> The mob responds with a 1-sentence emotional meme. Classic moral panic 101.
it was one person.
im writing this comment 1 hour after yours, and still only a single person has responded and you’ve called one person, a mob. you’ve declared one person commenting to be a “moral panic.”
I shall echo the comment of pibaker with one caveat.
>The exact same sentiment is widely observed across this entire website.
You do see this sentiment across this website, but this doesn't mean that it is a view held by the majority of people here, the people motivated to act can create the illusion that their opinions are more widely held than they are.
A few days ago I posted a comment which, in it's entirety reads
>Perhaps things would work out better if people didn't say mean things regardless of who it's about.
>You can still criticise without being mean.
The comment sits at -4 today, and has one antagonistic response. I don't really think most people disagree with this sentiment.
The antagonistic response came from the same one person as the comment in this thread.
do we think a scraper should be allowed to take whatever means necessary to scrape a site if that site explicitly denies that scraper access?
if someone is abusing my site, and i block them in an attempt to stop that abuse, do we think that they are correct to tell me it doesn’t matter what i think and to use any methods they want to keep abusing it?
> “Protesting isn’t a listed or ‘valid’ reason for having Global Entry revoked, but being arrested at a protest is… And being investigated is.”
its no secret they're declaring everything a protest. they are actively and seemingly randomly roaming, demanding ids, and then declaring everything from that moment forward a protest. this isnt imaginary, its happening regularly.
it’s no secret how many people they have arrested and released an hour or two later once they’re "investigated."
it’s also no secret that they’re simply arresting people, who arent at a protest, but who happen to be in the same street they’ve roamed to.
if they roam into my neighborhood, and if i were to be outside walking my dog, they demand my id which i probably wouldnt have because im just walking my dog. so they arrest me. hours later let me go because they’ve "investigated" and oops, just a neighbor out walking his dog..
if they've declared it a protest, this would mean i would have just been arrested and investigated at what they call a protest.
so now in this situation i would barred from global entry because they’ve declared everyone in their eyeline worthy of arrest and then wrongly arrested and investigated me?
what a cluster fuck. we need to get due process back, this is insanity.
not to mention that protesting, just like legally carrying a firearm is absolutely protected by the constitution and not at all a criminal offense. getting arrested at a protest because they dont like protesters is absolutely not a reliable indicator of any kind of illegality.
for context for those who don’t know about the dead fetal pig:
a couple years ago ebay had to pay out millions to a couple it was trying to intimidate into silence, ebay didn't like the negative publicity the couples writings were generating.
ebay harassed and stalked them with tons of horrifying shit, including like mailing cockroaches, live spiders, a dead pig, a funeral wreath and a book on how to survive the death of a spouse.
it’s incredible how few people in this sphere have heard about this. the witness tampering, physical stalking, insane online harassment and on and on etc..
again, ebay was forced to pay them millions. i don’t remember all of the specifics but it was the max the law would allow and it was in the millions.
oh, they were found guilty in criminal court and forced to pay a fine of millions [0]. i was mistaken.
their criminal fine was the max allowed at $3 million. i can’t even imagine how much they’ll have to pay out in civil after being found guilty in criminal.
unfortunately too much time has passed and i can't edit my original comment now. :(
I never heard about it but the way you describe it sounds insane/sketchy, on the level of Tesla/racial slurs story with crazy millions initial verdict that ended up much lesser.
I mean, I can easily imagine mentally unstable person, that happened to be an employee, doing that shit, but I don’t see company with company processes acting like that. Like how do you expense purchasing and mailing dead pig? The life is full of surprises though, so I’m not ruling out corporate involvement completely. Can you provide sources and verdict?
sure. directly from the DOJ [0] and another from CBS. [1]
i get it, it sounds insane, but its very real. here ya go.
Department of Justice: [0]
> Jim Baugh, eBay’s former Senior Director of Safety and Security, was sentenced to 57 months in prison in September 2022;
> David Harville, former Director of Global Resiliency, was sentenced to 24 months in prison in September 2022;
> Stephanie Popp, former Senior Manager of Global Intelligence, was sentenced to 12 months in prison in October 2022;
> Philip Cooke, a former Senior Manager of Security Operations, was sentenced to 18 months in prison and 12 months of home confinement in July 2021;
> Stephanie Stockwell, a former Manager of Global Intelligence, was sentenced to one year in home confinement in October 2022; and
> Veronica Zea, a contract intelligence analyst, was sentenced to one year in home confinement in November 2022.
CBS [1]:
> eBay to pay $3 million after couple became the target of harassment, stalking
> Devin Wenig, eBay's CEO at the time, shared a link to a post Ina Steiner had written about his annual pay. The company's chief communications officer, Steve Wymer, responded: "We are going to crush this lady."
> About a month later, Wenig texted: "Take her down." Prosecutors said Wymer later texted eBay security director Jim Baugh. "I want to see ashes. As long as it takes. Whatever it takes," Wymer wrote.
> Investigators said Baugh set up a meeting with security staff and dispatched a team to Boston, about 20 miles from where the Steiners live.
> "Senior executives at eBay were frustrated with the newsletter's tone and content, and with the comments posted beneath the newsletter's articles," the Department of Justice wrote in its Thursday announcement.
theres plenty more links out there if ya need them.
everything i’ve read and heard about the good internet is that it was good because sooooo many of the people did stuff for exactly that, fun.
i’ve spent some time reading through some of the old email lists from earlier internet folks, they predicted exactly what weve turned this into. reading the resistance against early adoption of cookies is incredible to see how prescient some of those people were. truly incredible.
keep having fun with it, i think it’s our only way out of whatever this thing is we have now.
if it doesn’t know medical advice, then it should say “why tf would i know?” instead it confidently responds “oh, you can absolutely do x mg of y mixed with z.”
these companies are simultaneously telling us it’s the greatest thing ever and also never trust it. which is it?
give us all of the money, but also never trust our product.
our product will replace humans in your company, also, our product is dumb af.
subscribe to us because our product has all the answers, fast. also, never trust those answers.
this is much much closer to going in reverse back to when the church were the deciders rather than liberating knowledge the way the printing press did.
the church did the thinking for the peasants. the church decided what the peasants heard, etc… this is moving absolutely in that direction.
the models now do the thinking for us, the ai companies decide what we get to see, these companies decide how much we pay to access it. this is the future.
i think when most people bring up mistakes that these models make, much of their concern is that little can be done.
when one of the juniors makes a mistake, i can talk to them about it and help them understand where they went wrong, if they continue to make mistakes we can change their position to something more suited for them. we can always let them go if they have too much hubris to learn.
who do we hold to account when a model makes a mistake? we’re already beginning to see, after major fuckups, companies blackhole nullrouting accountability into “not our fault, don’t look at us, ai was wrong”
the other thing is, if you have done a good job selecting your team, you’ll have people who understand their limits, who understand when to ask for help, who understand when they don’t know something. a major problem with current models is that it will always just guess or stretch toward random rather than halt.
so yes, people will make mistakes, but at least you can count on being able to mitigate for those after.
> who do we hold to account when a model makes a mistake?
First we stop anthromorphising the program as capable of making a "mistake". We recognise it merely as machine providing incorrect output, so we see the only mistake was made by the human who chose to rely upon it.
The courts so far agree. Judges are punishing the gulled lawyers rather than their faux-intelligent tools.
Who was held to account when the IRS made a mistake and sent me a demand letter for over $100K of "unpaid taxes" I didn't owe? Who compensated me for the hours I spent on hold and the money I had to pay an accountant to deal with it?
it was one person.
im writing this comment 1 hour after yours, and still only a single person has responded and you’ve called one person, a mob. you’ve declared one person commenting to be a “moral panic.”
reply