Now do ICE!

Why should my tax dollars be used to bail out someone who bought a multimillion dollar home in a high risk area? Why should home owners get all the profits from owning but get to skirt the risks?

I don’t see the problem, is that not the point of phishing tests? Users need to ensure the sender is legitimate before taking action such as clicking links.

The article title is incredibly misleading. Even the first sentence of the article makes clear what she was actually saying:

Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-MI) has urged her Democratic colleagues to stop attacking the “oligarchy” on Thursday, arguing that the word did not resonate with most Americans and should be replaced with “kings.”

She’s advocating for using a more relatable term, not for a change in party values. The “woke” comment irks me, but again is focused on terminology and not ideology.

When you need the dumb fucks’ votes, you gotta speak their language. Or at least water it down to be palatable to someone who was “educated” in our broken-ass system.

Why do we “need” to change laws to artificially inflate the price of cars? Don’t we give enough money and government control to Ford and GM?

Doesn’t make you any less responsible when the fruits of your labor are used to murder civilians.

Like what? What are American companies required to do to protect your privacy that TikTok doesn’t do because they are a Chinese company?

Besides the Tesla, none of these are easily achievable by a non-executive working at Apple at age 33.

Judging by the downvote count, I was off by 2x. My apologies to the community!

(For the record, I have nothing against GrapheneOS, but also no use for it)

That particular Snickers bar was briefly worth $1,000.

Maybe it’s an eMMC chip on an embedded device?

I would never claim that China is performing less surveillance of its citizens. They definitely are a world leader in this, in a very bad way.

However, mindless commenters spamming social credit demerits on any post that mentions China only serve to feed the exaggerations and inaccuracies.

I want them to have to explain their idiotic opinion so they can fail to defend it

But the truth is emails may be dangerous, and the trainings exist to show people how to tell the difference. What reasonable alternative is there? Your argument is effectively “People will never learn how to use a fire extinguisher so why bother doing fire safety training. Some fires are so bad that a fire extinguisher will do nothing.” We don’t control the danger, but we can manage and minimize the risk through training.

That’s a harder question to answer and depends more on your own moral compass. Do you believe that having better defensive capabilities empowers the users of your creation to feel safe enough to do evil things? I certainly don’t think you could absolve the makers of anti-missile systems who supply militaries that are committing genocide.

There has been a widespread misconception that China operates a nationwide and unitary social credit "score" based on individuals' behavior, leading to punishments if the score is too low. Media reports in the West have sometimes exaggerated or inaccurately described this concept.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Credit_System

What do you mean?

The model exists already — abstaining from using it doesn’t make the energy consumption go away. I don’t think it’s reasonable to let historic energy costs drive what you do, else you would never touch a computer.

Conservative thinktanks (National Center for Public Policy Research) be conservative thinktanks. Despite all the other major corps rolling back DEI programs, it’s nice to see the likes of Apple and Costco pushing back against the right wing nutjobs. Not sure if they’re doing so for profits or morals, but I’ll take either at this point.

Idk man, I feel like you’re striving for perfection in an imperfect world. I agree it would be nice for all email to be plain-text and with no clickables, but that’s not the world we live in, and getting companies to remove them from mandatory emails is an uphill battle.

While it’s true that there’s no way to completely eliminate spoofed “From” addresses, I think it’s fair to say it’s rare, and that checking the “From” address will conquer a significant chunk of phishing attempts. The training isn’t meant to 100% eliminate the effects of phishing attacks, it’s meant to reduce the number.