totm nov 2023 Thread to discuss negative things in a very general way, just see where it goes y'know?

[ColdJ]

3 scam Emails in quick succession, 2 sent at the same time, claiming that there had been suspicious activity on my Microsoft account. What would suspicious activity on a Microsoft accout even look like?

They looked very professional but the scammers are as dumb as ever. I worry about people who fall for these scams.

Remember folks. Never click on links in Emails or SMS from places that you didn't solicit to contact you.

[DDE]

2 hours ago, ColdJ said:

What would suspicious activity on a Microsoft accout even look like?

Anything.

I'm not joking, I believe they used this title for notifying you about logging in with a different device.

[AlamoVampire]

Welp a new day has dawned and already 2 more spam calls. More to come im sure. Long this list might be.

634…  090602252025

636…  100002252025 2 more…

637…  101602252025

659…  195002252025 27 total on the day..

Edited Wednesday at 01:50 AM by AlamoVampire

[Nuke]

every printer is broken. especially our color laser printer. it gets weird gradiation on the black channel. i suspect a bad cartridge. these are not cheap. it would cost $200 to replace all of them. the machine has not even printed 1000 pages yet. yet now we have come to the conclusion that a new printer would be cheaper than new cartridges. ewaste++; i mean we could waste $50 on just the black cartridge, but that's kind of a gamble.

[Linkageless]

12 hours ago, Nuke said:

now we have come to the conclusion that a new printer would be cheaper than new cartridges

Yep.  Printers are a massive waste of money, and the whole industry appears geared to milk you of more.  Long ago, when I had an IT Ops role I found myself increasingly becoming "the printer man" (despite being their only *nix and VMS professional) and came to the conclusion there was something fundamentally incompatible between paper and computer systems.  They secretly hate each other.  I had to leave that job to escape being sucked further into the vortex of endless frustration at stupid driver problems and having to constantly replace random parts.

The reality seems to be that the most cost effective and least frustrating way is to have well built printers, maintained by expert technicians and have them used on a daily basis.

I'm damned if I'll ever buy a printer again.  If I really must have something printed, there are places that will do it for a reasonable price that keep the printers away from me, and my sanity intact.

[Linkageless]

20 hours ago, AlamoVampire said:

Welp a new day has dawned and already 2 more spam calls. More to come im sure. Long this list might be.

That's frankly awful.  Are there no options available to you to block spam calls?  Have any been repeat calls?

Apologies in advance if you're already doing any of this... Assuming there's no facility available from your provider, and that you've already considered some kind of automated solution (I'm pretty sure spam call blocking is available), I would be turning to at least silencing the calls.  If these are on an Android phone, you can use "Do not disturb" and in the detailed config for that set it to only ring if it's a favourite contact or a repeat call within 15 minutes.  Your aim should be to avoid it become a mental burden.

Back in the days of dumb phones, I once got so annoyed by a repeated automated silent call that I silently answered it, put it aside and left it connected for over 24 hours.  It denied me the use of that phone, but they didn't call again.  Call costs at the time were higher, and it probably wouldn't make much difference these days but it shows that if you can tie up their resources and make a difference to their bottom line, they go elsewhere.

[Nuke]

46 minutes ago, Linkageless said:

Yep.  Printers are a massive waste of money, and the whole industry appears geared to milk you of more.  Long ago, when I had an IT Ops role I found myself increasingly becoming "the printer man" (despite being their only *nix and VMS professional) and came to the conclusion there was something fundamentally incompatible between paper and computer systems.  They secretly hate each other.  I had to leave that job to escape being sucked further into the vortex of endless frustration at stupid driver problems and having to constantly replace random parts.

The reality seems to be that the most cost effective and least frustrating way is to have well built printers, maintained by expert technicians and have them used on a daily basis.

I'm damned if I'll ever buy a printer again.  If I really must have something printed, there are places that will do it for a reasonable price that keep the printers away from me, and my sanity intact.

we unfortunately have to deal with a lot of bureaucrats and the nearest kinkos is in another state. no two of the various government bureaucracies mom depends on for survival seem to use the same system to submit applications. some have a portal, others have a phone app, others still do things the old fashioned way, one recently required us to fill out a fallible pdf, print it out, sign it, scan it back in and email it to them. i wasnt going to waste all that paper, so i just printed out the signature sheet and edited it in with gimp.

Edited Wednesday at 12:07 PM by Nuke

[AlamoVampire]

My phone is always set to silent but vibrates when a call comes in. Until recently (2ish weeks ago) i was unaware of silence calls from unknown numbers which is now enabled as of 2ish weeks ago. Each call gets blocked and reported as junk. Some calls are reported to the national do not call registry. Call blockers are imperfect things that can block calls from legitimate callers such as potential employers or law enforcement (most officers have their cells caller id blocked). The better ones charge fees to have and i have problems with that idea. This will eventually pass. Eventually. Today is 1 full month. I will make a post at some point today when todays wave starts and update as i can. It sucks. If you want my hypothesis as to why it started i can dm you it. 060802262025 @Linkageless added tag 063402262025

Edited Wednesday at 12:34 PM by AlamoVampire

[SunlitZelkova]

If there is a place in education where people are taught not to reason, it is college.

"Composition II" course. I try to write about affordable housing for the final essay, but the proposal is returned with advice to "support my own argument with sources" (original plan was to play two arguments off each other and argue that both are bunk). In other words, my argument must align with that of others so that it may be supported by evidence.

I respond to the teacher stating that it is impossible to create an evidence-based argument in anything except classical physical sciences. I get told I am wrong, and indeed I was. I conclude my topic was just too broad.

So I narrow it to rent control. Should be easy, right? If the assignment is to basically just parrot existing discussions and "change it up so my position looks like it is original" there have to be a million papers out there I can cite. A thousand arguments to choose from, all I have to do is say I agree with one side and describe to the reader things that other people have said.

Nope! Rent control is just as subjective as "affordable housing." I cannot make a serious, evidence-based argument for or against it without falling back on subjective values, which will invalidate my argument.

So here goes nothing with a paper criticizing legal arguments made in the USA in favor of criminalization of incest. Upping the ante all the way to core American legal concepts was the only way I could think of to find a non-physical sciences subject within which an evidence-based argument could be made within a certain context. Going for subjects related to basic human activites, like subsistence, is a major no-no because that stuff is wildly subjective.

I'm worried it will be rejected though, because the structure isn't perfect on account of the eccentricity and obscure nature of the subject.

When the guidelines for college composition are to make an argument and then support it with evidence in the form of sources, in a manner in which the argument entirely hinges on other people validating one's own view about the subject, it's no wonder kids are so tempted to use ChatGPT. A paper will be rejected if the argument hasn't already been made by someone else, so why not ask the LLM to not only find those arguments, but also piece them together and pick what argument is best?

I won't give into that though. Rage will be the best fuel for another all nighter though, so my next topic will argue against the entire structure of Western curriculum and thinking in favor of Eastern examples.

I blame institutionally-backed scientism for all of it by the way. Academics wonder why there is so much disdain for themselves among the common folk, but their insistence on finding evidence to support any argument leaves most people unable to make their own arguments because finding evidence (research) either requires enormous amounts of time, enormous amounts of money, or both. So academics are seen as "gatekeepers," and this assertion evolves into academics being seen as tyrants. And all of a sudden the most random, normal things become "heinous instruments of control." Thus perfectly valid and interesting ideas get thrown into the burn pile.

Of course, this backlash is wholly rage-induced and without any underlying theory to guide it. Perhaps the "experiment" in the West that started with the Enlightenment might end. Blatantly subjective beliefs would once again guide society. It wouldn't be the end of the world though, because currently many subjective beliefs still guide society but are dressed up in scientific/logical sounding language to make them seem objective. The verdict of the founders of this new epoch would be written as follows: No, there was no objective way of looking at the world.

/end venting

[Linkageless]

44 minutes ago, AlamoVampire said:

My phone is always set to silent but vibrates when a call comes in.

It of course depends on how often you expect calls, but I wouldn't tolerate even vibrate alerts that many times a day.  My policy is if they really want to get through to me and aren't in my favourites, they can leave a message, or try again within 15 minutes in which case I'll pick hear it and pick up.  You're fighting the good fight by reporting them but it would put me on edge to have that many demands on my attention.

48 minutes ago, AlamoVampire said:

Call blockers are imperfect things that can block calls from legitimate callers such as potential employers or law enforcement (most officers have their cells caller id blocked).

I'm with you there.  Putting filtering in someone else's hands like that is always a risk.  In an ideal world, spam would barely exist as it would be quickly blocked and dealt with at source by force of law, but I gather that's complicated by the fact that allegedly there's some minority of people who like to be advertised at and receive unsolicited phone calls.

[AlamoVampire]

@Linkageless with “Silence calls from unknown contacts” it gives me a banner notification of the call as it shunts them directly to voicemail. No vibration. I had to turn that on when i started getting 20, 30, up to 40 a day. Phone kept skittering off like a possessed bug. 072902262025

[Linkageless]

35 minutes ago, SunlitZelkova said:

Blatantly subjective beliefs would once again guide society. It wouldn't be the end of the world though, because currently many subjective beliefs still guide society but are dressed up in scientific/logical sounding language to make them seem objective.

This has already happened [cite news sources here] 

37 minutes ago, SunlitZelkova said:

Rage will be the best fuel for another all nighter though, so my next topic will argue against the entire structure of Western curriculum and thinking in favor of Eastern examples

Do it.  It will distinguish you from the 'sheeple' (and get you tagged as a dangerous subversive).  Seriously though, you sound like you're thinking beyond the scope of that course so your marks could go to either extreme unless your tutor is capable of being purely objective!

[AlamoVampire]

Ugh 3 spam calls start the day…

662…  095002262025

663...  100302262025 

664…  101802262025

665…  110802262025

672…  184002262025 13 total so far today

Edited Thursday at 12:40 AM by AlamoVampire

[DDE]

5 hours ago, SunlitZelkova said:

I blame institutionally-backed scientism for all of it by the way. Academics wonder why there is so much disdain for themselves among the common folk, but their insistence on finding evidence to support any argument leaves most people unable to make their own arguments because finding evidence (research) either requires enormous amounts of time, enormous amounts of money, or both. So academics are seen as "gatekeepers," and this assertion evolves into academics being seen as tyrants. And all of a sudden the most random, normal things become "heinous instruments of control." Thus perfectly valid and interesting ideas get thrown into the burn pile.

Of course, this backlash is wholly rage-induced and without any underlying theory to guide it. Perhaps the "experiment" in the West that started with the Enlightenment might end. Blatantly subjective beliefs would once again guide society. It wouldn't be the end of the world though, because currently many subjective beliefs still guide society but are dressed up in scientific/logical sounding language to make them seem objective. The verdict of the founders of this new epoch would be written as follows: No, there was no objective way of looking at the world.

I think you're wrong at aiming this at academics per se. A lot of the people who exploit this style of argument are either not academics at all, or are academics with huge, huge scare quotes. They successfully poison the well with regards to requesting any sources, because it's just such a powerful sophistry tactic: assuming your target doesn't simply get intimidated by big words and leaves at this challenge, when it does come back, having done the legwork to get evidence, you're free to pull the rug from under them by claiming it's the wrong kind of evidence. You know, from evil sources.

You're right, there's no institutional framework that can eliminate subjectivity.

[Nuke]

11 hours ago, SunlitZelkova said:

If there is a place in education where people are taught not to reason, it is college.

"Composition II" course. I try to write about affordable housing for the final essay, but the proposal is returned with advice to "support my own argument with sources" (original plan was to play two arguments off each other and argue that both are bunk). In other words, my argument must align with that of others so that it may be supported by evidence.

I respond to the teacher stating that it is impossible to create an evidence-based argument in anything except classical physical sciences. I get told I am wrong, and indeed I was. I conclude my topic was just too broad.

So I narrow it to rent control. Should be easy, right? If the assignment is to basically just parrot existing discussions and "change it up so my position looks like it is original" there have to be a million papers out there I can cite. A thousand arguments to choose from, all I have to do is say I agree with one side and describe to the reader things that other people have said.

Nope! Rent control is just as subjective as "affordable housing." I cannot make a serious, evidence-based argument for or against it without falling back on subjective values, which will invalidate my argument.

So here goes nothing with a paper criticizing legal arguments made in the USA in favor of criminalization of incest. Upping the ante all the way to core American legal concepts was the only way I could think of to find a non-physical sciences subject within which an evidence-based argument could be made within a certain context. Going for subjects related to basic human activites, like subsistence, is a major no-no because that stuff is wildly subjective.

I'm worried it will be rejected though, because the structure isn't perfect on account of the eccentricity and obscure nature of the subject.

When the guidelines for college composition are to make an argument and then support it with evidence in the form of sources, in a manner in which the argument entirely hinges on other people validating one's own view about the subject, it's no wonder kids are so tempted to use ChatGPT. A paper will be rejected if the argument hasn't already been made by someone else, so why not ask the LLM to not only find those arguments, but also piece them together and pick what argument is best?

I won't give into that though. Rage will be the best fuel for another all nighter though, so my next topic will argue against the entire structure of Western curriculum and thinking in favor of Eastern examples.

I blame institutionally-backed scientism for all of it by the way. Academics wonder why there is so much disdain for themselves among the common folk, but their insistence on finding evidence to support any argument leaves most people unable to make their own arguments because finding evidence (research) either requires enormous amounts of time, enormous amounts of money, or both. So academics are seen as "gatekeepers," and this assertion evolves into academics being seen as tyrants. And all of a sudden the most random, normal things become "heinous instruments of control." Thus perfectly valid and interesting ideas get thrown into the burn pile.

Of course, this backlash is wholly rage-induced and without any underlying theory to guide it. Perhaps the "experiment" in the West that started with the Enlightenment might end. Blatantly subjective beliefs would once again guide society. It wouldn't be the end of the world though, because currently many subjective beliefs still guide society but are dressed up in scientific/logical sounding language to make them seem objective. The verdict of the founders of this new epoch would be written as follows: No, there was no objective way of looking at the world.

/end venting

that's why i quit with my aa. i quickly realized that assignments given to pass the course had nothing to do with what i would be expected to do in the real world. collage really is just a filter that lets the compliant ones through and prevents free thinkers from prospering.

i feel like the sieve has tightened a lot in the last 2 decades since i graduated. it seemed like they wanted you to align with one of a few common ways of thinking, they didn't care where you ended up so long as you ended up in a place accepted by a big enough subset of the populous. but now they want you to align with a specific way of thinking and anyone who deviates is wrong, and anyone outside the institution is not credible. so now you end up with students faking their way through, giving the profs what they want to get their degree and exiting the institution with no useful life skills or worldview.  are these institutions intended to educate you or to break you?

Edited Thursday at 12:56 AM by Nuke

[AlamoVampire]

13 minutes ago, Nuke said:

with no useful life skills or worldview.  are these institutions intended to educate you

10 years ago, id say partially educate you. But, given the rapid rise of antivaxx, antiscience, xenophobic, and general hate for the “other” and regression into misogyny, keeping the masses stupid and frightened such that the few in the richest 1% can take and maintain control IS the plan and sadly its working better than they hoped. 190902262025 its subjugation 101

Edited Thursday at 01:09 AM by AlamoVampire

[Nuke]

8 hours ago, AlamoVampire said:

10 years ago, id say partially educate you. But, given the rapid rise of antivaxx, antiscience, xenophobic, and general hate for the “other” and regression into misogyny, keeping the masses stupid and frightened such that the few in the richest 1% can take and maintain control IS the plan and sadly its working better than they hoped. 190902262025 its subjugation 101

id say hyperbole is the bigger issue. someone who is merely skeptical about the safety of vaccines or has questions about specific vaccines is just flat out labeled an anti-vaxxer and any hard questions they had are conveniently brushed under the rug.  failing to agree 100% with the present consensus on the soft sciences is enough to label one anti-science. science cannot function without people questioning the existing hypotheses that people erroneously call theories. even the theories are not set in stone, the best science is done when old widely accepted theories are overturned and replaced with better theories. science is a process for finding truth, it is not the gatekeeper of truth. im not even going to touch on xenophopbia because idk how to broach that one without entering into politics. in each of the examples you provided these are simply labels one side use to drive a narrative and are at best very imprecise or at worst completely unfounded accusations. now granted there are anti-science, anti-vax, blatantly racist types out there, and in the minority, but it is wrong to paint wide swathes of the population with that brush simply because they disagree with you.

Edited Thursday at 09:38 AM by Nuke

[Lisias]

8 hours ago, DDE said:

You're right, there's no institutional framework that can eliminate subjectivity.

Yes, there is. It's called "War" - you can't argue with a bullet.

Unfortunately, the argument will be won by the strongest, not the wisest - besides there being a tendency of the wisest getting stronger if the war takes long enough: there's no place for sophistry and stupidity on warfare.

Yet more unfortunately, there's no place for Humanity neither.

[AlamoVampire]

what the actual heck??? I just got a bloody solicitation TEXT and its nearly bloody MIDNIGHT when it rolled in!!! 000002272025

ok this has gone FULL illegal now. It is 0104. at 0102 I got a text. a SOLICITATION text. at 0102... I had to turn my computer back on to update this. AND to report this to do not call. what the actual... 010402272025

Edited Thursday at 07:04 AM by AlamoVampire

[Superfluous J]

1 hour ago, AlamoVampire said:

what the actual heck??? I just got a bloody solicitation TEXT and its nearly bloody MIDNIGHT when it rolled in!!! 000002272025

ok this has gone FULL illegal now. It is 0104. at 0102 I got a text. a SOLICITATION text. at 0102... I had to turn my computer back on to update this. AND to report this to do not call. what the actual... 010402272025

Well it was 9am in Russia (Moscow specifically) which is likely where the computer that texted you (for free over the Internet) is.

[AlamoVampire]

28 minutes ago, Superfluous J said:

Well it was 9am in Russia (Moscow specifically) which is likely where the computer that texted you (for free over the Internet) is.

Does not make me feel any better. Makes me all the more uneasy for obvious reasons. 014402272025

[DDE]

7 hours ago, Lisias said:

Yes, there is. It's called "War" - you can't argue with a bullet.

Unfortunately, the argument will be won by the strongest, not the wisest - besides there being a tendency of the wisest getting stronger if the war takes long enough: there's no place for sophistry and stupidity on warfare.

Yet more unfortunately, there's no place for Humanity neither.

Theoretically, maybe. Between the fog of war and bias, the two (and you better hope it's just two) sides end up having drastically different ideas of what's going on, and the subjective realities diverge even further.

[Linkageless]

On the bright side...  War brought us rocketry in various forms

Aside from the possibilities of destruction and misery,  who knows what else it might bring?

[AlamoVampire]

And the first scam call arrives at 0801 taking us to:

673…  080902272025

675…  091702272025 2 in 2 minutes

676...  094602272025 

677…  103602272025

678…  105102272025

679…  105402272025

680…  105902272025

682…  112902272025 2 3 min apart… 10 so far today

683…  121902272025

699…  183402272025

Edited Friday at 12:34 AM by AlamoVampire

[Lisias]

5 hours ago, DDE said:

and the subjective realities diverge even further.

But eventually one of them converge into reality- usually the winner's.