[–] 2 points 23 hours ago (1 child)

Three are so many things wrong with this article I don't even know where to start. In terms of danger from physical bodily injury, I have no reason to doubt this report while traveling on public transport. Though it is also highly dependent on the city and routes you take. It also doesn't necessarily take into account total commute, which also includes travel on foot to and from transportation hubs. But a majority of crimes and incidents that happen on public transportation are often nuisance and property crimes, and other non-violent offenses. There are also quite a bit of unreported incidents that occur.

What that translates to is that many people still encounter a higher level of incidents on public transportation that make them feel unsafe. In terms of actual physical safety though, if you summarize mass data like they've done here then public transportation is still much safer overall. However, that shouldn't be used like done here to discredit people's experiences and concerns with public transportation. The goal should be to still work on aggressively on improving people's actual experience.

The data doesn't really matter in changing perspectives if people still significantly experience significantly more anxiety and fear by witnessing or experiencing intimidation, verbal hostilities and altercations, property crime and theft, public indecency, drug abuse, and other things that are legitimate reasons for increased anxiety and paranoia.

  • source
  • [+] -15 points 1 day ago (1 child)

    Way to repeat the smears that were investigated and proven by the Senate Intelligence Committee to have no merit. The only people that enabled Trump was Genocide Joe, Kamala Cheney, and all her joyful pro-genocide supporters.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [+] -56 points 1 day ago (17 children)

    She has some terrible ideas, but the way they smeared her over this reminds me how they attacked Mamdani calling him an antisemitic Jihadist. Sad so many people on the left merely parroted their pro-genocide AIPAC politicians at the time.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [–] 3 points 1 day ago (1 child)

    Then those that want to fight should do so with consent. Kidnapping and beating people to force them to do something against their will just makes you the monster you claim you despise. Not surprising though considering Zelensky is a pro-Zionist who openly says he wants Ukraine to be like Israel.

  • source
  • parent
  • context
  • [+] -28 points 1 day ago* (8 children)

    What a weird timeline we live in. Suddenly everyone who despises ICE to their core is now pro-ICE. Guess they were always just upset that they didn't have their own fascist thugs they could use against people they didn't want in the country.

  • source
  •  

    Has anyone else’s Gmail inbox just completely gone off the rails recently? At the beginning of 2025, I was getting maybe 10 to 15 spam messages a week. Now I'm easily clearing 500+ a week.

    To Google's credit, most of it does actually land in the spam folder, but calling it "spam" is letting them off the hook. The vast majority of this is straight-up phishing. Scammers are constantly spoofing real company names to target credentials—I'm seeing fakes for Apple, Ace Hardware, Lowe's, Costco, and even healthcare portals like Epic (MyChart).

    The main issue here is that Google provides absolutely zero adequate tools to limit or control this. You can't mass-report emails as phishing. You have to do it one by one. When you're getting hundreds of these, it's incredibly time-consuming, and honestly, it feels completely pointless because it’s obvious Google doesn't actually do anything with that information to stop the abuse.

    Sure, these networks have gotten a bit more sophisticated using random domains and subdomains (I see a ton of .biz, .id, and .uk domains). But at the end of the day, global IP registries exist. These blocks get allocated and assigned to specific companies and individuals. Google and other major tech orgs have direct insight into this massive increase in spam, and they know exactly which operators manage those networks. So why aren't they locating the ISPs and ranges where the vast majority of this originates and just blocking them entirely due to persistent, pervasive abuse? They should be working with the US and other governments to adequately sanction or restrict services where action isn't being taken.

    And before anyone says "just use plus addressing" (like email+spam@gmail.com)—that is totally insufficient to limit spam. It doesn't mask your real email, and anyone who knows how Gmail works can just write a script to strip the + tag off.

    The only thing plus addressing is really good for is proving who leaked your data. I was actually one of the first people to notice the massive Comcast breach because I used a plus alias. Even though plus addressing does nothing to stop spam, it gave me enough info to know Comcast had a data leak when I suddenly started receiving fake Norton and McAfee antivirus subscription invoices (which I obviously don't subscribe to) sent directly to the exact Xfinity alias I had created. I actually called Xfinity/Comcast at the time, and they were in complete denial. It took them two full years from that date to even announce the breach. That alone should have resulted in serious fines and investigations by Congress.

    These days, I rely on SimpleLogin for unique aliases, which helps limit a majority of the spam. But I still need my core Gmail account for personal use and for those annoying instances where companies actively restrict access to alias providers. Because of that, the problem on my main account has just grown rampant.

    And when you get 500+ spam messages a week, the spam folder becomes untenable because false positives start piling up. Google has been flagging way more legitimate emails as spam lately. Ironically, the emails they consistently flag as spam are verified, legitimate legal notices for class-action lawsuits against Google, just buried in the influx of junk. You'd think Google actively flagging class-action notices against their own company as spam would be a major issue to bring to class counsel and the presiding judge.

    Ultimately, this whole mess highlights a massive systemic failure: Congressional inaction and total corporate capture. Congress already permits data brokers to trade and sell our consumer info en masse. Unless you live in one of the few states with CCPA-like protections, you have zero rights.

    The US government seems completely incompetent when it comes to stopping spam and phishing. Look at the Do-Not-Call registry—it does little to nothing to stop robocalls. One can only begin to assume the government isn't addressing the issue because of corrupt companies, like the timeshare conglomerates that literally refuse to stop calling me after I participated in a discounted Vegas rental to attend a meeting. Even physical mail is screwed; the USPS is entirely captured by advertisers. I demanded to be able to opt out of the multitude of useless junk flyers I get daily, and my local postmaster literally threatened to stop delivering my mail altogether if I continued to raise the issue.

    The government neglects to understand the real-world impact of this stuff. Phishing and scams absolutely devastate the elderly. They are literally utilizing and attacking infrastructure, and many of these scammers make literal violent or financial threats against their victims—behaving in the exact same capacity and definition of terrorism. Yet, the government does nothing to actually pressure or sanction the countries harboring these operations.

    But government failure doesn't mean companies like Google are helpless. They could easily provide actual email alias solutions natively. They could give us the ability to mass-report phishing messages. They could put serious pressure on bad-actor networks by defederating actual ISPs and even TLDs if they aren't cooperative in addressing the issue.

    What really concerns me is the weaponization potential here. This influx of spam generated by a sophisticated nation-state, or even the US government, could easily be used as a way to bombard a protestor or someone they wish to create havoc for. By flooding their inbox with so many illegitimate messages, the target would be completely unable to filter through the noise without potentially missing out on legitimate, important communications as well.

    Are any of you seeing a massive spike in this targeted phishing? How are you guys keeping your primary inboxes usable?

    Baton Roue Kamala (thelemmy.club)
    submitted 7 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) by [M] to c/voteblew@lemmy.world
     

    "Would you have done something differently than President Biden during the past four years?"

    There is not a thing that comes to mind

    Later:

    You asked me what is the difference between Joe Biden and me — that will be one of the differences. I’m going to have a Republican in my Cabinet

     

    In the spirit of transparency, and as a new community, we are implementing a necessary rule to begin challenging the status quo and prevent potential bad faith actors.

    We are here to document hypocrisy and foster genuine debate. For that to happen, ideas must remain visible long enough to be challenged.

    The Mechanics of Silence

    It is crucial to distinguish between disagreement and suppression.

    • Passive Disagreement is simply scrolling past a post you don't like.
    • Active Suppression is using the downvote button to bury the topic so that no one else can see it.

    When you downvote without commenting, you are not engaging in the debate—you are removing the ability for anyone to have the debate. You are effectively deciding that the topic should not exist for others.

    The Problem with Silence

    Silent downvoting attempts to censor viewpoints without ever having to do the work of formulating a counter-argument.

    Since our mission is to expose and discuss double standards, we cannot function if the content is being hidden before the conversation even begins.

    The New Standard

    To ensure this community remains a place for discussion rather than suppression, we are setting a higher standard for participation.

    • The Rule: If you care enough to influence the visibility of our content (vote), you are expected to leave a comment explaining your reasoning.
    • The Logic: We are asking for substance. If a post is factually wrong or hypocritical, tell us. But clicking a button to make content disappear without explanation is a refusal to engage in the very purpose of this community.

    Enforcement & Restoring Access

    Effective immediately, users who engage in "drive-by downvoting" will be banned. However, this ban is not permanent.

    • Reinstatement Process: If you are banned for this, simply message the mods. We will unban you immediately to allow you to participate.
    • Staying Unbanned: Once reinstated, you are expected to follow the rules. You will be banned again—and this time the ban will remain in place until you demonstrate a genuine willingness to engage in good faith.
      • Defining "Good Faith": Rejoining simply to leave a low-effort negative comment so you can "technically" follow the rules to downvote again will not be tolerated.
      • Reasonable Effort: We expect a willingness to discuss and debate. Low-effort insults or trolling comments used as a loophole to justify a downvote will result in a ban.
      • Timing Matters: Even if you comment, immediate downvoting often signals a closed mind. We ask that you allow the debate to unfold and give space for the discussion to happen before trying to bury the post.
     

    YouTuber @WolvesAndFinance shows how Erika Kirk's endorsement of JD Vance at Turning Point USA's America Fest is illegal under IRS tax code which prohibits a 501(c)(3) non-profit from endorsing a political candidate, and how as tax payers we end up subsidizing this. Not a single peep from Democrats though. Why aren't they investigating? Do they have something to hide as well? Here is the timestamp for most relevant info.

     

    YouTuber @WolvesAndFinance shows how Erika Kirk's endorsement of JD Vance at Turning Point USA's America Fest is illegal under IRS tax code which prohibits a 501(c)(3) non-profit from endorsing a political candidate, and how as tax payers we end up subsidizing this. Not a single peep from Democrats though. Why aren't they investigating? Do they have something to hide as well? Here is the timestamp for most relevant info.

    view more: next ›