Linus Tech Tips made a Faraday cage out of an employee's house using graphite-based EMF-blocking paint. MMS messages with images couldn't be sent from within the house, although text messages and phone calls went through. They didn't do anything to treat the windows, though, so maybe if you combine the paint with some sort of fine wire mesh over the windows you'd get a more comprehensive blocking effect.
At $200/gallon, the cost of the paint would also be a major consideration.
Fat shaming doesn't work. It can maybe work, sometimes, on an individual level, like if you're a big enough dick to your friend or partner maybe you can get them to lose some weight. But the problem we (society) have isn't that your spouse is fat and my friend is fat, it's that everyone's friend and everyone's spouse is fat, and we (as a society) have already tried being mean to all the fat people and it didn't work. Show me the incentive and I'll show you the outcome. You can't set up a society awash with processed foods which are addictive by design, force everyone to use a car to get to the store/work/school, refuse to educate children on how to purchase and cook healthy foods, and expect everyone individually to recognize these flaws in our system and make a conscious effort to counteract them in their own lives. Maybe some people will do it, good for them, but the average person will do what's easy. If you want a healthy society, you need to make being healthy the easiest thing.
If your coworker keeps asking you to review merge requests filled with garbage code they copy/pasted from an LLM, sure, shaming them might be part of the solution. But if people are turning to AI because it's too difficult for them to get certain types of emotional validation in the physical world, making them feel bad about it probably isn't going to help.
Then your bank is garbage and you should switch to a better one. My main bank (USAA) lets me use a one time code sent to my email as a second factor (or SMS, or a code from their app). If they started requiring me to use the app I would drop them immediately. Why is "but my banking app" treated like a valid objection every time user freedom comes up?
Because it's most banks that are like that. If you don't have this problem, then you're lucky your bank is actually technologically incompetent by industry standards.
The fact that they are easily spoofed is of no consequence for this use-case: entering an invalid 2FA code will simply fail to log you in into your banking. You should obviously not follow a link from an email that is not obviously coming from your request (and you should validate the top-level domain is what it needs to be even in that case), but you should be entering the bank web site directly.
The bigger problem is SIM swapping, which is more of a social engineering attack.
Can't you use youraddress.servicename@gmail.com? I thought gmail strips whatever comes after the dot. (I don't have a google account, so I could be wrong or maybe it was a different character, but I remember reading about it a couple times on here.)
“This seems like a path toward having no people with Down syndrome, having no people with certain disabilities, even though there are people that have those disabilities that live fulfilling lives,” he said. “You’re talking about culling a tree of human evolution, right?”
I've heard this argument before and I find it insulting, as though it's somehow a moral wrongdoing to prefer children without birth defects. If I could spare my future children from MS, schizophrenia, Downs, Huntington's, Alzheimer's, etc., I'd do it in a heartbeat. Framed differently, who would deliberately inflict a healthy newborn with any of those congenital disorders? That they might live a fulfilling life in spite of their disorder wouldn't make it any less cruel.
You should keep in mind that Down syndrome is "not really" a congenital disease. Yes, it's a DNA problem, but it's a problem that happens during conception in the logic of recombining DNA, not in the DNA itself. Down is "Trisomie 21". Which makes it very weird: it a congenital disease, but not hereditary (perfectly healthy parents can have a Down syndrome kid, especially if the mother is older, Down syndrome parents have normal offspring)
So there are congenital diseases ... and there is Down syndrome. They follow an entirely different logic.
Btw: down syndrome parents have HUGE issues, but in fact these issues arise because the kids are healthy. Expectation is such kids will exceed their parents' intelligence at age 6-8 and be 2 standard deviations above their parents intelligence by age 10-12. You can imagine how that goes.
> If I could spare my future children from MS, schizophrenia, Downs, Huntington's, Alzheimer's, etc., I'd do it in a heartbeat.
I'm sure any reasonable person would agree; the more poignant question is whether you are sparing your future children or destroying some future children in favor of others. The former is something I hope any reasonable person would agree with; the latter is tantamount to eugenics.
The sun on Pluto is only slightly dimmer than the sun on a very strongly overcast midday on Earth (about half as bright), but still much brighter (almost 200x) than a full moon.
Someone who's jailed for driving on a suspended license because it's the only way they can get to their job probably isn't going to discontinue that behavior upon their release. I don't want my tax dollars being spent on a punishment that's just going to exacerbate the problem, especially when the crime isn't particularly odious in the first place (whatever they did to get their license suspended probably was, but once you have a suspended license it's almost impossible to just stop driving).
> when the crime isn't particularly odious in the first place
“A significant association was found between all reasons for DWVL and the risk of causing a road crash. This association was particularly high for drivers with a suspended license and drivers who had never obtained a license. In these subgroups of drivers, the proportion of the relationship explained by high-risk driving behaviors is high” [1].
If the license was suspended for financial reasons, sure. If it was suspended for driving infractions, incapacitating them by putting them in jail while deterring others from driving seems socially efficient.
>“A significant association was found between all reasons for DWVL and the risk of causing a road crash. This association was particularly high for drivers with a suspended license and drivers who had never obtained a license. In these subgroups of drivers, the proportion of the relationship explained by high-risk driving behaviors is high” [1].
"Among church attendees, those attending church services in a prison were more likely to be convicted of a crime in the future than the average"
I too can mislead with sampling bias.
Nobody with a double digit number of brain cells is going to be impressed that a group that includes a lot of people who lost their licenses is going to be more crashy than the average. The average has a lot more people in it to water down the statistical effect of those people. But that doesn't mean that a lot of people in your "bad" group are actually bad on an individual level rather than a statistical one.
Pretty much every license suspension is for financial reasons at the end of the day because people who can afford lawyers and fines and whatnot are much more able to avoid the suspensions.
This is wishful thinking, the people I know who drive on suspended licenses also don't have jobs and refuse to work. The vast majority of people with suspended licenses are not otherwise productive members of society. The kind of antisocial behavior that gets your license suspended doesn't magically stop when you stop driving. These are, by in large, just bad people.
Many states also have special use permits for the case of needing to drive to work.
Also, everyone I personally know who drives with suspended licenses has the ability to get 99% of places they need to go by bus. Like we all did before we were old enough to drive. They just don't want to have to wait for a bus or walk a block or two, so they don't.
PS- I wish I didn't know these waste of space people, I don't get to choose my family. I would choose different people.
Lose your license? You get a ride, ride a bike, take the bus, get compassionate permission to only drive to work, etc. there are many ways to move yourself around. Then don’t mess up again once the suspension is over.
What about a child molester that works in a school? It makes sense to prevent them from being in contact with children. I think preventing people from driving saves the public from similar potentially dangerous harm.
"within your natural lifespan" isn't really a qualification of "never, ever". The two are very different time frames. I think it's good that you're willing to adjust your opinions given new information, but it would be nice if you admitted that you changed your mind based on what MatrixMan said instead of acting like "within your natural lifespan" was your original intent.
Or alternatively, they was using hyperbole as a rhetorical device.
If you read the comment sympathetically, it is definitely possible to infer that was their original intent. In fact, i think its the most reasonable interpretation.
Every prediction about the future--this one, every other one ever made, and every other one that will ever be made--is implictly made under the assumption that if the prediction lies beyond the predictor's lifespan, then the predictor will not be in a position to care one whit about the veracity of the prediction when that time comes. My clarification isn't at all motivated based on what the parent commenter said (I find the construction of a skyhook approximately as likely as the construction of a space elevator, which is to say, it will "never, ever" happen), but rather as an explicit clarification of the aforementioned implicit assumption.
What would you say to someone who claims that "never" obviously means "not before the end of this quarter, cause who could possibly care about anything beyond that"?
At $200/gallon, the cost of the paint would also be a major consideration.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n5BOFsiDpYQ