The Constitution was literally the best a bunch of doped-up, syphilitic slaveholders could come up with to replace the divine right of kings. They even had a first try with the Articles of Confederation and fucked that up.
We really need to stop teaching kids that a system of government written by people who used leeches to cure hysteria is the greatest thing ever created.
These things are ableist. We are reaching the point where AI can solve these much more reliably than a human. As a result the difficulty has to rise and will exclude more and more people which might have problems with “basic” tasks from a neurotypical perspective. Not to speak sometimes there might be multiple solutions depending on language and cultural interpretations.
Do audio captchas require English? I’ve never actually done one but I sorta assumed they were language agnostic, or at least would adapt their language to the system language.
Try them. Last one I tried was absolutely utterly impossible. Two times ago, it was easier or just as easy as the visual CAPTCHA. Unfortunately can’t recall either provider/site.
I’ve had to do a lot of Jira captchas over time. They were so horribly ambiguous that I had a failure rate of about one in two. So I tried the audio captcha and was met with the sound of a demon being murdered and nothing else.
Eventually shouldn’t we theoretically reach a point where AIs can solve any possible practical to use captcha just as well as a human? I kinda wonder what the answer to replace them will eventually be
It’s already beatable right now, there are services in third world countries where people get paid fractions of a penny to solve captchas for machines.
Well, this isn’t a problem for smaller, less centralized services, so that might be an answer. Obviously not an answer big corporations will bring to the table, but ultimately, it might simply be among the reasons why users do still prefer smaller services.
Yeah it’s almost like the whole thing was fucking stupid from the get-go.
“Prove you’re not a machine by training this machine to pass this exact test.”
And we know what the response will be, here. More and more of the internet gated by incredibly invasive verification methods.
If you’re not willing to let the OS/web browser fist fuck your computer’s most intimate areas, down to the hardware, and work it like a puppet just to make sure you’re not a bot, then you’ll just be hard blocked from every site.
Never mind how that will incidentally allow them to report that you’re using a VPN or an ad blocker to websites, or some other unapproved software, and even take action against all that while harvesting data…no, truly the biggest concern is the bots.
WCAG AAA actually mentions that. Which includes things like OTP. It’s going to be tricky to balance security with accessibility in situations like this for those with cognitive and physical limitations
OTP is a success criteria instead of captchas but then you have issues with accessibility when you require somebody to have a device like a phone for the code or require them to app/context switch. So somebody using a device using their eyes or tongue as an input trigger would have a hard, if not impossible, time logging in with that arrangement.
Oh yeah, it’s ableist as fuck. The worst offender I’ve run into was a CAPTCHA I had to solve to make a neuropsychologist appointment, of all things. Sure, they only required the use of basic skills to solve, but those were the very skills I was seeking treatment for.
I feel your pain. I have rare disorders which affect my executive functioning, so simple tasks are insurmountable at times for me while my intellectual ability is unaffected and likely above average. Which leads to two things: I rarely get help making appointments and what to do and just “do it yourself” without guidance and get kicked out. And the other one is that I could not be possibly correct interpreting the test results, because how could I have the ability without being an official researcher to research things. I am deeply frustrated, the more tests I run and see my thesis is correct, the more push back by doctors it is more likely to have randomly a dozen conditions instead of a single one uniting them. Welcome to Ehlers Danlos.
I can hardly claim to know enough about captchas to weigh up the cost / benefit, but I was delighted to come across a captcha that didn’t try to force me to train an AI
I ran into this recently. Trying to get access to a credit union’s system as a vendor, they had a captcha that was the old style image of distorted text, with a text box labeled “are you a robot?”. Having the tendency to take things literally, I initially typed “no” into the box. That was not the right answer.
I think someone else in this thread said it best. The more power you have the more temptation there is to fulfill your whims. Why do you think billionaires live the way that they do?
At least, that’s how I see human nature. I made this post because I think there’s room for reasonable debate.
It’s easy to be cynical about human nature when the extreme negatives are so amplified and given so much publicity. You have to remember the vast majority of people do still possess empathy.
Reasonable debate about what? That most people would be evil if they had the power because the people who have power are often evil? That inference does not follow. That’s not a logical claim, it’s a self report at worst and a fallacy at best.
Not quite what I’m saying. It goes the other way around: people are morally questionable by nature and this comes out when people have the chance to act without facing consequences.
So the debate essentially boils down to whether you think people are essentially good/bad at heart. That’s something people can reasonably disagree on.
Your evidence for the claim that people are evil by nature is: billionaires are often evil and you would make immoral choices if you could stop time. That’s just a self report and a logical fallacy smashed together
Why do you think billionaires become billionaires? They were already messed up before the money and had no morals to stop them from doing immoral things to get it.
If I knew I'd never be caught, I'd hope I would do things that billionaire brown-nosers think is immoral. But it's things I believe are moral. Like reclaiming stolen wealth from billionaires.
Yeah but think about it: you could check someone's ass fully instead of stealing glances, put random dirt smudges on people's faces.. it's hard to resist such a power.
It always works out fine for them. I don't know why anybody says imperialism or colonialism are bad or destructive, seems to me that Britain and France and Spain and Portugal and the Dutch are all doing fine. Really weird how maps of their empires seem to overlap a lot with parts of the world that currently or recently experienced a lot of, idk let's call it "troubles?" They must be dumb or smth
They weren’t countries. They became countries when the colonizers (and I’m using that term as accurately as possible) lumped together into managed regions and then told them they were countries with their own governments and flags. It was all “We’re going to conquer these people and these people and these people, then put Governor Fitzroy, nephew to the Prince, in charge of all of it with a big army to back him up.” Then they wrote laws and made flags and all the happy crappy stuff they do. Then they lost WWII (because pretty much everyone except for the US lost WWII), and said “you’re on your own.”
They turned former colonies into artificial countries with governments that all but guaranteed factionalism.
There was always war, and there always will be war. But the specific type of war we’re seeing in former colonies is because of the post-colonial situation.
Exactly and when they drew the borders of those artificial nations, they had a strange talent for choosing two or more peoples who would otherwise never have formed a nation together voluntarily, so they still don´t get along today and probably never will.
Most of the other countries with problems don’t have their citizens walking around loudly declaring as a matter of average discourse that they are the “greatest country in the world”.
Ever seen Europeans on the Internet act like the way their country or continent does things is the only correct way, and North America is too stupid to realize it?
Sounds like you met Americans with money and time to travel internationally. That’s… not very many of us. I’d posit they’re some of the worst… most financially successful… but the worst.
Oh then you have met every American my bad. I should have known your personal experience equals everyone else’s and shows what every American is like rather than a shitty group that can be found in any country.
so you claim that portuguese run around, claiming theirs is the best country?
How about the austrians? Irish? Scotts? Danish? Polish? Czech? Croats?
Note: I wouldn’t ask about Netherlands or nordic countries (because imho IF they’d claim that, then they just might kinda have a good point) or the swiss (they can claim similar, I just wouldn’t follow their reasoning in the slightest).
Well, and there’s the English too…
But still: what is a good example in your opinion?
It is remotely true. Waving German flags at soccer games was essentially non-existent. Germans are more likely to identify as European rather than German, compared to other EU nations. If you ask Europeans “is your culture superior” people like Greeks say yes but people like Germans say no.
A good example would be the UK or France .They believe they are top dogs but, by US standards, they are impoverished.
Soccer games are like the only* socially accepted events where you can proudly bring out a german flag without looking like a nationalist. At world championship the whole city is a sea of black-red-gold.
I’m quite surprised.
Tho I’m not a soccer fan and therefore don’t know how that looks abroad.
*(hyperbolic; guess if we think more than a few seconds we could find more, nut that’s not that important of a point here)
The actual reason that we don’t is pretty much because of the invention of sewing machines. Once sewing machines were widespread, making coats became sooo much cheaper than they had been. Coats need a lot of tightly made seams which took time and so made coats very expensive. With sewing machines, making these seams was vastly quicker and more reliable.
Coats win over cloaks in so many ways because you can do things with your arms without exposing them or your torso to the rain and cold: impossible with a cloak.
Capes were the short versions - and intended to cover the shoulder and back without seams that might let the rain in, but with the new machine made seams, they were not needed either.
The really big change was when it became affordable to outfit armies with coats instead of cloaks or capes. At that point all the caché and prestige that was associated with military rank disappeared from cloaks and capes and they were suddenly neither useful not fashionable.
Nowadays, of course, they are no longer what your unfashionable dad would have worn: they are quite old enough to have regained a certain style.
The other big reason is that the world is cleaner. Capes and cloaks also protect the whole body from mud/dust and can be easily removed. Riding a horse or walking on dirt roads is a lot dirtier than riding in cars or walking on a sidewalk
The original type of coat that would have been worn when riding was the Great Coat - which did cover the whole body, down to the ankles (and included the front of the body much better than a cloak). Those would have been worn by military officers, particularly.
Those were fine for riding, but then if you were off your horse and end up in the newly developed trench warfare - starting from around the US civil war onwards - you ended up wading through mud which got caked to the coat. So then they started cutting the coats shorter and they became Trench Coats.
The “British Warm” was the intermediary as I understand it: a shorter greatcoat favoured by Britsh officers in WW1. The Trenchcoat itself was modeled to fit over, accompany or replace this.
Horse shit. In cities, you waded through horse shit.
As someone who has done extensive reenactment in period dress, sometimes in towns dedicated to realism that banned cars and relied on horses for travel, you wouldn’t believe how terrible even a dozen carriages and a few dozen private horses can be to your skirts/trousers and shoes. Especially when it rains.
People sometimes make light of women in the past who changed their outer clothes two or three times a day, but if you were in town, your attire would be absolutely foul after a few hours in the same outer skirt. A long cloak helped immensely to keep your skirts or trousers from soaking up horse sewage.
Once cars took over, that stopped being a problem, cloaks weren’t as desirable as they obscured fashion, and coats became shorter and more for protection from the weather than from horse shit.
There was a bit of military influence, but that was more about fashion than functional influence.
Or just living in New York where it’s cold in the winter. It’s a blanket you wear over your coat. You’re not supposed to wear it as your only piece of outer clothing.
Technically we are talking about Spartans not hoplites. The Spartans had bows, javelins, and slings too. But ranged weapons aren’t great against steel armour. And their bronze armour would have caved like butter if hit by basically any of the steel weapons and ammunition the samurai used.
Remember, kids - when you boycott a business for being “woke”, you’re a patriot with strong moral values. When you cancel a business for “bigotry”, you’re ruining the economy, and part of the reason this country is going to hell.
That’sa lie. I’ve voted every election since eligible age but fuck the two majors. I’m happy to write in, but I’m not keen on Cornell anymore either so I’m about to nope, unless someone better than the status quo comes along.
Give up? More like the Republicans are grasping for straws considering how bad they have done in local and midterm elections. They could be putting propaganda to dissuade Democratic voters, which I don’t see happening anytime soon. Biden (and many Democrats) has surprisingly been more progressive for me as a leftist and many people appreciate that. My theory is that the pandemic and the government response to alleviate the costs after the lockdowns made Americans appreciate more government assistance.
The people we need most to turn out and vote this election season (18-24) are the most susceptible to this kind of campaign. And you very much can get them to vote with the right message.
I’ve voted democrat for every election I can remember. And while I like to see my “team” win as much as the next guy, at some point you realize that other countries have better electoral systems in place.
Meanwhile, we’ve all acquiesced to this 2-party winner takes all bullshit.
Australia, Ireland, New Zealand, Malta, Northern Ireland and Scotland all have ranked choice vote. Slovenia had it previously but regressed to FPTP in 2021.
Sweden, Germany, Colombia, Australia, etc. Ranked/Alternative/Proportional voting. We should have multiple choices without fear of voting for less popular options being useless. With our current system we basically can’t vote for third parties.
It takes a while for the effects of party decentralization to take hold. The underlying party structure is at the core of two-party systems. RCV is just one incentive (a big one) to restructure parties to be more democratic and diverse, instead of coalescing into monolithic amorphous blobs. Along with Gerrymandering laws, campaign financial regulation and voter civic education. It all has to work in concert to dismantle the social control version of democracy.
The most confusing thing to me is how Democrats can have majorities in the House and POTUS and their agenda gets inched along but the second Republicans have that their agenda gets rammed through asap.
Is that a misconception? It certainly seems that Republicans make much more aggressive and active use of their power.
Republicans have forced out anyone who doesn’t walk in lockstep with the party. They have gone as far as to run alternative Republicans in some races, causing the conservative vote to be split and forcing the incumbent Republican to lose to the Democrat. Meanwhile, Democrats will let a far-right nutter like Joe Manchin run as a Democrat because he is slightly to the left of some other even crazier bastard. Even when the Dems win a majority the Republicans do everything they can to keep elected people from being sat for as long as possible. During Obama’s term, Franken was elected, but the Republicans drug out every legal battle they could to contest his win and keep him from being seated. In the end, the Dems had an actual majority for only 4 months, and even then had to get 3 Republican votes to break the Republican filibusters.
If you’re referring to relatively recent events (like the first 2 years of Biden’s term) you need to look no further than Kyrsten Sienema and Joe Manchin. “Democrats” that opposed the agenda (and general Good Things™) for personal greed and lobbying interests. Biden had a majority in the house, and a hostile supreme court, which we’re going to be dealing with for a good long time that’s to McConnell’s fuckery. The defection of Sienema and Manchin made progress very difficult.
It’s also harder to get the wider variety of interests in the big tent of left to go in the same direction. Kinda like herding cats.
i’ve been in relationships where someone passive-aggressively refuses to communicate (or simply through incompetence doesn’t know how, and/or came to believe that I was supposed to already intuitively know their position and condition)
One such relationship recently ended on thankfully good terms.
One such relationship was years ago and never quite got off the ground because I was NOT going to play along with the stupid games.
Several others got up through the initial courtship phases but then disintegrated as I realized that my partner at the time was not going to engage me on an honest basis.
These people are real. They’re really out there. And they’re either destined to be vaguely miserable forever, or someone is going to have to teach them and make them intensely miserable in the immediacy until they learn - and not many people have the patience or psychological energy to guide someone (who is kicking and screaming objections about how they shouldn’t have to change or grow or adapt because they’re special and perfect just as they are) through establishing a basic understanding of communication.
When people are adults, it’s their job to learn the things and seek the knowledge and self improve. That thinking that you can save someone, that one will always get you in hot water. You just focus on improving you. And leaving the drift wood behind.
lemmy.zip
Hot