Is this a war tho

You can live off minimum wage in Canada in some regions, if you’re children-free. It gets harder with kids, though the state will cover some of it of you’re low-income (Like a couple hundred per months, and virtually no income taxes).

After 10 years working in offices, the last 3 being mostly remote, I hate to say it because I am lazy and it makes no sense to commute 2hours a day to go into an overcrowded city, but being in a physical location beats remote if done right.

The problem is, it is rarely done right. Some workplaces also just happen to be filled with people I will never bond with.

I also fucking hate to have my calendar filled with meetings and useless 1:1. It is worst than it ever been. What could have been a quick chat at my desk is now a reserved 1h long meeting for which I have to prepare and stay glued at my webcam for.

I have a friend who absolutely love remote and webcams. He loves sitting still in front of the computer and making faces and everything. Well I am not like that. I like multitasking, talking to people while I work or moving around. I loved going out for dinner with the people I bonded with to talk about stuff.

Work in the office can be made to not feel like work, I experienced it in at least 1 place. Made me feel like I was hanging out with friends all day. Remote work will sort of always feel like work for me, even with the people I like it is sort of meh. Being on call is too intrusive and not being on call is too isolated. We’re sort of missing the in-between. Anyway I could go on.

I always wished I could simply teleport into the building, because the commute has always been the worsy part of the day, by far.

This is what dedicated AP are for, though if it will works sort of depend on distance and line of sight. Maybe you could setup a directional antenna to catch the signal on the other side with an AP or a repeater. You can also buy a bunch of APs and setup a mesh if the distance is not too great.

You cannot do a whole lot without JS to be honest. My comment was not about Facebook but fingerprinting in general, though I kinda forgot to mention. I suspect finger-tracking strategies are kinda trade secrets so it probably varies. Running a VM still expose your VM settings, which basically let them track your VM around. This is the insidious thing about fingertracking, you can be followed around with spoofed data just as well. The very first time you will login anywhere, whether you use a VM or a VPM everything you touched with those settings will now track back to you.

Using weird anonymization techniques will also make you more unique. Disabling JS, running in a VM and having uncommon settings in general will make you very easy to follow around.

To be honest, I had a similar experience in a workplace, and I definitely did not have the guts to post it before reading your comment.

It is important to take all accusations seriously, but it is also important to verify.

I have seen baseless accusations getting reported and shared on my previous workplace. It was made to sound like a living hell, and frankly you would have needed to be on a psychotic break to experience it like this. This same employee had pledged on their first day of work to print a chart of conduct and equality that would bind us all. It was very weird to be honest. Unfortunately some people saw the articles and believed every words and felt “betrayed” by my old bosses.

Anyway, here’s a disclaimer because everytime I post an anecdote encouraging to be diligent I get replies telling me I am assuming this or that. Let me be clear, I believe Madisson and I would be very surprised if she wasn’t abused considering everything. But still, I like to verify, we must always verify. In this case, it means waiting for further development. You can encourage and support the supposed victim while simultaneously not jump to the throat of the accused.

That is because denying welfare to people who need it happens to line up perfectly with the beliefs of those groups you named. Neoliberalism didn’t work out for the people, only people still voting for this shit are bigots and gullible morons.

Not sure how this relate to “Technology”.

Let me guess, the same kind of people who get triggered about vaccines and own pickup trucks as fashion accessories? They tend to get triggered a lot, ironically, for people claiming that society became too sensitive.

Perfect is the sense that you have perfect randomness. Like the Fisher-Yates shuffle.

I think the problem is worded specifically to hide the fact that you’re creating two set of doors by picking a door, and that shrinking a set actually make each individual door in that set more likely to have the prize.

Think of it this way : You have 4 doors, 2 blue doors and 2 red doors. I tell you that there is 50% chance of the prize to be in either a blue or a red door. Now I get to remove a red door that is confirmed to not have the prize. If you had to chose, would you pick a blue door or a red door? Seems obvious now that the remaining red door is somehow a safer pick. This is kind of what is happening in the initial problem, but since the second ensemble is bigger to begin with (the two doors you did not pick), it sort of trick you into ignoring the fact that the ensemble shrank and that it made the remaining door more “valuable”, since the two ensembles are now of equal size, but only one ensemble shrank, and it was always at 2/3 odds of containing the prize.

assuming a perfect mechanical shuffle, I think the odds are near zero. humans don’t shuffle perfectly though!

To me, it makes sense because there was initially 2 chances out of 3 for the prize to be in the doors you did not pick. Revealing a door, exclusively on doors you did not pick, does not reset the odds of the whole problem, it is still more likely that the prize is in one of the door you did not pick, and a door was removed from that pool.

Imo, the key element here is that your own door cannot be revealed early, or else changing your choice would not matter, so it is never “tested”, and this ultimately make the other door more “vouched” for, statistically, and since you know that the door was more likely to be in the other set to begin with, well, might as well switch!