Let me tell you about the time Sony put malware on 22 million music CDs.
Sony the corporation, on purpose.
2005. you buy a CD at a music store. you get home. you put it in your computer. Windows autorun kicks in.
Sony's software silently installs a rootkit on your system. It hides itself using the same techniques professional malware uses to evade detection. it runs constantly in the background. it phones home to Sony with information about what you're listening to.
and it cannot be uninstalled.
The removal tool Sony eventually released to fix it required your email address and installed additional software that introduced further vulnerabilities. the fix was worse than the rootkit.
A security researcher named Mark Russinovich found it on Halloween 2005. published his findings. the internet erupted.
Sony's President of Global Digital Business responded: "most people don't even know what a rootkit is, so why should they care about it?"
things then got worse:
other malware authors discovered that anything hidden using Sony's rootkit technique became invisible to antivirus software too. they started hiding their own malware inside the same hidden directory. Sony had accidentally created the perfect malware concealment system and shipped it to 22 million people.
50 artists had CDs with the rootkit. Celine Dion. Neil Diamond. Santana. none of them knew.
Van Zant's album that started the whole investigation ranked 887 on Amazon. after reviews warned about the rootkit it dropped to 25,802 in three weeks.
Sony recalled the CDs. settled with the FTC. paid millions. Mark Russinovich became CTO of Microsoft Azure.
the rootkit is the reason we now consider autorun a security risk.
Sony shipped malware to protect music.
the malware protected nothing.
the music got pirated anyway.
In the original game, he can shoot you. And it hurts you. Then naturally you panick, shoot him, and then you get the heaviest silence possible, realizing what just happened.
Here, even when he's pointing straight at you, nothing hits you.
Jesus Christ, this is shit.
@RepairOfAmerica@pampamrdgz@Peterisrandom Then I would hope that you and your hypothetical significant other would live exciting lives, because most of life is mundane drudgery, and if you can’t bring yourself to talk or care about that drudgery then you’ll have very little to talk about.
Linguistically, breasts are considered a pair because either breast could function on its own as a separate unit. An ass cannot. It consists of both buttocks — "cheeks" in common parlance — and a hole, and the sum of their properties constitutes an ass. If one were to separate these components, no one individual component could definitionally be considered an ass on its own.
@RepairOfAmerica@pampamrdgz@Peterisrandom People realize, often far too late, that the “meaningless stuff” is the only stuff that ever actually mattered. What you see as needless blather is actually the “meat” of any relationship.
Without it you’re essentially conversing with strangers who you know the person details of
I don't think 'many conservatives' believe this at all.
I think many conservatives believe that (1) unequal opportunities obviously exist, (2) even if you could somehow fully equalize opportunities, disparities would still remain because people differ in their innate characteristics and dispositions, and (3) some of what we observe as unequal opportunity is itself partly influenced by those underlying differences.
I’ve seen End of Eva on the big screen before, but never with a packed audience and never sitting behind teenagers who had (apparently) just watched the series for the first time. Saw a kid barely older than Shinji have a revelation.
It’s still got it. It’s always gonna have it.
This is less an argument than a collection of caricatures.
Pro-lifers don’t need the Bible to argue that intentionally killing an innocent human being is wrong. The argument can be made from embryology and moral philosophy.
Conservatives generally don’t believe “immigrants are bad.” They argue over illegal immigration, border sovereignty, assimilation, security, labor markets, and immigration levels.
And capitalism apparently existed in an intellectual vacuum until Ronald Reagan? Smith, Locke, Hayek, Friedman and several centuries of political economy might have something to say about that.
Yes, conservatives are underrepresented in academia. But jumping from that fact to “therefore conservatives are incurious” is not scholarship. It’s ideological self-congratulation masquerading as an explanation.
There are incurious conservatives. There are incurious progressives. Curiosity is not a partisan trait.
Ironically, reducing opposing viewpoints to “Bible/Fox News/Reagan told them so” rather than seriously engaging their strongest arguments is a pretty good example of the incuriosity you’re accusing everyone else of.