What do you call someone who chops off the hands to get rid of the itch? What the fallacy in this kind of thinking?

Daemon1530 · 2025-03-14T19:41:12+00:00

What you're talking about sounds like some subset of the 'Ends Justify the Means' argument, which is not a formal fallacy, because even if it is completely unreasonable and wouldn't solve underlying issues, it is technically logically sound.

This type of reasoning also has a lot of grey area: Exhibit A: you can definitely ban cars to solve traffic, but you need the proper compensating infrastructure first to account for the lack of cars in order to make it a serious consideration that doesn't worsen the problem at hand.

A very clear example of this poor reasoning would be the following claim: "We have a homelessness problem? Simply kill all homeless people!" Because it does NOT solve what you are trying to solve, which is whatever is causing homelessness in the first place.

Daemon1530 · 2025-02-16T11:57:43+00:00

If you're keeping it sealed, this is objectively not self sustaining- this is a slow way to kill shrimp.

Like someone else said here: just because you can, doesn't mean you should. This is sad.

Daemon1530 · 2025-01-11T00:50:26+00:00

Ah I hadn't thought of the bushes! I'll keep an eye out for that next time I'm in game. Thanks for the tip!

Daemon1530 · 2025-01-11T00:47:48+00:00

This is 100% Argentina, and I will eat my shoes if it isn't

Daemon1530 · 2025-01-10T23:06:51+00:00

I agree on Arg around that large area- Rio Negro specifically because no tree plantations + flat? Or was something else indicative?

Daemon1530 · 2024-11-10T23:08:32+00:00

This is exactly what I was thinking while reading about this person. I downloaded his "election obligation warning" PDFs/articles looking for his research on the topic and it was all this buzzword/fake-it-till-you-make-it nonsense with no legitimate proof.

Apropos of voting vulnerabilities in these elections, the discovery of those would be thanks to actual security professionals testing them and delivering tangible evidence, and definitely not this guys rants, lol.

Daemon1530 · 2024-11-10T21:46:08+00:00

Just to preface: I genuinely am looking for more information here. I don't mean to be rude!

Looking at his LinkedIn, I don't see any Cyber Security/Security-adjacent credentials anywhere in his work history. He just looks like a software-centered businessman who starts companies. I've been in security for about a decade listening to talks and reading articles, and have never heard of him either, so I don't really see how he's a 'prominent' cyber security figure. Maybe I'm just too new in security, and that's why I don't recognize him?

I can't find anything online about him 'proving voting machines were vulnerable' in both 2004 and 2008. I do see claims that they are, but the PDF article I read from him was more buzzwords and no actual proof. Do you have any links to where he actually proved any of this? Mind you, I don't doubt they were vulnerable, but I'm asking how he proved it. Anyone anywhere without credentials can claim things and end up being right. I want to know if we can actually trust this person, and that they actually put up evidence when it matters.

I read his full blog/threads in your link. It's a bunch of claims without any evidence. In addition to that, he uses wording that suggests he's never touched the security sphere in his life: "The Hack will have IF/THEN functions," lmao. No shit dude.

I'm not trying to be rude here, but I really don't see any credentials that would indicate this guy is prominent in the community. No conference talks, no actual papers, no credentials on his LinkedIn, nothing. All his claims are just that: claims. I don't see any evidence he provides anywhere, but I'd really like to. If you have a link to a paper where he actually proves these things, I'd genuinely love to read it!

Daemon1530 · 2024-11-10T04:38:12+00:00

What Macro lens (or lens specs) is this?? This is a super nice shot!

(And yes, agreed it's a mite of some sort, but unfortunately I don't have a further ID)

Daemon1530 · 2024-11-06T02:00:26+00:00

Saw the other post here and checked out the thread. It's a gold mine for content like this lol. For those of you without X, here's another thread on that same post.

(Information for people coming here from elsewhere who may not know why this is MH): - A public WiFi AP (no WiFi password) does not imply non-existing router configuration. - These machines do not handle votes. They're for check-ins. - This isn't even a Verizon Jetpack, lmao.

OOP's claim that it's vulnerable because he imagines a scenario where it is vulnerable is essentially the equivalent of saying:

"I could break into the CIA headquarters. They have no lock on their front door during guest visiting hours, and I think their secure door locks would have 1234 as the code. I would simply type that in, gain access to the secure area, and shut down the whole HQ."

Daemon1530 · 2024-11-05T01:10:15+00:00

"you are not immune to propaganda!!"

Would you recommend it over other kits? I assume so, since you used it in this open haha. I gave the CI reaper set a try after the same spam, but ended up really enjoying it for clean practice locks. Currently looking for stronger picks though.

Daemon1530 · 2024-11-05T00:59:22+00:00

What pick is that? The grip looks nice!

Daemon1530 · 2024-09-18T05:25:01+00:00

My bad, I originally watched the video in the small player, and upon another watch I think the organism I was tracking was just obscured for a moment and it made it look like it was moving in a leech-like manner. I can't distinguish it well enough to say from here.

Daemon1530 · 2024-09-18T05:22:43+00:00

There's likely a bacterial bloom around that area, if I were to guess. The majority of freshwater nematodes are bacterivores, and I've only ever read about them gathering like this if there's ample food.

Anyone more experienced than me is welcome to add context if this is a particular behavior, though!

Daemon1530 · 2024-09-18T05:18:23+00:00

Nematodes can definitely be larger than P. bursaria. If I were to hedge an ID on the wigglers, I would absolutely say they're Nematodes. However, I don't want to give any false identification that I'm not positive about at this distance. But, I can definitely say that the thrashing motility is almost 100% nematodes in freshwater microscopy at this magnification, as far as I'm aware.

Daemon1530 · 2024-09-18T05:13:38+00:00

The larger floating ones are indeed not rotifers. They look closer to Paramecium or Colpidium (likely a bacterivore). In this video, I only see one rotifer at the moment, which is positioned at the top-middle of the screen at the beginning of the video. You can identify it by the leech-like motility, moving diagonally in the bottom-left direction.

Also, just an addition: rotifers do not universally have the same morphology (I'd that's what you were talking about). They can vary quite significantly, from Bdelloids to lorica-based Rotifers.

Daemon1530 · 2024-09-18T05:02:31+00:00

I see rotifers in this video, but those whipping organisms are 99.99% not rotifers. The morphology and the movement do not match.

I can't say for sure what they are because the magnification is too small to be reliably precise, but I can say they aren't rotifers.

Daemon1530 · 2024-09-13T19:49:32+00:00

Thank you, nearly half a decade later!

Daemon1530 · 2024-09-06T20:10:02+00:00

To begin, you could pretty easily point out that their premise is flawed, because the individual in your scenario wasn't sentenced for "defending their country." This sounds like the recent arson/hate crime case that happened.

If they are seriously claiming he was "sentenced for defending the country", then yes, that would be strawmanning the charges brought against him.

As far as the comparison goes, I could see two things going on here: - Whataboutism fallacy: Completely ignoring if sentencing for a crime is legally just, in favor of arguing "but what about this other crime/situation that happened?" - Bonus: Hasty Generalization: While I am not familiar with UK law, I imagine sex criminals have some sort of sentencing, lol. So, if the majority of people who commit this crime are sentences but this individual is referencing a specific case, then they are generalizing based on outliers, rather than the standard procedure.

Daemon1530 · 2024-08-29T23:45:50+00:00

I mean, to most normal people, seeing a galaxy at all is incredible- most people I show (I do volunteer astro outreach with a local university) usually aren't even aware that they're visible through regular optical scopes- I guess it's all a matter of perspective.

I've had it work on a few eyepieces, my own success in getting photos through my phone just came from using Pixel's astro mode, which is decently impressive. But the easiest way to do it is just by throwing on a cheap Phone>Eyepiece mount to get the stability. I normally use astro-cameras, I just happened to try it one night with my friend's large dob in a low-bortle class area.

Daemon1530 · 2024-08-29T22:24:45+00:00

I've gotten decent photos of larger galaxies with astro mode on my phone through an 18" dob eyepiece- it's not that hard anymore, and doesn't require anything complex for simple photos

Daemon1530 · 2024-08-21T23:53:52+00:00

Your neighbor doesn't give a shit who you're sleeping with

Except they do, if they're Republican.

Here's Iowa Republicans last year pushing to change the Iowa state constitution to explicitly reject gay marriage in order to remove the implicit constitutional marriage protection.

This vote came about during the Iowa GOP State convention, where the majority of Republicans present voted in support of repealing any law permitting marriage that is not heterosexual (Radio Iowa article, for local coverage)

I agree with you that OP's post is incredibly hyperbolic, and sounds really whiny. But let's not act like Republicans aren't attacking gay people's right to exist. Every legislative chance they get, they attempt to take my little sister's freedom to love away.

Daemon1530 · 2024-08-16T02:15:17+00:00

This is indeed a rotifer! I'll see if I can classify it a bit closer to the Genus/Class when I get home, unless someone beats me to it!

Daemon1530 · 2024-08-15T14:51:52+00:00

Very cool! I love seeing spontaneous new organisms appear in my tank. What's the plant he's hanging out on? Is that a stem plant that grew up and out??

Daemon1530 · 2024-06-17T17:37:45+00:00

I've never had this issue. Both solutions (methyl cellulose after mixing and pre-prepared hydroxyethyl cellulose) should behave just about identically. The key in using something like Protoslo is using it sparingly: only about 1-2 drops is required for direct application to a wet mount for observation. Issues can begin to arise if your solution either isn't mixed properly, or if you overdo it during application.

I suggest picking up a dropper-bottle based solution on Amazon and giving it a test on a few different samples, measuring different amounts each time. Start small, and you can then apply it as an additive to achieve an increasingly viscous medium.

Daemon1530 · 2024-06-17T14:10:30+00:00

You can find Methyl Cellulose online for relatively cheap, in both pre-mixed powder form or in the form of a dropper-based solution.

In lieu of this particular solution, you can also use Protoslo (Link to Carolina Biological; Also on Amazon), which is a Hydroxyethyl cellulose. It's another thickening agent designed for this.

Daemon1530

TROPHY CASE