This might have something to do with Elsevier's apparent love for charging extortionate prices, so that someone can access individual papers.
Remember, that it was these kinds of companies which led to Aaron Schwartz being driven to suicide (over a very hefty prison sentence) for the terrible crime of... Uh. Leaking scientific papers which weren't even funded by them.
You must not have one of your researchers allegedly* experiment on minors 70 years ago, we will punish you very harshly for that forever.
If you're driving them to suicide with fringe religious therapies today, that is perfectly okay.
*Seems to have been debunked.
I think the British Government did that but literally everyone ignored them when they did.
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/dec/15/proton-mail-founder-vows-to-fight-australias-esafety-regulator-in-court-rather-than-spy-on-users I feel like statements like this exaggerate how much power she actually has (Proton is a *Swiss* company), but it is important to pushback against her.
Useful to consider that the original post references an article where someone literally just ignored the criminality outside of a cursory mention (which there seemed to be little of) and complained about something else.
And it was very distracting as you're literally there to read about the criminality, not someone's QAnon-like rant.
I don't think I've seen takes like that, that bad, in quite some time though. This one is less bad but clearly a dog-whistle, and it's worth watching out for that.
Supposed to take someone seriously who is like tripping QAnon flag after QAnon flag... Including the trans prisoners one.
So, saw it again, this time from a QAnon-adjacent data broker adjacent "think of the children" advocate. One of the people pushing for things like the chat control.
I have like every base covered...
"they have a sexual interest in children" I'm noticing a strange emphasis on this in a couple of articles.
It's really strange to specifically make a point out of it, especially when it overshadows what crime it is someone is actually carrying out.
Is this some new Q dog-whistle...?
From a psychological standpoint, it is also not that which is the problem per say... And I think it just makes people paranoid...
It's also just plain distracting...
"A grand jury in Mississippi determined that there was no criminal conduct on behalf of the officer who shot and wounded an 11-year-old boy in his home who had called authorities for help."
OW
Software Engineer. Psy / Tech / Sex Science Enthusiast. Controversial?
Free Expression. Human rights / Civil Liberties. Anime. Liberal.