Meh. She's just telling it like it is. Don't conservatives love that? Many are giddy that the President said "BULLSHIT" yesterday. Or I'd there a double standard there?
She notes that facial recognition software's a joke and offers no privacy protections. She motes black people are better that white at identifying black faces and white Republicans in Congress can't tell the difference between Elijah Cummings and John Lewis.
She's not exactly threatening civil war, and wanting to murder her political opponents like the President is. He's totally off the rails. Still. What's funny is he's not even denying the criminal behavior he has admitted to.
Meh. She's just telling it like it is. Don't conservatives love that? Many are giddy that the President said "BULLSHIT" yesterday. Or I'd there a double standard there?
She notes that facial recognition software's a joke and offers no privacy protections. She motes black people are better that white at identifying black faces and white Republicans in Congress can't tell the difference between Elijah Cummings and John Lewis.
She's not exactly threatening civil war, and wanting to murder her political opponents like the President is. He's totally off the rails. Still. What's funny is he's not even denying the criminal behavior he has admitted to.
The thing is, she's also promoting stereotyping. The black community here aren't happy about the remark. The facial recognition software uses facial geometry, not skin-color, to get it's matches. The analysts have to make sure that the identified faces match the other profiles (ie: female, male, black, white, etc...). In other words, a white woman's face could match the facial profile but if the suspect is a black man, that match needs to be discarded. From what I understand, that is not done by the algorithm.
This random guy on twitter expressed quite well one of the reasons I don't support Trump. He shut down the idea of mandatory e-verify because it would be "too tough". For who, the damn employer? The people we should be targeting? He doesn't pressure the wealthy business side at all, so no one is happy there, he doesn't actually deport people in large numbers, so his supporters aren't happy there, and he has policies that are exceedingly harsh towards the most sympathetic of migrants, alienating most people.
At that point it's little more than bullying. The carrot is still there, and no-one is trying to take it down, but the stick keeps coming out again and again. You have to turn off the incentives. Nobody who is illegal can get work, starting 1 or 2 years from now. That gives them time to prepare, by gaining citizenship or finding work elsewhere or what have you, and halts to great extent any reason for illegal migration.
Meh. She's just telling it like it is. Don't conservatives love that? Many are giddy that the President said "BULLSHIT" yesterday. Or I'd there a double standard there?
She notes that facial recognition software's a joke and offers no privacy protections. She motes black people are better that white at identifying black faces and white Republicans in Congress can't tell the difference between Elijah Cummings and John Lewis.
She's not exactly threatening civil war, and wanting to murder her political opponents like the President is. He's totally off the rails. Still. What's funny is he's not even denying the criminal behavior he has admitted to.
The thing is, she's also promoting stereotyping. The black community here aren't happy about the remark. The facial recognition software uses facial geometry, not skin-color, to get it's matches. The analysts have to make sure that the identified faces match the other profiles (ie: female, male, black, white, etc...). In other words, a white woman's face could match the facial profile but if the suspect is a black man, that match needs to be discarded. From what I understand, that is not done by the algorithm.
While we're on this subject, I read an interesting study the other day that's sorta half-relevant. There is a consistent pattern of a sort of soft bigotry from those with certain progressive views.
This is a smokescreen to get everyone to accept facial recognition tech by our governments. Our freedoms and rights for security. That is the main concern here.
This is a smokescreen to get everyone to accept facial recognition tech by our governments. Our freedoms and rights for security. That is the main concern here.
I read the article as Mrs. Talib being none too pleased with it either. At any rate, yes I'd agree facial recognition and things like deepfakes are problems. So are websites and Facebook spreading lies and misinformation.
1/4 Americans think the sun revolves around the Earth. Antivaxers, flat earthers, and others are seemingly all in on ignorance these days.
This is a smokescreen to get everyone to accept facial recognition tech by our governments. Our freedoms and rights for security. That is the main concern here.
I read the article as Mrs. Talib being none too pleased with it either. At any rate, yes I'd agree facial recognition and things like deepfakes are problems. So are websites and Facebook spreading lies and misinformation.
1/4 Americans think the sun revolves around the Earth. Antivaxers, flat earthers, and others are seemingly all in on ignorance these days.
I believe this is all fueled by religious fervor. Everyone has the right to believe what they want, until they try to push their will on others. Then it's tyranny.
So now that we have the revelation (and hell, ADMISSION this morning from his own mouth) that Trump was ALSO trying to pressure the Chinese to investigate his rivals, and that it ALSO went into the secret server, I'd like to ask a question of our resident China expert @semiticgod. I want to know what the chances are that even if there was an ounce of validity to the claims, what kind of "fair trial" can someone expect to receive in the Chinese court system?? I want to know what kind of show trial the President is advocating considering he is now flat-out looking to get an authoritarian state to prosecute his potential opponents.
He's seeking election help from an authoritarian state (China) and a very corrupt state (Ukraine). His conspiracy theories are bullshit but he knows that - he wants them to create stuff - to manufacture evidence - and prove his stories.
In 3 years he's turned the US into a banana republic.
He's rigging elections right in the open just like his hero Putin does. Putin too launches political investigations into rival politicians. Putin locks up his opponents and fills the government with loyalists to him personally.
This is the end goal seemingly - destruction of American democracy to own the libs.
He's rigging elections right in the open just like his hero Putin does. Putin too launches political investigations into rival politicians. Putin locks up his opponents and fills the government with loyalists to him personally.
I'm not sure what elections you are talking about. Yes, you can technically go and vote, but political opposition doesn't exist in Russia. The problem isn't with rigged elections or with police dispersing street hoodlums who pose as opposition for money, but with the fact Putin has no rivals to speak of.
The overall point that I was trying to make, and I believe others as well, is that it is fundamentally unjust to hand down a harsher sentence upon person A to compensate for how a totally unrelated person B's crime is handled.
There's no doubt that Police Officers are being given WAY too much leniency for the killings they commit. That there has been an obvious miscarriage of justice in those cases does not mean she should be punished more harshly to "even the scales".
It's not a matter of "evening the scales." It's that being a police officer should be a matter of responsibility, not license. Every time they kill should be under greater scrutiny and extrajudicial executions should have harsher sentences, similar to hate crime enhancements. A reason for this is the fact that it's so effortless for many officers to get a slap on the wrist at best after killing someone who presented no actual danger to anyone. It's not revenge for Eric Garner's murderers walking or Michael Brown's murder. It's intended to make it harder for police to commit such crimes without consequence.
Isn't it weird how many people insist that police - individuals who often have access to military equipment of all things - should not be held to a greater responsibility for the force they can deploy and use? I can't imagine why someone would actually think that this is a good idea.
As far as facial recognition goes, it's bad. Surveillance states are bad. They don't make us safer - they put people into danger.
The overall point that I was trying to make, and I believe others as well, is that it is fundamentally unjust to hand down a harsher sentence upon person A to compensate for how a totally unrelated person B's crime is handled.
But I don't think anyone is saying that she should be punished more harshly for what unrelated person B did. What I think is she should be punished more harshly for is abusing the trust the public put in her as a police officer, especially since she used her service weapon. Not sure about the US, but at least in my country a martial artist would also be dealt with more harshly when committing assault and any claims of self-defense would be scrutinized more closely.
What is the point you want to make with this video? All I see is a mentally distraught women with everyone else in the room being not comfortable and not sure how to deal with her.
That America is sick, I thought I made that clear in my post? When you keep repeating the sky is falling, or crying wolf people start to crack. American media is a major contributor to the mental instability of the American people.
It works the same way as religion does. "Our maker is coming!" "The devil made me do it!" " Kill the infidels!" It is very easy to program the weak.
I still think this was a Troll getting one over. The "bomb Russia" comment kinda gave it away. Unfortunately there are people out there that are like this. Man made illness.
Still not clear on the point. Is this a general observation? Or are you specifically claiming irrational fears are new or becoming worse?
In this specific instance, I would say the media is understating the threat. Should the media just stop reporting on Climate Change, because some people can't handle the potential implications and might crack? If so, given the constant immigration fear-mongering this seems like an odd example.
See that's the problem, you are looking at this as an argument or a "He's on that side of the fence."
I said American media. All of it. Once you take the blinders off, it's very easy to see.
Maybe if I said, " Look what Trump is doing to people" maybe my post would of been received better.
See that's the problem, you are looking at this as an argument or a "He's on that side of the fence."
I said American media. All of it. Once you take the blinders off, it's very easy to see.
Maybe if I said, " Look what Trump is doing to people" maybe my post would of been received better.
I am more saying it is an odd example as you do not actually see the media stirring any fear. It's just a video showing a woman who is either trolling or off the rockers. If you want to demonstrate that it is the media stirring up those fears, you should show of video of that and not what you claim to be the effects thereof.
Edit: anyway, this is not a discussion without context. I am familiar with part of your post history in this thread (e.g. "virtue and honor died out with our ancestors"). It's not unreasonable you are coming at this with a certain point of view here.
Since you are labelling me, what is my point of view? I would love to hear a fellow forumite break me down and compartilize me. I'm all ears.
I am not claiming you fit neatly into some compartment, just that some traits are clear from the posting history. Firstly, the extreme cynicism (which amounts to fatalism at that point) you display with all politicians and all media (major newspaper, etc) being clearly untrustworthy. Additionally, some sort of belief in a general moral decline. Would you disagree with those?
This is something we should all be very concerned about, no matter our Political or Religious views. A child's innocence is sacred. Pedophilia and Child Prostitution is not ok in any circumstance.
"Iraqi girls as young as NINE are sold for sex in temporary 'pleasure marriages' approved by Shia clerics that can last as little as an hour
Shia clerics were filmed offering brief marriages in a BBC documentary in Iraq
One claimed there was 'no problem at all' with 'marrying' girls as young as nine
Undercover With The Clerics - Iraq’s Secret Sex Trade is on BBC iPlayer
Iraqi girls as young as nine are being sold for sex in temporary 'marriages' that can last as little as an hour, a BBC documentary has revealed.
Shia clerics were filmed offering 'pleasure marriages' in which men, usually banned from having sex outside marriage, can pay a dowry for an interim wife.
Asked about 'marrying' a young girl, one cleric claimed to an undercover reporter that 'nine years plus, there's no problem at all' under Islamic law.
The practice is banned in Iraq but eight out of 10 Shia clerics who were approached were willing to carry it out - and one of them even offered to help procure young girls, the BBC News investigation found. The religious rite dates back centuries, partly intended to allow men to have a legitimate relationship while away from their wives.
However, some Iraqi men and Shia clerics are now abusing it to give a veneer of legitimacy to child prostitution.
One cleric in Karbala, an important religious site in Iraq, told the undercover BBC journalist that girls as young as nine could be subject to the procedure.
'According to Sharia, there's no problem,' he said, when asked if it was acceptable to conduct a temporary marriage with a young girl. When the reporter voiced concern that he was exploiting the girl, the cleric told him: 'No way'.
Another cleric, also filmed secretly, was asked if a temporary marriage with a 13-year-old virgin would be permissible under Islamic law.
Extremely short-term marriages are a standard way of avoiding prostitution laws and legitimizing premarital sex in Saudi Arabia, but I wasn't aware it was also practiced in Iraq. I suppose it wouldn't be surprising that the folks who are willing to so blatantly violate the entire principle behind opposition to premarital sex by setting up phony marriages would also be okay with molesting children.
@jjstraka34: I'm guessing that Trump's openly calling on China to interfere in the 2020 election is illegal, but as for the odds of China actually helping him in 2020, the odds of that are essentially zero. Unlike the Russian government, the Chinese government doesn't view America's loss as inherently China's gain. The Chinese government dislikes Trump and views his tariffs as a threat to their interests--if China were to meddle in the 2020 election, they would be much more likely to do it against him than for him.
Kurt Volker's (recently resigned Special Envoy to Ukraine) texts that he turned over to the House yesterday absolutely obliterate any of the pathetic defenses the White House was coming up with on Ukraine. They are a documented record that the entire apparatus of US foreign policy was being steered toward securing Trump's re-election. Everything they denied is in there, and it's only from ONE official who got his ass out the moment this became public. Again, they have betrayed this country:
Kurt Volker's (recently resigned Special Envoy to Ukraine) texts that he turned over to the House yesterday absolutely obliterate any of the pathetic defenses the White House was coming up with on Ukraine. They are a documented record that the entire apparatus of US foreign policy was being steered toward securing Trump's re-election. Everything they denied is in there, and it's only from ONE official who got his ass out the moment this became public. Again, they have betrayed this country:
Comments
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.detroitnews.com/amp/3830360002
She notes that facial recognition software's a joke and offers no privacy protections. She motes black people are better that white at identifying black faces and white Republicans in Congress can't tell the difference between Elijah Cummings and John Lewis.
She's not exactly threatening civil war, and wanting to murder her political opponents like the President is. He's totally off the rails. Still. What's funny is he's not even denying the criminal behavior he has admitted to.
The thing is, she's also promoting stereotyping. The black community here aren't happy about the remark. The facial recognition software uses facial geometry, not skin-color, to get it's matches. The analysts have to make sure that the identified faces match the other profiles (ie: female, male, black, white, etc...). In other words, a white woman's face could match the facial profile but if the suspect is a black man, that match needs to be discarded. From what I understand, that is not done by the algorithm.
At that point it's little more than bullying. The carrot is still there, and no-one is trying to take it down, but the stick keeps coming out again and again. You have to turn off the incentives. Nobody who is illegal can get work, starting 1 or 2 years from now. That gives them time to prepare, by gaining citizenship or finding work elsewhere or what have you, and halts to great extent any reason for illegal migration.
While we're on this subject, I read an interesting study the other day that's sorta half-relevant. There is a consistent pattern of a sort of soft bigotry from those with certain progressive views.
https://insights.som.yale.edu/insights/white-liberals-present-themselves-as-less-competent-in-interactions-with-african-americans
This is a smokescreen to get everyone to accept facial recognition tech by our governments. Our freedoms and rights for security. That is the main concern here.
I read the article as Mrs. Talib being none too pleased with it either. At any rate, yes I'd agree facial recognition and things like deepfakes are problems. So are websites and Facebook spreading lies and misinformation.
1/4 Americans think the sun revolves around the Earth. Antivaxers, flat earthers, and others are seemingly all in on ignorance these days.
https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2014/02/14/277058739/1-in-4-americans-think-the-sun-goes-around-the-earth-survey-says
But they all can vote! Yay...
I believe this is all fueled by religious fervor. Everyone has the right to believe what they want, until they try to push their will on others. Then it's tyranny.
In 3 years he's turned the US into a banana republic.
He's rigging elections right in the open just like his hero Putin does. Putin too launches political investigations into rival politicians. Putin locks up his opponents and fills the government with loyalists to him personally.
This is the end goal seemingly - destruction of American democracy to own the libs.
It's not a matter of "evening the scales." It's that being a police officer should be a matter of responsibility, not license. Every time they kill should be under greater scrutiny and extrajudicial executions should have harsher sentences, similar to hate crime enhancements. A reason for this is the fact that it's so effortless for many officers to get a slap on the wrist at best after killing someone who presented no actual danger to anyone. It's not revenge for Eric Garner's murderers walking or Michael Brown's murder. It's intended to make it harder for police to commit such crimes without consequence.
Isn't it weird how many people insist that police - individuals who often have access to military equipment of all things - should not be held to a greater responsibility for the force they can deploy and use? I can't imagine why someone would actually think that this is a good idea.
As far as facial recognition goes, it's bad. Surveillance states are bad. They don't make us safer - they put people into danger.
But I don't think anyone is saying that she should be punished more harshly for what unrelated person B did. What I think is she should be punished more harshly for is abusing the trust the public put in her as a police officer, especially since she used her service weapon. Not sure about the US, but at least in my country a martial artist would also be dealt with more harshly when committing assault and any claims of self-defense would be scrutinized more closely.
I hope this was a joke.
That America is sick, I thought I made that clear in my post? When you keep repeating the sky is falling, or crying wolf people start to crack. American media is a major contributor to the mental instability of the American people.
It works the same way as religion does. "Our maker is coming!" "The devil made me do it!" " Kill the infidels!" It is very easy to program the weak.
I still think this was a Troll getting one over. The "bomb Russia" comment kinda gave it away. Unfortunately there are people out there that are like this. Man made illness.
In this specific instance, I would say the media is understating the threat. Should the media just stop reporting on Climate Change, because some people can't handle the potential implications and might crack? If so, given the constant immigration fear-mongering this seems like an odd example.
I said American media. All of it. Once you take the blinders off, it's very easy to see.
Maybe if I said, " Look what Trump is doing to people" maybe my post would of been received better.
I am more saying it is an odd example as you do not actually see the media stirring any fear. It's just a video showing a woman who is either trolling or off the rockers. If you want to demonstrate that it is the media stirring up those fears, you should show of video of that and not what you claim to be the effects thereof.
Edit: anyway, this is not a discussion without context. I am familiar with part of your post history in this thread (e.g. "virtue and honor died out with our ancestors"). It's not unreasonable you are coming at this with a certain point of view here.
Here let me help you get started @Ammar
I am a member of KKE (Κομμουνιστικό Κόμμα Ελλάδας) Communist party of Greece.
I am not claiming you fit neatly into some compartment, just that some traits are clear from the posting history. Firstly, the extreme cynicism (which amounts to fatalism at that point) you display with all politicians and all media (major newspaper, etc) being clearly untrustworthy. Additionally, some sort of belief in a general moral decline. Would you disagree with those?
Edit: Here is one of those forms.
Here's another.
And just incase people think I'm biased.
"Iraqi girls as young as NINE are sold for sex in temporary 'pleasure marriages' approved by Shia clerics that can last as little as an hour
Shia clerics were filmed offering brief marriages in a BBC documentary in Iraq
One claimed there was 'no problem at all' with 'marrying' girls as young as nine
Undercover With The Clerics - Iraq’s Secret Sex Trade is on BBC iPlayer
Iraqi girls as young as nine are being sold for sex in temporary 'marriages' that can last as little as an hour, a BBC documentary has revealed.
Shia clerics were filmed offering 'pleasure marriages' in which men, usually banned from having sex outside marriage, can pay a dowry for an interim wife.
Asked about 'marrying' a young girl, one cleric claimed to an undercover reporter that 'nine years plus, there's no problem at all' under Islamic law.
The practice is banned in Iraq but eight out of 10 Shia clerics who were approached were willing to carry it out - and one of them even offered to help procure young girls, the BBC News investigation found. The religious rite dates back centuries, partly intended to allow men to have a legitimate relationship while away from their wives.
However, some Iraqi men and Shia clerics are now abusing it to give a veneer of legitimacy to child prostitution.
One cleric in Karbala, an important religious site in Iraq, told the undercover BBC journalist that girls as young as nine could be subject to the procedure.
'According to Sharia, there's no problem,' he said, when asked if it was acceptable to conduct a temporary marriage with a young girl. When the reporter voiced concern that he was exploiting the girl, the cleric told him: 'No way'.
Another cleric, also filmed secretly, was asked if a temporary marriage with a 13-year-old virgin would be permissible under Islamic law.
'Just be careful she doesn't lose her virginity,' the cleric replied, suggesting other forms of sexual interaction instead." https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7537529/Iraqi-girls-young-NINE-sold-sex-temporary-marriages.html
By the way police kill 25 dogs per day
https://www.thenation.com/article/police-kill-nearly-25-dogs-each-day/
@jjstraka34: I'm guessing that Trump's openly calling on China to interfere in the 2020 election is illegal, but as for the odds of China actually helping him in 2020, the odds of that are essentially zero. Unlike the Russian government, the Chinese government doesn't view America's loss as inherently China's gain. The Chinese government dislikes Trump and views his tariffs as a threat to their interests--if China were to meddle in the 2020 election, they would be much more likely to do it against him than for him.
Huh. So, basically what you're telling me is that a politician lied?
I'm absolutely swooning with astonishment here!