Or, In Case You Missed It...
 |
| Image by Steve Buissinne from Pixabay |
This is a weekly column consisting of letters to my perspicacious progeny — the Stickies — to advise 'em now, haunt them after I'm deleted.
Things come and go in the news cycle like waves of fever." -Adam Curtis
On my website, underneath the picture of the very happy baby taking a sink shower, it says Don't demonize, compromise.
Given the state of The Republic, and the state of its citizenry, it would seem that what it takes to hold a republic together (the same thing it takes to hold any sort of relationship together, compromise) often gets lost in the shuffle.
Being a (the) glass-is-half-empty sort of dude, I worry that many of muh fellow 'mericans (Lyndon Johnsonese for my fellow Americans) are so caught up in never-ending Blue team vs. the Red team dramas that they're oblivious to the need for compromise to maintain a peaceful playground.
{Lyndon who?}
However, World Aquatics "...formerly known as...[the] International Swimming Federation, is the international federation recognized by the International Olympic Committee... for administering international competitions in water sports" according to Wikipedia, is setting a good example.
{Internationally?}
Last year World Aquatics decided to ban transwomen from competing against women born that way.
{Just what is a woman anyway?}
However, they also promised to experiment with adding an "open" category for 50 and 100m races in which transwomen are welcome.
From a post on the SwimSwam website: “This pioneering pilot project highlights the organization’s unwavering commitment to inclusivity, welcoming swimmers of all sex and gender identities,” a quote they attribute to World Aquatics.
Unfortunately, for some reason, no-body has taken them up on the offer according to an article on The Guardian website. Go figure.
Penis Pics in the News: Financial sextortion, "...in which predators befriend victims online under false pretenses, entice them to send incriminating photos and then demand payment under threat that they’ll expose the photos to family and friends," according to the Washington Post has become a RBFD "with teen boys being specific targets."
Given the number of horror stories/specific examples cited in a very detailed article, I agree. Geesh, sometimes I'm grateful that...
{Let me guess, this is today's official reason you're glad you're old.}
Getting older, Dana, getting older. However, I was a fairly modest young man of um... average dimensions back in the day so I probably wouldn't have...
{Ah geeze!}
Hey, I checked alright, and I'm delighted to say that...
{Moving on... please?}
Absabalutely. According to "...Lauren Coffren, executive director of the Exploited Children Division at the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC)...NCMEC, which serves as a clearinghouse for records of abuse, received more than 10,000 tips of financial sextortion of minors, primarily boys, in 2022...
By the end of July 2023, NCMEC had already received more than 12,500 reports... ."
{Looks like the perpetrators of the famous Nigerian Prince scam have moved on to greener pastures.}
Nope.
The Nigerian Prince is alive and well according to a firm called Abnormal Security, and is using artificial intelligence technology to improve his/her/their bottom line.
"Abnormal recently uncovered more than a thousand attacks targeting organizations using at least 70 unique email addresses."
{Oh, please. Surely nobody falls for these things anymore, and they're easy to spot 'cause of the goofy spelling and grammar.}
"Spelling mistakes and grammatical errors have long been characteristics of an attack, making them easy to spot even if they did land in the inbox. But with the rise of generative AI, this is no longer the case."
{I've heard that one of the ways teachers and professors can spot papers written by AI is by noticing the spelling and grammar of a given paper is just too perfect. Still, I can't believe that the "Nigerian Princes" are fooling anyone.}
Note from my first quote that they're targeting "organizations" nowadays. There must be a reason... Also, they're not still sending 'em out because they never work. It's my guess the organizations in question don't want word to get out and that for the bad guys it's like they're playing the lottery with tons of free tickets, knowing that, occasionally, they're going to win.
Dear The Guardian, I'm sorry that like many formerly profitable newspapers, you're finding it hard to make a buck, or in your case being UK-based, a quid.
The Guardian, quoted at the beginning of this column, has been around for just over 200 years. It's not been either privately owned or run by a profit-seeking corporation of some sort since 1936.
"Profits are reinvested in its journalism rather than distributed to owners or shareholders." -Wikipedia
It describes itself as being a centre-left publication; I think that clearly-left(wing) is a more accurate description but I'm not a regular reader. But of course, I support their right to describe themselves as they please, and to hold whatever other opinions they please as well.
{You spelled center wrong.}
No, I didn't.
Ironically, given their political/social/cultural stances, they became a non-profit way back in 1936 to get around paying "death duties"(taxes). When a newspaper owner died back then, death duties also occasionally killed his/her/their newspaper.
{Okaaay. But why...}
Because when I land on their website, which only happens when I click on a link while doing research, or a link in something I'm reading sends me there I'll be asked to "Fund independent journalism for $5 per month" and/or "Register: it's quick and easy," that is to say, provide them with my email address.
But they promise not to sell it, or any of the info they collect on me... if I click on a button or two. They just want to serve me better.
Occasionally, I've been met with a relatively lengthy message that informs me that I've been to their site __ times now so I really should consider contributing. Fine, you have my permission to sell any data you compile on me -- although you don't legally need it and will do it anyway if I don't opt out.
If not for what must be some seriously bad karma that has resulted in... well, never mind, there are enough whiney, retired Boomers with pathetic fixed incomes loose in the world, I'd be contributing to newspapers left, right, and center to keep 'em all going.
Good luck, and think about trying truck lorry driving school.
Poppa loves you,
No comments:
Post a Comment
Don't demonize, compromise