Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Frumple]

Nearly three dozen GOP house critters breaking ranks when they're going to be working with a sub-10 majority and the house in general breaking against trump... all I can think is that the DC narcotics market is going to be doing some real brisk business this christmas season.

Kinda' makes me wonder what the odds are a congresscritter ODs in the next few years, someone out there's got to be betting on that.

[martinuzz]

US diplomats in Damascus met with Ahmed al-Sharaa, the unofficial leader of the new Syrian regime.
Barbara Leaf, head of the diplomatic delegation said they had a good, extensive conversation about the political transition in Syria.
After the meeting, the US announced that it has withdrawn the 10 million dollar bounty that was offered for information that would lead to his arrest.

[Duuvian]

Michigan House kills hundreds of bills. See what died on final day of Dem control
https://www.bridgemi.com/michigan-government/michigan-house-kills-hundreds-bills-see-what-died-final-day-dem-control

Michigan lame-duck Legislature: House ends year with tears, fingerpointing
https://www.bridgemi.com/michigan-government/michigan-lame-duck-legislature-house-ends-year-tears-fingerpointing


In what is becoming a party tradition, a Democrat which these articles say often votes with Republicans has stifled a large number of reforms by walking out and reducing the number present below a quorum. This was only the 4th time in state history (the state was founded in 1837 but I don't know if it's counting from then or before that from time as a territory or even afterwards for some reason I don't remember) that the Democrats controlled both houses of the legislature. This forgets the massive political shift under President Johnson of course; the last time the Democrats held both was prior to that, in the 1930s IIRC from somewhere in the very long second link, as it was updated over days.

[martinuzz]

Trump threatens to take back the Panama canal from Panama if they do not lower the costs for US ships passing through.

[Eschar]

BTW, I am far more worried by the heroization of Luigi Mangione by American youth than by oligarchs doing oligarch stuff. Left terrorism is not fun AND it can help fascists to solidify power.

Luigi's been pretty celebrated by the entire political spectrum, tbh, and most age groups as well. It's been pretty remarkable how united the nation's been in saying fuck the guy he killed.

He's not likely to be inspiring violence of any specific political or generational alignment, just maybe a bit of CEO murdering, which, y'know. Signs point to there not being many tears spilled by the US public over that, ha.

E: Maybe if it ends up targeting something other than the particularly murderous industries, I'unno. Folks just have a remarkably dim view of the leadership of an industry that's got the blood (of hundreds) of thousands on their hands, y'know? What Luigi did more than just about anything was make that very, very clear to basically everyone, as opposed to just very, very clear to anyone paying even a little attention.

Yeah, if Luigi is the killer, the ideologies he's expressed online sure aren't very "leftist."

It's crucial to remember "the killer" and "Luigi Mangione" are very much two completely different people legally. Murder of one person isn't terrorism without intent to promote an ideology, and since Luigi isn't confirmed to be the killer legally, the manifesto allegedly found on him can't support the idea the killing was done in service of such.

(This makes UnitedHealthcare's equating of Luigi and the killer on their website criminally libelous, by the way.)

I will also state the circumstances surrounding the arrest of Luigi Mangione are questionable, even if it's likely he's the killer. Why keep a manifesto AND the murder weapon around for a week when "your" modus operandi has been observed to be dump everything related to the crime within an hour of it happening? Luigi has written lots of criticism of the healthcare industry online, sure.... but it doesn't at all match the tone of the "manifesto". Who starts such a document with "sorry Feds, gotta apologize because I just respect the FBI so much  "?

[Starver]

I'm not good with faces, but the "smiling pre-killer" on security camera just seems too 'off' (and out-of-character for an otherwise thorough hitman-wannabe) from what I've seen of the post-arrest pictures. Obviously he's not at all grinning in the later, different angle, etc, but... Aw, shucks, I remember when I suddenly realised my own Dad had stopped sporting a moustache, but not when he actually had, so don't treat me as an expert Super-Recogniser with professional doubts.

And never ascribe to complex conspiracy what is probably just simple cock-up. Not without far more conspoicuous pointers.

[Folly]

It does seem a wee bit suspicious that the killer, after thoroughly scouting his target over the course of weeks and carefully planning his escape route, would then be hanging out in a public restaurant with the murder weapon in his backpack, and some random employee just happens to recognize him.

Could the real killer have planned this from the beginning? Murder a Healthcare CEO and then pin it on some entitled rich kid? All he had to do was slap on a pair of fake eyebrows and make sure they are seen in front of cameras, then slip the weapon into his target's bag before whispering to a waiter, "Hey, doesn't that guy kinda look like the CEO killer?".

[Duuvian]

That seems far fetched to be honest

Reuters has been running a series of articles on Onlyfans.

https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/onlyfans-sex-children-accounts/

This is only a guess, but there may be an organized group placing the copy and paste accounts. In addition, if they are checked and found to not be illegal, "suspect" but legal spam postings were a tactic that was used in what it seemed were efforts to cripple adult dating websites in the past (though those were mostly spam floods and more innocuous in content likely to make the site unusable rather than especially publically abhorred). This is because despite best intentions it's not really possible to determine age accurately by eye when shown a photograph of a young looking woman. There is a legal review article in some periodical somewhere that ran a test with experts in this field that showed it wasn't possible to accurately place the age of young women by eye by a photograph; I don't recall if they tested with video as well but I guess that would have made sense. I think it can be found on Lexis with some searching.

This website checks government ID for performers so it would be more difficult to spam I would think. I guess someone could use another person's but then it seems like there is still a direct line back to that person, so it would have to be stolen or fake to be difficult to follow? That seems like a broader ID issue if that's what it is.  It's also possible that what is detailed in this article of the series about copy pastes could be honeypots that were inadvertently interrupted. Reuters did not receive more information after they were closed.

The article also is missing context at one point. Reuters had received a response from Onlyfans saying the NCMEC had full access behind the paywall curtain. However, Reuters said that NCMEC was limited to tips and ongoing investigations, and did not do basically an active search.

I think the reason this is missing context is because the United States has conflicting federal circuit decisions on the matter of Agency status, or it did last I read about agency law. To sum it up quickly, the NCMEC is heavily funded by the US government. This raises the question of whether NCMEC, a 501(c) organization, is an agent of the US government. This carries a larger burden as far as things such as the 4th amendment are concerned and generally would make certain things more difficult.

The reason why this is the missing context is it's likely not Onlyfan's fault that NCMEC cannot perform searches. NCMEC's statement suggests they are trying to stay close to the boundaries set for not being found to be a US government agency under Agency law, in that it can't (in probably too simple terms) perform a service (such as a search) at the request of the government or else it may be an agent which is also supported by the government funding. In addition if it were found to be in an agency status, it would be subject to the 4th amendment which law enforcement already is and which may interfere to some level with some of NCMEC's core functions. Whether NCMEC is attempting to satisfy both of the split circuit decisions I can't try to hazard a guess from the article, but weighing 4th amendment could also add to being unable to perform (or possibly participate in private actors' process in certain ways for) searches (without a warrant) to some degree if it's duties conflict in some way.

IIRC the controlling precedent on the matter of status as agency at the time I read about it involved a case about Amtrak and it's status, as it too is federally funded.

The article also seems to run the risk of lionizing action against small of stature but adult performers as well, which seems unreasonable... plus if I were to guess the performers themselves would generally not want to share a platform upon which they benefit with such things...

[Lord Shonus]

There's some important bits in the article worth noting.

The public details of those accounts often included emojis such as teddy bears, lollipops, or baby bottles. In their non-explicit profile photos, some females wore their hair in pigtails or braids. Others had braces. Many referred to themselves in diminutive terms such as “small,” “tiny,” “petite” or “mini.”

Some described themselves as “shy” or “innocent.” One profile description read, “If you came to my page, it means you love little, inexperienced girls like me!”

Eric Silverman, a researcher for Culture Reframed, an organization focused on raising awareness about the harms of pornography to youth, said the 49 profile photos raised serious concern.

“Their appearance, wide-eyed, innocent look, the pouting, the finger in the mouth, all these are visual cues that convey childhood,” he said. “Even if every single one of them is verifiably 18 or older, you still have to confront the issue that OnlyFans is profiting from the sexual portrayal of women who appear to be underage.”

In the 49 public profiles Reuters reviewed, many of the account names included the words – or variations of the words – “little,” “baby,” “sweet” or “Lolita.” Those names, when combined with images of young females, can be used to advertise child sexual abuse material, said the specialists consulted by Reuters. The posts sometimes referred to females in schoolgirl or other child-oriented terms. One, for example, stated: ”The depraved babe @[account name redacted by Reuters] ran away from schоol.” It continued: “Subscribe and punish her!” The account was removed by Dec. 17, the day after Reuters contacted OnlyFans about its findings.

Bios or posts in the accounts Reuters identified often included references to females being 18 or having just turned 18. “I've been waiting to turn 18 for a long time so I could register on Onlyfans, and here I am,” read the profile of one female, who Cohen said appeared younger.

“There's a fullness to her face that is often associated with youth. She's got disproportionately large eyes, and children tend to have larger eyes on their face relative to adults,” said Cohen.

Even if the females actually were 18, child exploitation experts said that’s still a problem because the images themselves suggested they might be underage. “It creates a demand for younger and younger bodies,” said Cohen. “This type of behavior normalizes pedophilia.”

Or, in other words, this

The article also seems to run the risk of lionizing action against small of stature but adult performers as well, which seems unreasonable

Is not a "risk". It is exactly what the people behind the "investigation" are trying to do. The Canadian Open Source Intelligence Centre is a nebulous entity with no clear agenda, but the same is not true of the other agency listed as being behind this. A simple browse of Culture Reframed's web site shows that they're a "all pornography is evil" pressure group.

This sort of thing is part of the strategy that anti-porn crusaders have been following for a while now. Instead of pushing for a full-on ban that would meet not only with strong resistance but very strong legal precedent, they chip away at the edges. Pressure the credit card companies to refuse to work with studios that push the envelope a little too far. Wage an assault in the court of public opinion that can only be fully answered by releasing the full details of your performers' actual identities (which would guarantee nobody ever worked with you again). Push the narrative that this or that is too close to a problem and why take the risk. Then you wait a few years for the envelope to stabilize, and you start all over again with the edge you previously carved yourself now being a bridge too far.

It works because porn isn't just about attractive people bumping uglies, and relies strongly on taboo - a high percentage of scenarios in the medium thrive on "yeah this is wrong, but..." situations where the people consuming them would find the exact same scenario abhorrent in real life. It is very easy to look at the edges and say "ok, maybe the critics have a point here", and there's not going to be a lot of people who decide to make a principled stand against the pressure. There's also often a kernel of truth in the criticisms - young people often don't realize just how unrealistic the stuff is, which has the potential to significantly impact their relationships in subtle ways - the most obvious being that a lot of the acts shown onscreen are ones that only a minority of people actually like. But they're not interested in actually solving such problems, as it is all just a smokescreen to achieve the actual goal of a de facto ban.

[Frumple]

“Even if every single one of them is verifiably 18 or older, you still have to confront the issue that OnlyFans is profiting from the sexual portrayal of women who appear to be underage.”

That one in particular's just a bad joke. Most cultures I'm aware of highly value un(der)developed sexual characteristics as a marker of beauty, and just about anything leveraging beauty is going to be doing the same damn thing, just with more clothes on and/or piecemeal.

Targeting a vulnerable minority of sex workers instead of trying to address major actual source of that shite is big "pull the plank out your eye first" energy, but that's not much of a surprise considering the source

[Robot Parade Leader]

https://www.yahoo.com/news/vivek-ramaswamy-dragged-wild-rant-210515949.html

Makes you wonder if they care about the average person, MAGA? They think you're not good enough?
Do they want to fire everyone, not just government workers or workers at the companies they took over?
Will they, one way or another, get to the place you work and have half the people there fired too...?
And do they want to replace you with immigrants? Was all that anti immigrant talk not for your benefit?

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

"The former Republican presidential candidate and upcoming Department of Government Efficiency co-lead offered his two cents on the discussion surrounding the future of “American-born” labor in Silicon Valley.

Ramaswamy, who is Indian American, was immediately lambasted by the left and the right for this pitiful, presumptuous take.

“There is nothing wrong with American workers or American culture,” former Republican presidential candidate Nikke Haley replied. “All you have to do is look at the border and see how many want what we have. We should be investing and prioritizing in Americans, not foreign workers.”

“Vivek you’ve accomplished a lot but it’s ok to just say you don’t understand American culture,” one conservative replied, going on to remind him how racist much of the MAGA base is. “Neil Armstrong, greater than any Indian to ever live and product of American culture, chose the less academic Purdue over MIT because he liked the football team.”

“‘Us’, ‘our’, ‘we’. No. YOU are going back,” another MAGA supporter replied.

“Ivy leaguer trying to sell ‘math Olympiad over prom queen’ to the maga base amid intense educational polarization is wild,” said Harvard professor Matt Blackwell.

“Vivek trashing sports achievement (‘a culture that celebrates the jock over the valedictorian’) is surely going to go down well with his audience. Everyone loves a Yale guy talking about why American culture sucks,” wrote Current Affairs editor Nathan J. Robinson.

Ramaswamy’s views, which seem to be in misalignment with the majority of MAGA, may potentially put his power as DOGE co-lead in jeopardy. It remains to be seen how President-elect Donald Trump will respond to these talking points, if at all.

https://www.cnn.com/2024/12/26/politics/video/elon-musk-vivek-ramaswamy-immigration-h1b-republican-src-digvid

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

 "Vivek Ramaswamy and Elon Musk, the co-chairs of Trump's proposed Department of Government Efficiency, are facing backlash from the MAGA-base and others within the Republican party after encouraging offering more visas to highly-skilled and foreign-born immigrant workers."

Do they have no intention of helping the average person in America rise up to get a good job? They want more engineers? Could we train engineers here? We could send them to school and/or do apprenticeships, right? We could make more engineers, but.... Do they not care about that or you? Was all that talk about making it easier to get a good job, like eliminating degree requirements and deporting immigrants not meant to help you the ordinary American person? Why does it look like they are going to import people from other countries with degrees to get the best jobs? They aren't going to do that are they? Wouldn't that leave you without a degree or any credentials while they import immigrants from other countries to get those good jobs? Where would that leave you, the average person? Hang on, didn't these guys take over companies only to fire everybody they could however they could? Did two people from foreign countries not value American workers and just get put in charge of firing as many American government workers as possible so they can then go to the private sector and fire as many American workers as possible?

https://www.stuff.co.nz/world-news/360535454/after-backing-donald-trump-low-income-voters-hope-he-wont-slash-their-benefits

I mean, he's gonna?

[McTraveller]

I would be surprised if they are even interested in making the aggregate metric rise. The cynic in me thinks the oligarchs want to dismantle the government not to save money, but to reduce the government's power so they can continue to do oligarch things.

It's a shame that people in the lower percentiles of socioeconomic status seem to think that the party of "we need to eliminate social programs, socialism is bad!" is going to help them with social programs. I feel bad for the people in that PA factory town that didn't move along with the companies when they left, but I don't know how they think any of the federal policies are going to help them.

I honestly hope I'm wrong.

[wobbly]

I would be surprised if they are even interested in making the aggregate metric rise. The cynic in me thinks the oligarchs want to dismantle the government not to save money, but to reduce the government's power so they can continue to do oligarch things.

It's a shame that people in the lower percentiles of socioeconomic status seem to think that the party of "we need to eliminate social programs, socialism is bad!" is going to help them with social programs. I feel bad for the people in that PA factory town that didn't move along with the companies when they left, but I don't know how they think any of the federal policies are going to help them.

I honestly h

ope I'm wrong.

Let's play a fantasy game. You rage about x in the world and I say we should do y about it, but we can't. The people in power don't care f' about the consequences they care about whether they can get away with it. And recent trends in politics says they can. Expect worse is my base view point.

[Lord Shonus]

The cynic in me thinks the oligarchs want to dismantle the government not to save money, but to reduce the government's power so they can continue to do oligarch things.

Some of it is that, but it is impossible to overstate the strength of the ideological belief in "government waste". It is an article of faith among so many that the government is constantly hemorrhaging money because they're not given proper oversight, with the fabled "$1000 hammers and $5000 toilet seats" (or whatever the cited numbers are) serving as proof. In reality, the hammers in question were specialized tools for tank repair that were purchased in a relatively small batch (driving down economies of scale) and needed to meet extremely strict, and the "toilet seats" were part of a very extensive program to replace the in-flight chemical toilets on older bombers instead of the bit of office equipment most people imagine.

This ignores not only the reality of government funding where "cost efficiency" is rarely higher than third or fourth on the "what matters" list, that a lot of "waste" is caused by oversight (sometimes because the bean counters rightly decide that a program with millions or billions sunk into it will never work and needs the axe, sometimes because Congress puts in very well-intended rules that turned out to be a bad idea), and that sometimes a program did cost too much but is reaching the goal anyway and trying to cut it in the name of saving money will cost you more money down the road.

[Grim Portent]

Oversight is like Means Testing, sometimes it saves money, sometimes it loses more money than it saves. People generally want it to remain even in those cases for ideological reasons rather than practical ones.