So the US government will not even investigate this because of the close ties / relationship with Boeing?
I swear to god, the US and its oligarchy is just russia “at home”
Always has been.
Our pig just has nicer lipstick.
Oh, I was wondering why I recognized your name!
My apologies that you couldn’t get laid in high school.
Are you going to explain this? Cuz it really sounds like you fucked a 12 year old when you were in high school.
How does getting laid in high school equal fucking a 12 year old? What’s the context here?
Jax took that comment way out of context.
The original thread was about puberty blockers being blocked by NHS when prescribed to kids with gender dysphoria.
At no point did a specific age come up, but it’s assumed that puberty blockers would be most effective before puberty.
However by this point in the thread, Jax had commented that they didn’t feel comfortable with kids taking birth control, a different tangent.
I responded, in sarcastic tone (and to a reply to Jax’s post, as in, to a third party), as if surprised to learn that people should be taking birth control or receiving HPV vaccines before they start having sex (as in, not when they start having sex).
Jax responds that they just aren’t comfortable with kids having sex.
I respond with the quote above, Jax replies with:
So you’re either suggesting that 12 year olds should be fucking high schoolers, or you’re just too dumb to think about what you said. I’ll give you a few minutes.
I don’t know where that leap came from, but it followed me here a day or two later.
AITA?
I think there’s a real Red Scare style trend among zoomers with regards to pedophilia. Any time they can find the slightest pretext to link someone to pedophilia, they’ll do it and then call a mob with pitchforks.
A lot of shitty things are done under the guise of, “It makes me feel uncomfortable”
Trans people especially, anything to do with them really, Oh I make you uncomfortable, guess we will just magically stop existing.
And for the uncomfortable people out there, most times the “stop existing” thing, comes in the form of unaliving because we aren’t cis like everyone else… that’s kinda the whole thing
Different conversation. Was talking about the effects of GnRH on the body, it led to a conversation of the similar effects of birth control on kids. I mentioned how I didn’t like the idea of kids needing to take birth control, which then brings us to that comment.
The kids in question would have been 12, right around when puberty starts. So the “sorry you didn’t get laid in high school” sure fucking sounds like this person is saying that they think it’s normal for high schoolers to fuck 12 year olds. You can draw whatever conclusions you want from that, I’ve drawn mine.
Edit: you can look through my comments, I stand by everything I’ve said.
Ah, I see. From what limited info you’ve given here, it sounds like you blew a common saying way out of proportion, but maybe I’m missing some of the more important context.
The context is children taking puberty blockers, which means taking them at around 12 years old.
The context is exactly what I stated it as, I have blown exactly nothing out of proportion. I gave them the opportunity to explain themselves originally, they declined by not responding, so tell me exactly what conclusion should I draw?
“Oh it’s fine that this person insulted me when I’m expressing my feelings (I cannot believe I just referred to being creeped out by kids taking birth control and fucking high schoolers as feelings), they deserve the respect they didn’t give me.”
Absolutely not, if the above is what you’re suggesting you can have these hands too.
Edit: I have to add, I did just randomly find this person again. I did not go out of my way to follow their comments. I just realized that might seem possible.
kids taking birth control and fucking high schoolers
I think this is the issue. These are two separate statements and you’re conflating them.
“Someone didn’t get laid in high school” is a pretty common phrase that just means you’re lame. I think it’s a coincidence that the original topic was prepubescent puberty blockers.
The alternative is that someone just decided out of nowhere to proclaim their love for pedophilia. I think it’s far more likely that you misunderstood them.
Edit: I have to add, I did just randomly find this person again.
I… regardless, bringing this unrelated beef into this thread is a rude fucking thing to do to both them and us. Like i haven’t seen this level of pettiness in a good bit.
Keep it in your own thread. Isn’t that like a golden Internet rule?
The best lipstick.
our glorious pig’s glorious lipstick of the highest caliber*
You are making that up, nobody said it won’t be investigated and the case he was a whistle blower for isn’t being stopped by this.
I do hope you’re right.
I hope every single Boeing plane gets grounded until every single plane gets independently checked by a reputable 3rd party.
But my hopes are idealistic, and the real world is far from ideal.
The case isn’t stopped but it’s a lot less likely to succeed now.
And I’ll believe there’ll be an investigation when there is one.
The article doesn’t say this, where did you get that info?
They made it up. I won’t be surprised if it goes this way, but there’s no indication that’s how it is now.
We exported this in the 90’s. Russia learned it from America.🇺🇸
Makes me wonder, how much does a professional hitman pay troll factories for white washing the crime with “but how do you know it wasn’t a suicide”, specially the ones that are equally professional about it not being flagrant? How much does it compare to cases in Russia for people suiciding out of windows with multiple gunshots?
When something isn’t clearly black and white, without the facts and investigative research, continuing to discuss it usually makes it end up becoming a 50-50% grey area that grossly distorts as much as a completely black and white presumption would. In those cases, the initial “gut feeling” impression and the general education and awareness of a person involved may end up corresponding more to the reality, specially in cases actively trying to suppress the truth.
“Boeing”, a non-living fictional mythos that has been accepted as a “person” so that the industrial revolution could be fueled, did not kill him. But there were plenty of psychopaths with power and influence who would have been affected by his deposition. some who’ve also been spearheading expansion into countries where dealing with and coming to compromises with its lowest ethical lowlifes (some of them also being potential or existing customers) would have been a necessity.
They make airplanes tf is this mafia shit
Didn’t stop coca cola or the banana companies
Didn’t used to be this way till the BAs took over
fuck McDonnell-Douglas
Planes crashed more back then. Statistically speaking, safety has still improved over time even after the McDonnell-Douglas merger. Maybe it could have improved faster but commenters in this thread are saying crazy hyperbolic shit like “complete disregard for human life” which just doesn’t track with the actual accident rates. But conspiracy theories and corporate malfeasance sure do get a lot of clicks if you’re a news site. I’m sure executives were, are, and will continue to be profit-oriented while pretending to be something else, otherwise their business goes under.
Fucking corporate shills everywhere.
They’re rich enough to easily hire a good hitman.
And have the motivation to silence this guy before the entire country is calling for Boeing to have their corporate charter revoked
Welcome to capitalism, baby!
They are also involved in the military and aerospace industry. They also practically only have a single competitor in the passenger plane manufacture industry (airbus). So they are rich and powerful and do not shy away from exerting their influence to protect their interests.
Wait until you hear about the people who make chocolate
They are a megacorp, they have enough money to do what they want
When you have enough money you’re effectively a god in every way except the omnipotently immortal part.
Correction: they make money
They also make military equipment, an enormous amount of it
They also bribe politicians to give them an excuse to sell those weapons. Gulf of Tonkin, anyone? Grenada? Panama? Af-fucking-ghanistan?
Viet FUCKIN NAM
🤘
Both incorrect, they make money.
They take money. It’s banks that make it.
Odds echo in reality. The French thriller “Blackbox” featured a conspiracy around a new aircraft crashing taking inspiration of the MCAS related crashes.
Holy shit some Boeing motherfuckers better go TO BIG JAIL
They won’t.
If Corporations are People, I say Boeing should get the Death Penalty and be Nationalized.
had* better go
Wow. That is chilling and very damning of Boeing. Like really…Boeing is that dirty? Surely not?
If you want, take a deeper look into the *max events and you’ll find that being dirty is the least surprise.
Do you have any fuckdamn idea how many innocent people died by the command of American fruit companies?
Capitalism feeds on blood, it always has.
United Fruit just turned into Chiquita and continued on like they didnt massacre people too.
They literally overthrew democratic governments just to install their own puppets.
A fucking FRUIT company.
And you’re right, they just kept going like nothing happened.
Like really…Boeing is that dirty? Surely not?
I mean they were willing to knowingly keep producing unsafe air planes which lead to several crashes killing 100’s. So yeah, I really wouldn’t be surprised if they also do assassination to ensure their profit.
Also as stated elsewhere, they make world ending nuclear bombs delivery rockets. They’ve profited from the possible destruction of all of humanity.
Why not? They killed multiple hundreds of people so far. Just one more.
probably just McDonnell Douglas…
Boeing is that dirty? Surely not?
Why not?
International profit chasing entities just wouldn’t value profits over human life?
It is a corporations fiduciary responsibility to maximize profits over any other things. That obviously includes human lives.
Does a human life have a value to other humans? Yes.
Does a human have a value to a corporation? It has a value and a cost, if the cost is higher than the value of the human then it is a risk to the value of the company and can be liquidated.
“But corporations are supposed to care about people more than profits!”
Welcome to the real world, buddy.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhopal_disaster
Oh and have you any idea what Boeing has been doing for some years now?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8oCilY4szc
Hint: it involves maximising profits while endangering people, to the extent that Boeing is literally assassinating witnesses so the extent of how recklessly they endangered lives for profit wouldn’t come out.
Friendly reminder that Boeing is not a plucky airline that can’t make safe airplanes, it’s an AMERICAN MILITARY DEFENSE CONTRACTOR worth billions. If I you threaten that arrangement with slander like the truth and facts, they are good friends with people who kill for a living and completely unashamed in paying for their services.
This so much. Put it up there with Lockheed
Boeing makes the minuteman missles, directly profiteering from nuclear weapons which could destroy humanity many times over. They’re evil.
Put another way: there are plenty of people who will eagerly issue death threats, stalk you, and swat you over minor differences in opinion. Think what they would do over serious money.
… Oh they totally killed him didn’t they? You put it in very good perspective.
it’s an AMERICAN MILITARY DEFENSE CONTRACTOR worth billions
Probably one reason why the FAA isn’t immediately shutting Boeing’s shit down, you know when doors fall off their planes mid-flight, and investigations uncover more problems.
I’m not any defender of corporations, by any means, but I’m not sure that I’m willing to take the word of a “close family friend” who “needed help one day” any more than some corporate HR; and “I don’t care what they say, I know that Mitch didn’t do that” isn’t exactly a solid argument to be basing things on.
Edit: I seem to have missed this on my first read:
Jennifer said she thinks somebody “didn’t like what he had to say” and wanted to “shut him up” without it coming back to anyone"…“That’s why they made it look like a suicide,”
I’m never surprised to hear something bad about Boeing, but this is just a woman convinced with, on the face of it, no other proof than what’s in her own head. Unless she’s got a recording or document, the article’s title could have been, “Family friend tells reporter a story”
This isn’t “I know Mitch didn’t do that”, it’s “he literally told me the specific thing that happened and he wasn’t going to do it”. What motivation does she have to just fully make up a conversation? Boeing has billions of dollars of motivation, she knew him from family get togethers.
What motivation does she have to just fully make up a conversation?
That’s my point: we have no idea. We have no information other than that her and Barnett’s mothers are best friends and that he was a pallbearer at her father’s funeral. She could be a well educated individual that is doing her best to make a point and draw attention to something, or she could be someone who believes tons of stuff that is blatantly false and is telling her opinion to anyone who will listen. Either way, (copying from my other comment) I guess this is all more me just trying to voice frustration with the article. Not that it’s unprecedented (maybe even the norm) these days, but it’s always frustrating to see headlines with unsubstantiated claims and discussions ensuing as if it’s fact."
There is literally no other corroboration that could be given, it’s a personal conversation between friends or friendly acquaintances, reported as such. There’s nothing wrong with the article. This is the maximum amount of corroboration for a private conversation (none) and it’s reported as a conversation, with information about the speaker’s relationship and direct quotes. Just because people don’t record their lives in unalterable write-once media doesn’t mean personal conversations simply should never be the subject of reporting. We have headline news stories about US generals’ personal conversations with Trump and his denials, and no one thinks “well, that shouldn’t be reported because either side could be lying and without recording they’re both equally suspicious”.
I’m certain you don’t actually follow a philosophy of “nothing anyone says can ever be given any more credence than anyone else” because it’s an impossible way to live. And whatever high-minded “no one can ever know absolute truth” ideas you have, claiming that a HR rep and a family friend have the same level of believability is ridiculous. On one side you someone whose job is literally to say things to protect a billion dollar company and the other a family friend with nothing to gain talking about a pretty reasonable conversation one might have.
There’s nothing wrong with the article.
I guess I can concede that the article describes what happened, so maybe it was the headline that set off my skepticism. In my opinion there’s a big difference between:
‘If anything happens, it’s not suicide’: Boeing whistleblower’s prediction before death
and
‘If anything happens, it’s not suicide’: Family friend reports Boeing whistleblower’s prediction before death
I know I’m being pedantic, that it’s just clickbait, and that’s the reality of today’s media; but I’ve spent the last 8-10 years watching some my family radicalized by headlines like this (albeit on different topics) and feel pretty strongly about it, I suppose. After realizing a few years ago the negative effect internet echo chambers were having on me I started to try and be a little more skeptical about things I was reading, especially if I agreed with them. Most of the time I just try to keep quiet but, apparently, felt like trying to start a discussion about it this morning.
claiming that a HR rep and a family friend have the same level of believability is ridiculous.
You probably have a point here. I could have better phrased my statement as something like, “I’m not sure that I’m willing to take the word of a “close family friend” who agrees with my point of view than I am a “close family friend” who disagrees with my point of view” or something similar. For instance, if the women in the article told the reporter, “he was very unhappy and told me he might kill himself” I’d still be thinking there was a convincing chance that Boeing was directly responsible because I wouldn’t consider her any more credible just because she’s agreeing with me.
There’s a few accounts on these threads that are really determined to remain neutral and open minded about Boeing, I blocked a different one with the same speech pattern recently
Remaining open minded, waiting for evidence… Must be ChatGPT because that’s not a human thing, never had been!
I am a Lemmy language user and I have processed this request.
Remaining open minded, waiting for evidence…
You wrote “being willfully ignorant” wrong
Well, I for one think some rogue at Boeing is behind the Epsteining of this guy. The company is definitely run by psychopathic crooks and has been for a while and I hope these fuckers all go to jail and the company fixed before more people die.
Idk about these accounts you blocked… but I am always going to advocate for at least being self-aware of being loosey-goosey with one’s reasoning. Maybe it is compulsion, maybe it is the decades wasted being religious that have led me to detest careless epistemology that leads to specious conclusions. Then again … if COVID taught me nothing, it should have taught me that efforts in this area are probably pointless. I must like swimming upstream. I seem to do it all the time.
My pet theory: Some extra dirty psycho at Boeing probably had him killed. Probably to cover up specifics about themselves. It seems pretty clear Boeing is rotting at the head and has been for decades. All these issues that have come up since MAX are the result of deeply systemic problems, stemming from crooked, greedy psychopaths at the top.
But in the interests of being as rational and honest about this as possible, let’s also not forget that this article is based on her claim, and she’s the only one (so far) to make it. People have been known to seek attention with bullshit. It’s evidence, yeah, is it really unimpeachable? Well…
Think about it like this: if there was a dated and notarized statement in his handwriting saying the same thing that she claims he told her, that would be more trustworthy.
But again, pet theory, some Boeing sicko was covering their own ass by having him Epsteined. Totally plausible.
I don’t think this is the last we will be hearing about this.
Amazing how standards of evidence work. I am a Jesus Mythicist and pretty much all we have to “prove” Jesus was real is one guy saying he meet some unnamed person who had a dream. But here we have a direct eyewitness stating what they heard a week ago and that isn’t good enough.
My brother in whatever, for your information that is called a “witness”
And he said, ‘No, I ain’t scared, but if anything happens to me, it’s not suicide.’
He pretty much said “I think something may happen to me and they will make it look like a suicide.”
Unless she’s got a recording or document, the article’s title could have been, “Family friend tells reporter a story”
Yeah, it won’t hold up in court, and neither would it if she had recorded this casual, intimate conversation between two old friends.
Maybe, though, it’s enough to get the coroner to take another look at his death.
I’m not any defender of corporations, by any means, but I’m not sure that I’m willing to take the word of a “close family friend” who “needed help one day” any more than some corporate HR;
You sure have a lot more faith in corporations than I do…
Maybe, though, it’s enough to get the coroner to take another look at his death.
He’s a high profile corporate whistleblower who allegedly committed suicide. Any coroner who isn’t already triple checking everything is way too corrupt or lazy to bother with another look.
The coroner is going to call it as suicide. This isn’t remotely a debate to me. If it is suicide it goes away. If it is murder it means work for the police and a small annoyance to the powers-that-be. The coroner knows this and knows that if they don’t writer suicide their career is over at best at worst they get Epsteined as well.
He pretty much said “I think something may happen to me and they will make it look like a suicide.”
Did he state that somewhere else? Admittedly I haven’t been following the story too closely so I may have missed something there; but if he isn’t documented saying that somewhere credible, then all we have is her claiming that he “pretty much said” that. Is it likely he said it? I mean, I’d definitely be saying it if I was in his shoes, but one family friend’s claim isn’t enough to convince me that this should have been published as it was. I guess this is all more me just trying to voice frustration with the article. Not that it’s unprecedented (maybe even the norm) these days, but it’s always frustrating to see headlines with unsubstantiated claims and discussions ensuing as if it’s fact.
Maybe, though, it’s enough to get the coroner to take another look at his death.
Here’s to hoping
You sure have a lot more faith in corporations than I do…
I probably don’t, I’m just trying to present an argument with throwing on more layers of personal bias
Fascinating
I feel the same about the response given that I’m agreeing with everyone’s sentiments overall and only questioning the validity of a single source. Suppose I need to get a better feel for the site before trying to be more active.
Naw, you’re good. Change nothing about yourself. :) You are spot on and you have my upvotes.
Folks are in angry mob mode and can’t be bothered with even a hint of nuance or reason, apparently. Even if you are convinced Boeing totally killed the guy and state that clearly…
Anyway, peace out man. I hope for once corporate scum faces consequences.
Epstein. Your argument is disproven
I can see you were born yesterday.
I’m curious if some one who disagreed with you - on something that they found completely, obviously true - tried to convince you they were right by saying that their mom’s friend’s daughter made a claim about it, how inclined would you be to believe them or that daughter?
I think we all agree that Barnett suspected that something would happen; and we all agree that Boeing is a terrible company that is capable, and guilty, of terrible things. My point it just that there is concrete evidence of these things and articles should rely on something other than some person made a claim with nothing but, “it’s obvious” or “I know” to back it up
I don’t know whether or not he killed himself, and I strongly suspect he didn’t, but I sure as hell know this warrants an intense and thorough investigation. All company and private emails of executives, with forensics to determine if anything was deleted. Long interrogations to see if alibis match up.
There isn’t enough evidence to throw the book at Boeing, but there is enough to search every single little thing related to them.
There isn’t enough evidence to throw the book at Boeing, but there is enough to search every single little thing related to them.
What am I missing? What evidence is there at all that they did it? Don’t get me wrong, I’m certainly highly suspicious that they were involved, but you have to have a lot more than suspicion.
His death, under suspicious circumstances, objectively benefits Boeing in an ongoing criminal investigation.
That seems like sufficient justification to conduct an investigation.
His death, under suspicious circumstances, objectively benefits Boeing in an ongoing criminal investigation.
This is motive, not evidence.
That seems like sufficient justification to conduct an investigation.
The fact that he has died is sufficient justification to conduct an investigation, and I’m sure they will. But the claim was that they have enough evidence against Boeing to subpoena basically everything they have. And Boeing having a motive to kill someone is not evidence that they did it, and would not pass a judge if anyone were to seek some kind of warrant.
Not sure why you’re being down voted, what you are saying is accurate. I guess the others are of the “Boeing is bad, therefore it’s pitchfork time” mindset and not justice and due process.
Yup, that’s lemmy for you. The facts don’t matter, only the narrative.
“Yup, that’s $blank for you.”
Same shit’s been said ever since the caveman developed complex enough language to say. That’s a lazy, tired, and vacuous trope you’re mindlessly spouting there, tiger.
That’s cavemen for you. Always getting angry over stones being thrown but not realizing they’re throwing the exact same stone.
I mean your response to an over-generalization is to increase the level of generalization to include literal cavemen. I wonder at what point cavemen developed a sense of irony?
Lazy and tired, but unfortunately still true.
Thanks for sharing your knowledge, from the rest of us.
deleted by creator
abcnews4.com ‘If anything happens, it’s not suicide’: Boeing whistleblower’s prediction before death Anne Emerson 3–4 minutes
John Barnett’s family friend Jennifer doesn’t think the Boeing whistleblower committed suicide in Charleston. In fact, she says he predicted what may happen to him days before he left for his deposition. March 14, 2024. (Provided-FILE, WCIV)
CHARLESTON COUNTY, S.C. (WCIV) — A close family friend of John Barnett said he predicted he might wind up dead and that a story could surface that he killed himself.
But at the time, he told her not to believe it.
“I know that he did not commit suicide,” said Jennifer, a friend of Barnett’s. “There’s no way.”
Jennifer said they talked about this exact scenario playing out. However, now, his words seem like a premonition he told her directly not to believe.
“I know John because his mom and my mom are best friends,” Jennifer said. “Over the years, get-togethers, birthdays, celebrations and whatnot. We’ve all got together and talked.”
READ MORE: “Mystery lingers around Boeing whistleblower’s death at Charleston hotel.”
When Jennifer needed help one day, Barnett came by to see her. They talked about his upcoming deposition in Charleston. Jennifer knew Barnett filed an extremely damaging complaint against Boeing. He said the aerospace giant retaliated against him when he blew the whistle on unsafe practices.
For more than 30 years, he was a quality manager. He’d recently retired and moved back to Louisiana to look after his mom.
“He wasn’t concerned about safety because I asked him,” Jennifer said. “I said, ‘Aren’t you scared?’ And he said, ‘No, I ain’t scared, but if anything happens to me, it’s not suicide.’”
Jennifer added: “I know that he did not commit suicide. There’s no way. He loved life too much. He loved his family too much. He loved his brothers too much to put them through what they’re going through right now.”
Jennifer said she thinks somebody “didn’t like what he had to say” and wanted to “shut him up” without it coming back to anyone.
READ MORE: “‘John was brave’: Boeing whistleblower’s lawyer responds to news of his death.”
“That’s why they made it look like a suicide,” Jennifer said.
The last time Jennifer saw Barnett was at her father’s funeral in late February. He was one of the pallbearers. Sometimes family and friends referred to him by his middle name – Mitch.
“I think everybody is in disbelief and can’t believe it,” Jennifer said. “I don’t care what they say, I know that Mitch didn’t do that.”
Just because Barnett is dead doesn’t mean the case won’t move forward.
His attorney said they’re still prepared to go to trial in June.
News 4 reached out to Boeing following Barnett’s death. They provided the following statement:
"We are saddened by Mr. Barnett’s passing, and our thoughts are with his family and friends.”
READ MORE: “Boeing whistleblower dies in Charleston, Charleston County Coroner’s Office confirms.”
deleted by creator
I can’t get past the cookie notice and the phone - which is what I’m using now - is stuttering. Had to close the page.
A good follow-up to this story, worth the watch.
From the video…
“As I’m sitting there, I’m thinking, ‘This is the best witness I’ve ever seen’”.
when a whistleblower dies on the day of his deposition, you have to work really hard to convince me that it’s suicide.
Definitely! But a ‘friend of the family’ is not really a perfect source.
Just saying, I bet Boeings lied more about things that caused humans to die than the friend of the family has so if its he said she said, I think she’s got the superior credibility. She just doesn’t have superior profits.
Doesn’t matter, we’ve already got a rabble on.
They could have threatened to fly his family on a 737 Max if he didn’t kill himself
“We appreciate your candor and willingness to see the truth outed. As such, we hope your family will join you on a lovely vacation, with a complimentary flight on a 737 max.”
“Well shit, they’ve got me by the balls now”
Now that is a big threat!
Oh yeah, now this is an avengers level threat!
Boeing rep: Tragically, it appears that Mr. Barnett was discussing suicide in the lead up to his death.
deleted by creator
hope Boeing get their ass handed this time.
“We will be offering a stock buyback in his memory.”
It’s too bad he didn’t write a short letter saying the same thing and give it to her for safekeeping. As of right now all we have is her word. I’m hopeful that she’ll testify.
The feds: Doesn’t look like anything to me
And it still won’t look like anything to them even after they find out the handgun wasn’t registered to him. And after they find out the suicide note (pro tip: real suicides generally don’t include a note) was written super-generically.
And after they find out the suicide note… was written super-generically.
To whom it may concern,
I cannot take it anymore. If I have a wife and/or kids, tell them that I love them.
Good bye cruel world,
[Don’t forget to change this text to the assassinated target’s name]
pro tip: real suicides generally don’t include a note
The rate in the graph varies between 20 and 40 percent.
What feds, Boeing has been the only entity responsible for regulating Boeing for nearly two decades. I’m sure they’ll find themselves not guilty.
Nice reference! 🤜🤛
Another site in which “accidentally” the GdpR cookie forms weirdly aren’t scrollable so you can’t reject them
It’s not GDPR but the cookie law. Stop villanizing the GDPR.
I hate cookie banners, but I’m not villanizing the cookie law; I’m villanizing all the websites that try to spy on me
That’s fair! The cookie law requires that you can reject just as easy as accept, and mostly you just cannot.
Personally I think the minimum cookies should be the default required by law and if people want to opt in too more, they can do so on a specific page of the website. Get rid of those stupid banners which I have to reject every single time.
They could just respect the DNT standard… yet they decided to ignore it
I’m pretty sure the form is there exactly because GDPR needs it to be.
Also I’m not villanising it, I’m villanising the corporations who only pretend to comply.
How does GDPR affect EU cookie law?
Recital 30 of the General Data Protection Regulation considers cookies as part of personal data. It requires websites and web publishers to obtain valid consent when collecting personal data from users. Therefore, the GDPR and Cookie Law work in tandem in the European Union
This particular instance of a cookie notice is really bad. The gdpr is there for a reason and a lot of websites can come up with better solutions to that cookie law.
Yeah, my point exactly.
This one sucks.
I like the option of opting out, and way too many websites uses shenanigans to get you to accept implicitly or explicitly. And even when you don’t they hide “legitimate interest” checkmarks everywhere and you have to scroll a 100 miles to do them.
I still do.
But sites in which you can’t even scroll to see the “refuse” bit? Haiyaaaaaa
Unfortunately this is the exact type of shit you’d say when you’re battling with suicidal ideation.
People in this situation might consider putting themselves under video surveillance.
Or always stay in sight of two other people and eat and drink only from sealed packages purchased from random grocery stores.
And mentioning on social media so it’s public/informing journalists so they can make it public beforehand that you don’t plan on killing yourself.
The trouble with that is someone might say you DID plan to kill yourself, and tried to frame Boeing for your own death by telling people you weren’t suicidal. Thus it’s preferable to leave video evidence, that could also help catch the culprits.
It still leaves the possibility that you yourself hired a hit squad to kill you. Alex Murdaugh and Jussie Smollett both did things like that. Only for a beating in Smollett’s case, but Murdaugh actually wanted to be fatally shot, leaving an insurance policy behind.
Like Epstein was
I know right. Exactly my thoughts. If you are a whistleblower, install secret camers in your house and always keep a recorder (audio/video) in your pocket or chest.
Although in a few years this is obsolete. AI ftw.
He was staying in a hotel btw for the trial. He had given 2 days of testimony and didn’t show for the 3rd.
Still possible, but harder when you’re not at home.
Gonna come out that the hotel parking lot camera was down for maintenance that night
And the guy at the front desk ran an errand for five hours.
I would be going to pretty great lengths to ensure I didn’t get Epsteined or, if I did, the mfers behind it got theirs. I’d be sending hand written letters to every goddamn person knew that I wasn’t suicidal.
And I would be really careful about my opsec. Oh, you thought I was at that motel? Fuck you pricks, I ditched the rental, took a bus and switched five times, changed clothes twice and snuck to a culvert to sleep, you fucking corpo assassins. Good luck with that. .!..
