> I think that they've done it, this is Meta's iPod
I would love to try these types of devices but there is no way I'd ever give money to Meta or put my personal information into their systems or encourage my friends and family to do so either.
Hopefully Meta puts in a bunch of R&D to see what works in this space and then someone else (Apple?) just copies it.
If I'm reading that first study correctly, "Ideation" and "Ideation with plan" are lower but "Ideation with plan and attempt" is higher and "Attempt resulting in inpatient care" is almost twice as high.
Neither the discussion nor the conclusion mention this, so maybe I'm misinterpreting something?
The results for attempts are underpowered and they acknowledge this (note the p-values too), but not for ideation. From the discussion:
> We did not detect a difference in the odds of lifetime or past-year suicide attempts or attempts resulting in hospitalization. It is possible that we were underpowered to detect these differences given that suicide attempt items were less frequently endorsed than suicidal ideation items (Table 3). Given this study’s retrospective self-report survey design, we were unable to capture information regarding completed suicides, which may have also reduced the number of suicide attempts we were able to account for. Given that suicidal ideation alone is a known predictor of future suicide attempts and deaths from suicide, the current results warrant particular concern.
I may just be misunderstanding what you're saying but if you're just getting a degree to tick a box that says "Must have a degree" why would you pick engineering?
What are the jobs that "require" an engineering degree but don't actually require any engineering knowledge?
Sorry for any misunderstanding. To be clear, there are two problems:
1. Students going into debt to get a degree simply because a job req calls for it, but potentially doesn't use the degree. Think "business administration" amongst others. The "Bachelor's Checkbox" on an application if you will. The debt they incur is the cost to increase their white collar lottery odds.
2. Degrees in domains that are crucial for the work to be done, but the financing model is fucked. Engineering, MD, etc.
Both require solving for, but in this context, I am addressing the former.
How likely is it that all 18 of those people were accessing from mobile operating systems with no known working exploit chain? I would say pretty unlikely.
If they're "just" using Signal, they're likely "just" using stock Android if there isn't a policy requiring iPhones in lockdown mode. It's a very good question as to whether such a policy exists.
stock iPhones run 100% Apple software, afaik. from drivers to the shell it's one company. the hardware is one series of models by one company.
each Android vendor has a completely random fork of AOSP with who knows what kernel patches, out-of-tree drivers, unremovable apps and customizations. you're trusting an enchilada of your mobile carrier, Google, Samsung/OnePlus/whoever, plus all their vendors.
Android can be highly secure. the NSA's Fishbowl project used vanilla AOSP + SELinux + IPSec on closely scrutinized hardware to make a phone that can be used for Secret text messages. the cheap prepaid phone you buy at T-Mobile is not that.
> stock iPhones run 100% Apple software, afaik. from drivers to the shell it's one company. the hardware is one series of models by one company.
> each Android vendor has a completely random fork of AOSP with who knows what kernel patches, out-of-tree drivers, unremovable apps and customizations. you're trusting an enchilada of your mobile carrier, Google, Samsung/OnePlus/whoever, plus all their vendors.
That cuts both ways though. Any exploit for iPhone works on a lot of high value targets. An exploit for one android phone may well not apply to another. If we're talking about state actors, well, probably both are compromised, but the iPhone would be the priority IMO.
try going to a pub on a Saturday night, walking up to a group of people you’ve never met, having a conversation, and start talking about something completely unrelated, and see how they react.
what you’re seeing in online chat communities is just basic social interaction reflected online
Based on how search engines behave to day, not really. These days, you'll have to fight spammy forums who game SEO, reddit, stackoverflow, ML digested output,etc.. it is discoverable as in technically it is somewhere in the results, but people never see it. If google paid discord like they pay reddit and searched discord servers that allow for that, that might be a nice compromise.
Also, ancient forums without https seem to be excluded by Google more often than not. I know they have their rules to push TLS but I still want results regardless.
Add forum or “forum” to your search term and you’ll get results from tons of forums. Yes, you have to know to do that, but once you do, your results will actually be good.
In a lot of modern buildings the elevator will not let you up to any floor unless you've been admitted, so the rock won't do you much good unless you also use it to smash the lock on the elevator control panel and override the security there.
> regular people, who don't commit crimes and aren't a high value target for government agencies.
> While traveling to not really democratic countries the government can't spy on you (in many muslim countries the typical US/European browsing behavior is probably illegal).
Aren’t these two threat models already completely different?
IMHO if an authoritarian government considers what you’re doing to be a crime, you should not be doing it over a VPN you saw advertised on a billboard
I would love to try these types of devices but there is no way I'd ever give money to Meta or put my personal information into their systems or encourage my friends and family to do so either.
Hopefully Meta puts in a bunch of R&D to see what works in this space and then someone else (Apple?) just copies it.
reply