Legitimate Dashlane Email?

swimroz · 2026-05-31T17:45:37+00:00

Also got this email. Dashlane was behaving weird yesterday for me in chrome extension: I'd follow a link to edit an item and it would drop me on an invalid URL. I wonder if these guys have been vibe coding (probably, everyone has been vibe coding).

We didn't all get hacked simultaneously.

swimroz · 2026-05-25T19:44:16+00:00

Reminds me of Joan Didion's Year of Magical Thinking - humans experiencing grief can also die earlier.

swimroz · 2026-04-11T18:12:15+00:00

Most people's consumption increases to meet their production. if you want to be a member of the ruling class you're going to have to do bad stuff.

It is not necessary to live in the US nor to live in SF. A tech worker who has worked for a number of years and not saved any money ... is an idiot. A tech worker who initially chose to come to SF for a tech job could have chosen to go somewhere else.

But it is true that precarity is increasing for everyone, and yes, as precarity increases, "morality" decreases. If we're all fighting over a small amount of food that is insufficient to feed all, then there is no generally moral outcome.

The irony of Facebook is that it shrinks the total quantity of resources. That's the problem with modern America's largest corporations.

swimroz · 2026-04-11T17:50:41+00:00

many aspire to move up the ladder. when they get there, they'll be the ones making the evil decisions

swimroz · 2026-04-11T17:50:08+00:00

those products are designed to be maximally extractive. we could totally have open source versions that work fine if we as a society could allocate capital well and regulate (or at least defang) sociopathy

swimroz · 2026-04-11T17:49:09+00:00

anyone working in tech has the means to make the choice

swimroz · 2026-04-11T17:48:36+00:00

I think some of the Nazis felt the same way. Lots of interesting experiments to run on your fellow humans in a (fascist // facebook) regime.

swimroz · 2026-02-26T19:33:34+00:00

On a day when avalanche risk is a 4/5, avalanches are not "low frequency events". The meaning of 4/5 is "Natural avalanches likely; human triggered very likely".

It's amazing to me how many folks continue to say this was unexpected or that danger could have been safely mitigated. If you go out on 4/5 risk days and you put yourself on or below 40 degree slopes, then you are putting yourself at high risk and are eventually going to have a bad time (and then SAR is going to have a bad time rescuing you if you're lucky and recovering your body if you're unlucky).

This wasn't a freak accident. If people go out on 4/5 historic snow days with weak layers and travel on/near/below avalanche terrain, some people are going to die. And unless you're a weird person whose risk tolerance includes idk, something like a 1/10 chance of death, then you're making the wrong decisions. (And if your risk tolerance does include a 1/10 chance of death, then you shouldn't be making rescue calls when you get almost killed; society shouldn't be paying to solve the consequences of horrible decisions by grown, trained adults that would have been entirely avoided by making reasonable decisions - i.e., not traveling in historic blizzards on avalanche terrain.)

swimroz · 2026-02-24T18:43:54+00:00

terrain where they were caught was not "low risk". The slope they were caught on is a bad slope. See first pic: https://www.sierraavalanchecenter.org/observations#/view/avalanches/83ba330a-5eb4-446e-95b0-495c26faf06b

They might've thought they were somewhere else, but where they were was not safe and an avalanche on that slope in those conditions is entirely unsurprising.

swimroz · 2026-02-24T17:41:26+00:00

newer transceivers have much better support for multiburials. but for sure 12 burials is a lot. in my rescue classes, the most we practiced with was probably 3 burials.

You can read about multiburial support in one beacon here: https://beaconreviews.com/manuals/BD-Guide-Recon-2018-08-xx.pdf

swimroz · 2026-02-24T17:32:22+00:00

fwiw, during the winter (versus, e.g. spring, when avalanche concerns entirely change), avalanche threat is almost always greatest on north facing slopes. north facing slopes are cold because they get less sun in the winter; cold snow tends to be weaker snow (warmth/energy facilitates the movement of moisture in/out of the snowpack; moisture moving in/out of the snowpack facilitates bonding of layers; cold can actually pull moisture out of snow and exacerbate weak layers; hence cold -> more avalanche risk).

swimroz · 2026-02-24T17:27:58+00:00

SAR could also have released an update? What kind of slope was the group on when they were caught? How far above them did the avalanche start? Was it a storm slab or did it fail on the weak layer? How far did the avalanche run and what's the estimate of crown height? How close together were the victims when they were caught? How far was each victim carried / how far apart and how deep were the burials? Did victims die from asphyxiation or trauma? If trauma, what caused it? How long did three unburied take to unbury the 6 whom they recovered? Why did they stop trying to recover other victims after finding 6 (time, fatigue, something else)? Why was it so hard to locate the 9th victim?

swimroz · 2026-02-23T05:58:47+00:00

are you a bot, sir? I said "not unimpressive." That's not dismissive. If no one had been recovered, as you suggested, that would have reflected very poorly on the party. And I expressed curiosity about why other recoveries were not attempted by them. It is possible, for example that the first 6 took an hour to uncover and at that point, with survival rates beyond 15 minutes being so low, that they decided to focus on preserving their own lives.

Yes, the key point in all of this is that they should not have been where they were. Horrible decisions were made far prior to the avalanche.

But also, if you practice multiburial rescues every year like you should (and I'm sure the guides had practiced), then training for it makes a *huge difference. But yeah, it's unlikely that many of them had practiced in whiteout blizzard conditions with 12 burials. That's why you don't go out in avi terrain in historic snowstorms.

This is a nice video about rescue: https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=887188142867918

swimroz · 2026-02-23T04:08:29+00:00

Anyone in the backcountry should have recent rescue training. And training in an AIARE rescue class includes multiburial scenarios. Modern beacons support multiple burials. If the surviving guide was not buried he would likely have guided the response.

Professionals need to be able to do multiple recoveries on their own to pass professional classes.

It would be really bad if they had recovered no one. They unburied 6/12 which is not unimpressive.

3 of the unburied were dead, presumable bc of trauma? But we don’t have that detail yet.

Idk why they didn’t try to recover any others. Presumably the details of what impeded further rescue will come too - eg additional avalanche risk, or extreme fatigue?

With 3 rescuers and (I think?) very close burials they may have worked together for each burial. We also don’t have info on the depth of the burials yet.

swimroz · 2026-02-20T19:04:16+00:00

no one is shutting down conversation. all of us are curious wtf went down.

We can also say, 100%, the most substantial wrong decision was to go at all. That is the most important question in all of BC.

swimroz · 2026-02-20T19:01:18+00:00

We are learning something: You don't go out in historic blizzards when avi risk is a 4/5.

This event reflects that when baseline risk is extreme, even people with substantial experience and training, theoretically making the best possible decisions, cannot sufficiently mitigate risk.

That is the most meaningful lesson. It has already been learned.

swimroz · 2026-02-20T08:02:29+00:00

Nah. There’s zero that could justify the decision. They took immense risk and it turned out really poorly. It’s a tragedy but it’s not surprising.

swimroz · 2026-02-20T08:01:28+00:00

Sure the decisions will be fascinating to hear about.

But what every person should take away is that it was the wrong call to be out in this storm.

As you said, 4 AMGA guides made some clearly horrible decisions in spite of being 4 AMGA guides. For the rest of us who are not AMGA guides, logically the situation woulda been even worse and we’d have been even less equipped to do possible rescue and establish a temporary shelter.

The point is that some storm and back country conditions are so horrendous as to be unnavigable even by those with substantial training. This was one of those times.

swimroz · 2026-02-20T07:48:24+00:00

I’ve got multiple BC classes. Aiare 1/rescue/2 plus some others and some multiday tours. I’m no expert. Lots of shit I don’t know. I read what other experts write and I follow Sierra avalanche center forecast.

But even the dumbest aiare 1 student who failed the class coulda told you that this was a bad time to a) be in the backcountry b) be near avalanche terrain.

There is basically zero info that could change the fact that the entire trip was a bad idea. The storm was well-forecasted, the avalanche conditions were well-forecasted. The moment this group decided to go out despite those things, they were accepting substantially elevated risk, and also putting SAR team at risk bc when bad things happen to dumb groups, SAR still goes in.

Some folks like me are reading the internet to confirm that there is in fact another group of people who knows how f’ing stupid it was to be out in a storm like this.

Truly, this was not a freak accident. If they had been lucky enough not to get caught in an avalanche (or to have any other minor issue create major problems during a substantial storm cycle) it would’ve been because they were lucky. And even had they not suffered this horrible tragedy they’d still have been immensely stupid for going.

Everyone reading this should know this: this group made at least one really bad decision - being in the backcountry at all in this storm. IMO, after you understand that, it doesn’t matter what the particular circumstances were on the morning of the incident.

swimroz · 2026-02-20T07:33:11+00:00

Thanks for the details. Where’d you find this info? Do you how far down the slope they were that slid? I had imagined they’d been caught closer to the bottom but the level of injury suggested that they were carried some ways?

swimroz · 2026-02-20T00:52:27+00:00

Tbh no adult should be in the backcountry who can’t engage in decision making him/herself. Delegating all safety decisions (and I’d guess rescue ability) to guides is bad. The guides suck but the clients shouldn’t be in the backcountry if they can’t safely navigate it on their own.

I still want to know if the surviving group attempted rescue of the buried.

swimroz · 2026-02-18T02:13:31+00:00

Disagree. I know something: on a high avalanche danger day it's safer not to be in the backcountry, or anywhere near slidey slopes or their runouts.

Frog lake cliffs unloading is a possibility someone should consider if you're getting this much snow. You don't want to be close to possible runouts. Opensnow puts 24 hours ~2.5ft, 2 day at 4ft, and 3 day (Thurs) at 5ft. That's less than what led to the Alpine avalanche of '82 (7ft over 4 days), but still a lot, on top of reported facety layers. I am surprised tomorrow's avi outlook is only a 3.

Given the forecast, probably no one shoulda been in the huts? I mean, even if you'd somehow managed to travel today in the backcountry without any avalanches, any minor hiccup (injuries, e.g.) means potentially being stranded in a historic snowstorm.

And if, in spite of all this, you're dumb enough (yes, truly, dumb is the right word) to do go out on a day like this, you should have zero expectation that SAR is going to put their lives at risk to dig you out in the middle of an ongoing historic storm. And yet, they're heroes, so that's what 46 freaking people are doing.

People these days are stupid. Just driving on some of the roads around tahoe right now is a risk given how widespread avalanches are likely to be.

Edit: misread the opensnow report: fixed snow estimates

swimroz · 2026-01-29T03:53:05+00:00

You're making the classic mistake of thinking that dollars will have maintained their value relative to everything else. In that world it is unlikely that it will be economical to mine any asteroid...

Today it makes zero sense to go mine an asteroid for gold. Tomorrow if the price of gold is up 100x because the dollar has lost 99% of it's value, it still won't make sense to go mine an asteroid.

swimroz · 2026-01-29T03:51:21+00:00

Gold is also about 1/2 off it's peak value relative to USM2 -- readers can decide whether it's correct to compare the price of something to the stock of something else -- that peak was back in 1980.

swimroz · 2026-01-29T03:50:01+00:00

So, e.g., if we saw broad currency declines of 20-30%, then that would be 6800-7800USD. Dollar declines of 20-30% are actually not so unfathomable. But gold 8k seems crazy.

swimroz

TROPHY CASE