• 0 Posts
  • 19 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: May 23rd, 2024

help-circle
  • No. Because the very nature of passwords and password managers make you immeasurably safer than not using one at all. Password managers in almost all markets detect password compromises and alert you to change them. Doing so is trivial and as long as you catch it in time, you’re much safer and harder to target than almost any other user.

    Passwords are like physical locks. Its not about being unpickable or indestructible. Its mostly about raising the barrier of entry high enough that you are an unappealing target. Why would I spend days/weeks/months trying to crack the account of someone using a random string of 14 characters unique to every service and that can change their password within hours or days–when I could instead gain remote access to hundreds of other users that keep a ‘passwords.doc’ file in ~/documents with open permissions? They likely use passwords like ‘Snoopdog2004$’ so they’re easy to brute force, they won’t notice incursions, and can’t easily change passwords that are shared between multiple services.




  • There’s certain conditions that you cannot reform. Murdering your own daughter over a verbal disagreement? We don’t have the resources to focus on rehabilitating him if its even possible. I’d rather these theoretical prison therapists spend more time working with inmates that went to prison for aggravated assault in a bar fight etc.

    Sure, in a perfect society where his rehabilitation program doesn’t take time, money, and mental anguish from the therapist…it’d be nice to just separate him from society and revisit his ability to rejoin as a productive member decades later. But as of right now I don’t want to pay 45¢ to cover the cost of his rehabilitation when I could instead pay 20¢ to rehab a less complicated individual and the extra 25¢ could go to social safety nets or education.



  • I also despise everything this would mean in terms of state surveillance, but if you could isolate this capability, it 100% would help recover lost dogs. Speaking from experience. We lost our dog for 6 days and didn’t have any idea where he was until 3 days passed. The most effective way to recover lost dogs is by knowing their current location and setting out live traps with food for them to find at night. Scared dogs don’t recognize their owners by sound so driving around calling for them wouldn’t help.

    So if it this technology could work solely as a lost pet sighting tool and not a dystopian state surveillance tool, it would be immensely helpful.




  • No and no. The barrier to entry would have been too high. I don’t have hundreds of hours to track down the answers I was looking for. It’s not that I’m incapable of finding the information I was looking for in forums. It’s that its such basic knowledge to most tech forum users that I probably would have been seen as a leech. Have you been to tech forums lately? Its a bunch up people telling you to be a better programmer and calling you a fucking idiot. That’s why stack exchange is failing.

    Access to information should be free. That’s partially why we’re all here. Everything that we post could be scraped by an LLM and used for free. When it becomes an issue is when AI crawlers quadruple server load.







  • Anyone that wants to buy them on the open market. Since there would be a massive drop in demand for US bond markets, the bonds being sold would drop in price. It’s tough to say how far it would fall because you don’t know how many investors would be willing to buy what percentage of that $8 trillion. Any smart investor would know that amount of a selloff would take a considerable amount of time to recover from and also put the government in a really tight position. So why buy high? There’s always going to be people with more dollars than sense, so some will buy right away but large portfolios would wait and buy after an arbitrary drop. Say 30%. That would harm the dollar and would hurt the United States’ ability to sell new bonds to borrow money.

    As for the one time sale part, europe would then look to other markets to reinvest the money in the short term. They wouldn’t want to hold that amount of cash unless they wanted to fund a massive infrastructure project(interstate system, rail network, military, housing, green energy, etc.) So I would guess that they’d look to the east and buy bonds in Southeast Asia/China. Its the only other market big enough. Then if you have trillions in foreign currency, you’ll want to invest in development to keep that investment safe. New trade deals would probably be discussed and foreign investment in developing technologies would help spur innovation. Suddenly the US would look much less attractive as a trade partner and investment test bed. The US could try to pull back similar investments but we invested heavily into non liquid assets. Manufacturing being a major one during the post war boom after WWII. It’d be very difficult to pull those assets quickly. Then to wrap this all up, Europe acquired those bonds by buying them. If they wanted to slowly sell off other investments and go back to buying US bonds, they could do so. Probably on the cheap. They make their money back and more as the US market would presumably recover…if we are able to depose regressive politics after an economic collapse.