So what is your plan if the shit hits the fan

Stay classy, moldfella.

What do you need a thumb drive for with a secure work device connected to your network? Do not blame Chelsea Manning because you are trying to do things you should not be at work. I know network security and how work computers operate and today you should not need a thumb drive at all. It is just an open risk for bringing in fucked up shit you should not be, or taking valuable shit home you shouldn't be.

Eh. We all use our work computers for some personal stuff. Even if it’s just a quick google search. People who work in offices and on computers spend 8 hours in front of a computer. So, it’s not at all unlikely, in fact, it’s expected (with my company) that people are going to be doing personal things on their work computer.

The problem, even with thumb drives, is that, as you said, there are measures within the computer programming that does not allow documents to be uploaded to Google docs, a personal Microsoft cloud, or even a thumb drive. Especially at a pharma company. There are ways to get around it.

So, @oldfella1962, chuck the thumb drive and get on google docs. Then … I’m sure you’ll figure it out from there.

Some places are actually secure. I remember working for IBM IT helpdesk and they had some companies where you would be fined if you installed anything on their distributed tech that was not given by the company. So it can be that way.

I imagine cleaning toilets does not require that much security, but he should not be blaming trans people for things that are frowned upon at work for other reasons. There are a lot of reasons your office does not want you installing a bunch of programs or bringing in a bunch of files.

How do you install a thumb drive into a toilet?

I am not even going to look and I know there are toilets out there that can do it. I do not know why, but I know they do. If someone does search and cannot come up with one I think I need to go to the patent office.

I can't really see a need for a USB socket in the toilet itself, unless you want music played through the seat? But why not wireless so you can use your phone playlist? Like Bluetooth but in the shitter: we could call it Browntongue.

Its not listed in the description, but since this puppy costs almost $18K, I imagine it probably has one to update the software running the toilet.

Code probably checks for shit in bowl and ass on seat to flush at the worst time.

Ignoring the obvious ethical issue there.... Why? How would it make a difference at this point?

I was thinking about it a lot after January 6th. Just one dead Democrat senator would give power back to McConnell and stop Biden and Pelosi from passing pretty much anything, but there's no comparable target on the Republican side. No amount of missing Republican senators eliminates the filibuster, or forces Manchin and Sinema to stop being useless dicks. Democrats already have congress and the presidency. Even if every Republican on the supreme court dropped dead tomorrow, it's far from a sure thing that Biden would get to replace them, and after seeing Garland in action one can't even be sure he'd appoint reliably left-leaning justices.

The only thing assassinating a Republican would accomplish today is giving the Trumpers credibility when they claim their own violence is just self-defense.

Plus, statistically speaking, death threats from the right outnumber death threats from the left by about 3 to 1.

It's a "The system's completely fucked, so we might as well burn it all down." mentality.

Maybe? Feels to me more like right-wing trolls trying to push the lefties into doing something stupid.

Nope. I know some folks like that and they genuinely believe that the only way to get change to happen in our society is take out significant political and business leaders. None of them are Republicans.

Both of these are good points. I can see an argument that simple per-capita per year crime statistics aren't a full picture. Take trains for instance. Transport for London reported sometime in the past few years that the average train carries only 80 passengers, or about a dozen per car. Meanwhile everyone complains of overcrowding. Why? Because the average person rides the train during rush hour, when every train is packed to the gills, so the average person sees hundreds of passengers per car. I wouldn't say that statistic is the full picture either, but rather only a combination of the two gives you an idea of what train service is actually like.

If you're in a community of 1000 people spread out over 50 square miles, you're going to notice 3 crimes a lot less than any given person in a 10000-person community that's concentrated into a single square mile would notice 10 crimes.

The specific context was due to fear of Republican voter suppression and nullification putting people they consider full on fascists into power. And I can't say that isn't an issue - hence this thread. They are frustrated with Manchin blocking the Voter Rights bill and don't understand there might be things going on that isn't for public dissemination on that score. They say waiting until the 2022 senatorial elections will be too late - we will have already lost our democracy. Can't say I agree with that.

And yes, the problem of course is ceding legitimacy to those groups that going on an assassination spree would justify. The Reichstag fire comes to mind.

Nonetheless the objective reality and subjective experience aren't lining up.

Being more (or less, I'm not entirely convinced about the direction of the premise) conscious of a small percentage of crimes due to population distribution would not negate the literal fact of your chances of being a victim overall.

The numerically larger, more condensed, population in your example will appear to be more crime ridden in any given snapshot but that doesn't make it more dangerous per se across the board.

What it does mean is that you likely have concentrated hotshots where the danger is exponentially higher but that would be true of any population centre. It would not represent any meaningful assessment of the effectiveness of state governance, much less serve as a valid basis for comparison between blue and red states.

I don’t know about that. If you live in an apartment building and someone breaks into the mail room and steals all the packages, the single crime has many more victims than if someone had broken into a single family home's mailbox in the suburbs. It's one B&E and burglary either way.

Edited for a scenario I'm more familiar with.

Not a great analogy in that we aren't discussing crimes with multiple victims.

We're discussing the perception of multiple crimes versus their reality and (more importantly) whether either has any bearing on a rather vague comparison between states governed by rival political parties.

It affects the justification of the perception, and rightly so. City managers need to do BETTER than rural town managers to keep up.

And historically densely populated areas tend to lean left.

Hence the point we're looking at a poor basis for comparison between the aggregate performances of political parties as civil authorities.