Personally, I'd do the same thing as the cops if I were in the situation you describe: do nothing and rake in the moolah, and if anyone has a problem with that, pretend it's someone else's fault.
Because they're not a threat to society, have not been determined to be guilty, and throwing people in jail (only to bond out anyway a couple days later, in most cases - funneling more money to bondsmen) is a great way to (a) spread a pandemic and (b) waste money giving them what they want (shelter, food, healthcare, etc.)?
A dude swiping some snacks from Target I can understand, but people that break into private residences are definitely a threat to society. It is easy for that to escalate into a violent encounter and it makes people feel legitimately unsafe living in the city.
It's not a hotel, it's some sort of corporate subletting situation. These people broke into an apartment unit.
>7% of home burglaries resulted in a violent encounter. Given that only ~27% of the time someone was even home that's a pretty big risk when someone indeed happens to be home: https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/vdhb.pdf
Did you seriously just compare people being uncomfortable around black people with people being uncomfortable that their residence may be broken into??? "Legitimately" was the key word there.
A lot of people have gotten soft on petty (and misdemeanor) non violent crimes and assume everyone is a criminal with a heart of gold "just trying to make it out there". I have been very poor before and living out of my car, I never stole one thing or broke into and squatted in any houses. If I had I would not have soiled the place up and taken stuff on my way out. I was raised with better morals than that. If I were a Californian I would be tired of the excuses the far left come up with to excuse petty crimes and lawlessness. I think it will come full circle in the next few years though as the crooks get bolder with the breakins and flash mob robberies.
i thought you would offer a different take on these things. not answer with a question.
> We started getting reports from neighbors or the on-site management that are our guests are dealing drugs out of our units.
> Our lockboxes were getting broken into, keys taken and people have been living there for several days and in some cases weeks
> they would start packing up their car with our appliances
in civilised societies these kinds of actions would be considered extremely damaging to the fibre of the neighbourhood. people would complain to their elected official if the police refused to intervene. and if the elected official refused to act then he would be recalled.
Sorry, what makes them scummy? Because they want random squatters who are stealing stuff and not paying, while dealing drugs to not be in their accommodations that they created?
This kind of comment is exactly why “we can’t have nice things” when low-life’s are always defended, while those of us who actually meaningfully contribute to society are burdened to pick up the pieces and put up with illegal behavior.
I don't know of anything in crypto which actually works (read: does something better/cheaper than pre-existing technologies). The single value of it is speculation.
Do you really want Microsoft adding tabs to it, though? Because they'll do it the same way they did it in IE. "Your tabs are also windows because we don't understand the difference, enjoy!"
... can we talk about the fact that it has a copyright year of 2003??? Sure, I totally believe there aren't a billion known vulnerabilities in that OOB management chip's code... the damn thing is old enough to vote!
No, virtually nothing made 18 years ago is secure. In fact virtually nothing made a day ago is secure, but when something has been sitting around stagnating for 18 years that means the world has had ~6575x as many opportunities to find a vulnerability.
What on Earth are you talking about? There's countless things.
Any random chip, let's take a max232, from 1987. It hasn't changed since 1987. They are widely used.
There's countless simple chips there that have no "security issues" such as fram and pram chips that just store data and that's it.
Many programmers are only accustomed to seeing the modern JavaScript systems with 5GB of dependencies to print hello world and sure, fine; a virtual machine on a browser, on a userland, on a kernel, there's lots of stuff there to go wrong.
That's not what this necessarily is.
Systems can be simple. You use 1970s era zilog-80 with code that hasn't changed in 30 years every day when you do things like wait at a stoplight, use municipal water when you turn on your faucet, put food in your microwave, turn on your light switch ... You probably interact with and certainly depend on more 1970s and 80s era hardware and software that's been faithfully reordered and reproduced for decades then you do any modern system.
Motorola 6800 (not a typo) MOS 6502, and Intel 8080 clones are in every car, jet airplane, bus and train made in the past 30 years or so and they are still being used; oftentimes with no real modifications, for decades.
They are used exactly because there's no surprises and everything is known and accounted for. Newness, the thing you advocate for is the vulnerability.
Society entrusts things like interbank transfers (trillions a day) and international carrier switching on these systems.
This strategy works so well that these systems are utterly invisible.
I tend to think about it as: The ends never justify the means, but sometimes the ends are important enough that you do it anyway.
As a limiting example, I don't consider violence to ever be a good thing per se, but I still accept its use in self defence. I don't like using the word 'justified' to describe that acceptance, though that may say more about how I see 'justified' as a concept than it does about anything concrete.
