ChairmanMeow

joined 1 year ago
[–] ChairmanMeow@programming.dev -2 points 1 week ago (3 children)

I see, but the point of the comic is that women don't seem to agree with you and find that way of thinking about it fairly exasperating at times. In many cases there hasn't been a serious attempt to address the issues raised, so claiming that you can't address them without also addressing men's issues would be perhaps a bit premature.

[–] ChairmanMeow@programming.dev -3 points 1 week ago (5 children)

the direction I take to "steer it away" is to look at it as something universal, which is simply more helpful to understand why it happens, not to tie attention to men's issues specifically.

I understand your intentions, but it doesn't have the intended effect. By doing this you are making the assumption that the way women experience these issues is (close to) the same as the way men experience it. But you can't really assume that, and often people disagree.

When women want to talk about problems they face, it's important to hear them out and address their issue, instead of what amounts to 'deflecting' to a "grander" issue. At its core it's a whataboutism that derails the conversation, and that's not what you intended.

So my genuine advice is: don't. Address these problems one by one. The solutions can often be different.

You have to assume that

I believe we've come at the point where women and men issues are so intertwined, so much permeating each other that it's no longer helpful to see them as separate issues to begin with.

may well not be correct, and it can feel incredibly invalidating to people by assuming that this is the case.

[–] ChairmanMeow@programming.dev 0 points 1 week ago (4 children)

That's not true. Infinite doesn't mean "all". There are an infinite amount of numbers between 0 and 1, but none of them are 2. There's a high statistical probability, sure, but it's not necessarily 100%.

LLMs work pretty well for narrowly-scoped questions like this.

[–] ChairmanMeow@programming.dev 20 points 1 week ago

Currencies going up in value tends to not be great for an economy, as people will save instead of spend. It stops being a currency and becomes somewhat of an asset. A slowly depreciating currency tends to foster the most economic growth.

[–] ChairmanMeow@programming.dev 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Our company has directly profited from a competitor that leaked sensitive data, because some of their large corporate customers decided to switch to us.

Business don't like being on the receiving end of a data leak either you know.

[–] ChairmanMeow@programming.dev 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

"In an April 2008 article in Vanity Fair magazine, the journalist David Rose published confidential documents, apparently originating from the US State Department, which would prove that the United States collaborated with the PNA and Israel to attempt the violent overthrow of Hamas in the Gaza Strip, and that Hamas pre-empted the coup." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Gaza_(2007)#:~:text=In%20an%20April,empted%20the%20coup.

You have some reading to do.

There is no police for international matters.

There is, it's called a UN Peacekeeping Force.

[–] ChairmanMeow@programming.dev 4 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

Hamas to power in 2007 and broke all past agreements with Israel and started to launch rockets into Israel. This lead to the blockade.

Hamas seized power after a civil war, brought on by an attempted coup by the PA backed by the US and Israel. This attempted coup led to the Hamas attacks on Israel. They did not randomly break all agreements and started shooting rockets.

Hamas was always deeply unhappy with the Israeli presence, but they hadn't become really openly violent before that point.

If you started to fire your gun on my home at random hours I would have locked your door from the outside and set your home on fire with, or without, your family inside. This is common sense.

What the fuck is this insane statement. Call the police?

[–] ChairmanMeow@programming.dev 7 points 2 weeks ago

I think you're being too pessimistic about IT security, particularly in the Financial sector. A lot of the security rules and audits aren't even government-run, it's the sector regulating itself. And trust me, they are pretty thorough and quite nitpicky about stuff.

The cost of failing an audit also often isn't even a fine, it's direct exclusion from a payment scheme. Basically, do it right or don't do it at all. Given that that is a strict requirement for staying in business, most of these companies will have sufficiently invested in IT security.

Of course it's not airtight, no system really is. But particularly in the financial sector most companies really do have their IT security in order.

view more: ‹ prev next ›