• 0 Posts
  • 82 Comments
Joined 11 months ago
cake
Cake day: January 9th, 2024

help-circle



  • Don’t forget the rest of your phrase there: justify… “to who”?

    If to you, he would have to do a LOT more than he has, for you to still buy in despite seeing that.

    To them, merely having the title of “CEO” seems to be enough, to those who refuse to dig deeper. pOsItIoN oF aUtHoRiTaH.

    They will be shocked, Shocked I tell you, SHOCKED when their money goes poof.

    Put another way, your question presupposes several things, e.g. “In a fair world, how could that be allowed to happen!?”.

    BTW, Donald Trump lowered the funding for the SEC, the agency responsible for investigation of financial fraud matters. Also he + the Republican Congress lowered the funding for the IRS too. After ACTUALLY “defunding the police” with his right hand - while simultaneously claiming that the leftists wanted to “defund the police” with his left - we will see a lot more of this than we did in the past.

    In the past, criminals feared the police and did not want to get caught. Now that there are fewer investigations into financial frauds… we have FA, and we are about to FO.




  • NO - you would need a power level to be over 9000 for that.

    This is half that. So you have only half control of the Universe. Like, you have to submit a request to your boss to use your power to do anything, but then he/she gets to either accept or deny your request. Requests must be submitted in triplicate and accompanied by a notary public cosignee signature. Other terms & conditions apply. Also, Huffman has veto power, and your requests may be lost or ignored at any time - but if YOU ever lose or ignore a reply in turn, then you are banned.

    Yet one more reason to say: Viva la revolución!







  • I probably can’t solve your issue entirely, but if it helps, one thing I note from your post is that most of your stress seems to come from YOU trying to be too hard on yourself. Did anyone call you stupid? Yes, you did. Did anyone say that you should just quit? Yes, you did. Stop being so mean to your coworker! Yes, even/especially if that person is you!:-D

    Second, to get accurate information, LISTEN to your teammates!

    I get a lot of, “Wow, that’s crazy,” or, “Yeah your job does seem to have a lot of unusual blockers.

    Especially those more senior than you!

    when I explain what I’m blocked by, every person has said, “Oh weird, this seems like a really confusing task.” Or, “Damn I’ve never seen anything like that.”

    (emphasis added)

    What they gave to you to do is on them, but how you handle it is on you. Don’t stress yourself out too much.

    Third, yes you got called into a meeting with a senior dev. USE that to your advantage. If you were really were stupid, this is your time to get that crucial feedback - if accurate, then better to get out now before you get too deep and find it even more difficult to change careers. However, it seems to be the case that it is NOT accurate, and that information is INCREDIBLY HELPFUL, and you may want to treat that great feedback with the value that it has instead of dismissing it?

    Also, that senior dev can help you boost your skills. How many people get that opportunity? Free training, woot! Even/especially if it is not related merely to technical skills but skills on how to exist in a job environment.

    Fourth, you might also want to touch base with whoever created that ticket. They might even say “oh yeah that is still there? I totally forgot about that. Nowadays that would make zero sense, ever since we implemented that XYZ thing about a year and a half back. Just ignore it and go on to something else.” YOU could be the one knocking those tickets out of the park, resolving each one simply as “Won’t Do” citing “owner said so”. Okay, I doubt they will all be so easy, but it’s a thought.

    And you seemed like you needed an ego booster. Sorry, I don’t know how to do that well, but the least I could do is spend some time on your issue, so that you know that you are not alone. I hope these musings help some too:-D.




  • Ofc it could have been benign, but there is no evidence that it was, while conversely everything that we currently know points to a breach of ethics.

    One, they did not fully disclose that a camera was even there (unless I am mixing up this story with another one just like it?). That also makes it impossible to…

    Two, they did not obtain proper (or any) consent. A banking ATM that needs to use your face to verify your identity could be an example of a benign use, and ignoring the enormous potential security implications of that atm, it could do so with a popup on the screen “Do you consent to having your face observed?”, “Do you consent to storage of your facial data in our database?”, “Do you consent to us selling the marketing data we collect from analysis of your facial data?”. They did none of this.

    Three, when asked about it, they lied. Technically they obfuscated the truth, which is just another way of stating that they lied.

    Ofc it COULD have been benign, but so far they are zero out of three already towards that end - and that is even from just what we know so far.


  • Their corporate website mentions that they use the data for marketing purposes. Whatever type of face they see - e.g. male or female, large or skinny, etc. - gets correlated with what was purchased, and then they sell that data for marketing purposes. Exactly like Google selling your search history, except with likely fewer restrictions in place.

    Their website doesn’t mention how often they get hacked to give away that data for free - to be clear, that data meaning A PICTURE OF YOUR ACTUAL FUCKING FACE. I don’t know what resolution, or even what someone would do with it later, I am focusing here on the fact that the picture taking seems nonconsensual, especially for it to be stored in a database rather than simply used in the moment.


  • Surely many who have them received them from elsewhere before immigration to America, and likewise the proportion of immigrants who have them I would expect to be oversized. Americans tend to be more greedy than anything else and don’t put in the effort required for such small (financial) rewards.

    Also, those with PhDs tend to congregate into certain areas that support those jobs, i.e. cities but not even a goodly number of those so much; plus smaller college towns too ofc. As such, many in the general populace might rarely if ever run into one for the largest majority of their lives, unless traveling specifically to those areas for some reason?

    And ofc rural areas are far larger, geographically speaking, than places where a person with a PhD would (likely) go. So you could randomly pick a spot on a map 100 times and never manage to find someone with a PhD anywhere within tens of miles, I would expect - although that line of thinking reveals my own biases: do most educated farmers stop at like an MS and just follow up with their own (possibly even extensive) self studies, or go all the way to PhDs while working their actual farms? (I doubt it bc it does not sound practical, and that is a hallmark of farmers afaik, but I could be wrong…) Anyway, I expect the unequal distribution is a contributing / exasperating factor to the general rarity.