like they are. 2 weeks ago:
God damn, owned.
- Comment on Possible snipers seen at OSU. Administration says they're not snipers but should be treated like they are. 2 weeks ago:
Yeah, you think all those people on January 6th weren’t having their basic needs met? No, terrorists are not logical people fed up with the system. They’re fanatics and psychopaths, and in Gaza it’s a revered profession. They literally don’t have their basic needs met because they are spending all their money and resources on violent extremism. They’ve been doing it so long their economy depends on it; if they stop killing Jews, they stop getting money from their benefactors in Iran and Qatar. Panislamism, which includes Hamas and its allies, is an ideology of violent repression of non-muslims and infidels, it’s not a freedom movement, it’s MAGA for Islam.
- Comment on Possible snipers seen at OSU. Administration says they're not snipers but should be treated like they are. 3 weeks ago:
I agree. Look at the dude’s clothes and kit. That’s someone who’s out for a shoot.
- Comment on YouTube Tests Showing Ads When You Pause a Video, Calls it ''Pause Ads'' 3 weeks ago:
Yeah, I forgot I basically only use YouTube on mobile or Chromecast.
- Comment on YouTube Tests Showing Ads When You Pause a Video, Calls it ''Pause Ads'' 3 weeks ago:
Oh true, I forget I am on mobile usually for YouTube.
- Comment on YouTube Tests Showing Ads When You Pause a Video, Calls it ''Pause Ads'' 3 weeks ago:
Yeah all that stuff.
Everyone is a celebrity.
- Comment on YouTube Tests Showing Ads When You Pause a Video, Calls it ''Pause Ads'' 3 weeks ago:
Is it even possible anymore?
- Comment on YouTube Tests Showing Ads When You Pause a Video, Calls it ''Pause Ads'' 3 weeks ago:
YouTube is unwatchable for me with all these ads. Even without ads, content creators mostly all follow the same generic bullshit format.
It used to be a great resource for visual aids and explanations, now it’s filled with money making schemes and scams and every video has 14 minutes of bullshit and 1 minute of content.
- Comment on You can now buy a flame-throwing robot dog for under $10,000 3 weeks ago:
Obviously then yes it would be fine.
- Comment on You can now buy a flame-throwing robot dog for under $10,000 3 weeks ago:
That would probably fall under intentional torts rather than strict animal liability. If you do, put up some vague “is this your drone?” flyers with a blurry photo, wait a bit, take the drone to the vet and pay the bill in your name, and build the evidence of your keepership, because you’ll have to admit being a keeper for the defense to work. Also, owners or keepers are liable, and this is one of those rare times in law when or also means and, and Amazon will probably help you defend the case in chief, though they will probably come after you next. This does not constitute legal advice.
- Comment on You can now buy a flame-throwing robot dog for under $10,000 3 weeks ago:
That’s a legit point under common law. The owner or keeper of a wild animal is generally strictly liable for damage caused by the animal, except if the animal is local fauna, in which case liability terminates on the animal’s escape back into the wild. I don’t know of any place with native flame throwing robots.
- Comment on Tesla’s in its flop era 3 weeks ago:
Pretty much.
The dude is school on Sunday, no class.