SysAdmin. Mostly abnormal.
238 stories
·
11 followers

Check Your AirDrop Settings If You Don’t Want To Receive Pics Of Strangers’ Genitals

2 Comments and 3 Shares

The iPhone’s AirDrop functionality is convenient, allowing users to quickly transfer files between devices. At the same time, a small number of perverts and pranksters are apparently taking advantage of AirDrop to share photos of their “junk” with complete strangers.

The New York Post reports that several New York City subway passengers have recently found themselves on the receiving end of photos of others’ private areas delivered through the AirDrop service.

In one such case last month, a woman says she received such a message while riding the train. She tells the Post she accepted a message, which notified her that an unknown person wanted to share a note. After opening the file, she was confronted with a “huge close-up picture of a disgusting penis.”

How Are The Photos Sent?

Apple’s AirDrop service enables devices using iOS operating systems to transfer files with other users over Bluetooth and WiFi.

The system comes with three options for receiving messages, photos, videos, and other content: “Everyone,” “Contacts Only,” and “Receiving Off.”

While the service’s default is “contacts only” — in which only the contacts saved to your phone can send files — the Post notes that many users may have intentionally or inadvertently switched this option to “everyone,” enabling perfect strangers to send them files.

It’s this option that strangers are apparently taking advantage of on the subway. Of course, recipients must accept the message on their end.

“It never even crossed my mind that someone may use it to send stuff like that,” the woman who received such a photo tells the Post.

How To Change Your Settings

The best way to prevent such unwanted and disturbing photos from popping up on your iPhone or iPad is to check your AirDrop settings.

To do so, users can swipe up on the bottom of their screen to open the Control Center. Here you’ll find AirDrop on the right side.

Clicking on the tab produces the receiving options, “You can be discoverable in AirDrop to receive from everyone or only people in your contacts.” Select the setting you’re most comfortable with.





Read the whole story
deezil
1 day ago
reply
YA FECKIN MORONS. YOU STILL HAVE TO CHOOSE TO ACCEPT THE AIR DROP. WHY WOULD YOU DO IT WHEN YOU'RE NOT EXPECTING ANYTHING?
Louisville, Kentucky
cbenard
1 day ago
You're a dummy who has never used AirDrop or you don't even have an iOS device. It shows the image before you have the choice to accept or reject. If you accept, it's added to your camera roll. YA FECKIN MORON.
Share this story
Delete
1 public comment
mkalus
1 day ago
reply
Seriously? How can you NOT have it set up to accept it from contacts only?
iPhone: 49.287476,-123.142136

A day at the office, in miniature

1 Share

Derrick Lin

Derrick Lin

Derrick Lin

Using his iPhone 7, Derrick Lin pairs office supplies with tiny figurines to create these cool little scenes that he posts to Instagram. The book version of his photographic collection, Work, Figuratively Speaking, will be out in October. (via colossal)

Tags: Derrick Lin   photography
Read the whole story
deezil
6 days ago
reply
Louisville, Kentucky
Share this story
Delete

4 Things LuLaRoe Sellers Say About The Stress & Cost Of Their Job

1 Comment and 2 Shares

LuLaRoe, best known as the company behind the lycra leggings that at least six of your high school friends are trying to sell through Facebook, markets itself to freelance “consultants” as a possible pathway to financial independence and stability. But once again, LuLaRoe sellers are coming out of the woodwork to allege that this job is putting stress on their well-being, financially and physically. 
Previously, LuLaRoe consultants have talked about what they perceived as problems with the company, particularly with regard to quality control, pricing, and inventory.

Now Quartz has taken an even more in-depth look at the culture and costs of living the LuLaRoe life, and turned up sellers who claim they are being driven into debt, say they were misled into paying for thousands of dollars in items they could not sell, and allegations of bullying and harassment.

We recommend checking out the full Quartz story when you have the time, but here are just a few of the important takeaways.

1. The Hope

With promises of an endless stream of customers and ever-expanding opportunities to run their own business, it’s not hard to see why many women would be attracted to selling LuLaRoe clothing.

Kayla tells Quartz she first learned of the company after a friend invited her to an in-home party, and decided to join the company after hearing how much consultants were making through sales — sometimes as much as tens of thousands of dollars a month.

“I realized if they’re making the money that they say they’re making all over their Facebook pages and how it’s life changing, why can’t it change my life?” she recalls.

2. The Cost

But in order to make money, you have to spend money. Like other multi-level marketing (MLM) companies, those who want to sell LuLaRoe must purchase their own inventory from the company. And that can be expensive, with reps telling Quartz that they paid between $4,000 and $6,000 for initial inventory packages.

These packages, a LuLaRoe spokesperson tells Quartz, are “designed to provide sufficient inventory to help retailers succeed.”

The hitch, according to some of the sellers Quartz spoke to, is that they have no say in what products come in this initial shipment. To get items they believe they’ll have a better chance of selling, the consultants say they have to go out of pocket to purchase additional products.

This expense is in addition to the fact that reps say they are required to make a minimum purchase of 33 pieces a month, totaling around $350, in order to remain active.

3. The Debt

Many reps tell Quartz they were encouraged by their upline — the person who signed them up to sell products — to buy thousands of dollars more in inventory after their initial package. Sometimes these consultant groups suggest reps take out credit cards or even crowdfund to raise money for their shops.

Kayla says other consultants suggested she obtain a low-interest line of credit to make these additional purchases.

At first, things went well, says Kayla, who quit her full-time job after earning between $3,000 to $5,000 a month during the first few months.

However, the real key to a successful MLM operation is that sellers are always recruiting new sellers. While this means the parent company is moving more inventory, the influx of competition can also cannibalize the market.

Between this increased competition and waning interest, Kayla says she hasn’t been able to recoup her expenses.

Another seller, Ashley, told Quartz she opened three credit cards to cover her initial purchases. And when her sales declined after a few months, Ashley says her consultant group blamed low inventory, urging her to buy more.

Ultimately, Ashley says she was only making $500/month, but had $8,000 in LuLaRoe inventory she couldn’t sell.

A rep for LuLaRoe tells Quartz the reps should “absolutely never put their personal financial situation at unreasonable risk to establish or operate their retailer business.”

Of course, not all reps have fallen into debt while hawking shirts, skirts, and other clothing items. Quartz notes that some consultants, usually those who came onboard early, have been able to make quite a payday.

4. The Stress

Still, those who have struggled in selling LuLaRoe say they aren’t only hurting financially, but emotionally and psychologically.

Consultant Sophie tells Quartz that after falling into a debt trap of sorts where she would buy more inventory in order to muster up more sales, the venture started to take a toll on her health.

When she started having panic attacks, she told Quartz she had to get on anxiety medication.

Another rep said her business began to affect her family life. While Sarah tells Quartz that she was making tens of thousands of dollars at the peak of her business, she was also consumed by maintaining the sales.

She says she finally realized she needed to take a step back after she found she was spending all her time uploading items and participating in multi-consultant sales instead of with her family. When she took her daughter to dance class, instead of actively interacting with others, she was busy managing her Facebook group.

For its part, a rep for LuLaRoe tells Quartz that the company invests “considerable time, resources, and talent” to support consultants.

Still, the company maintains that consultants are responsible for their own success and failures.

“Retailers own their own business and make their own decisions…The success of any business depends on its leader’s own respective and independent business goals, and the strategies they employ to achieve those goals,” a spokesperson said.

For more information about LuLaRoe and consultant’s experiences, check out Quartz’s full story.





Read the whole story
deezil
8 days ago
reply
MLM does shady MLM things. Story at 11.
Louisville, Kentucky
angelchrys
8 days ago
reply
Overland Park, KS
Share this story
Delete

Impeachment and its misconceptions explained

1 Comment and 5 Shares

At the recent Aspen Ideas Festival, legal scholar and former Obama advisor Cass Sunstein shared some views on his understanding of and some misconceptions about impeachment, namely that it doesn’t need to involve an actual crime and “is primarily about gross neglect or abuse of power”. Or as he put it more formally in a 1998 essay in the University of Pennsylvania Law Review:

The simplest is that, with respect to the President, the principal goal of the Impeachment Clause is to allow impeachment for a narrow category of egregious or large-scale abuses of authority that comes from the exercise of distinctly presidential powers. On this view, a criminal violation is neither a necessary nor a sufficient condition for impeaching the President. What is generally necessary is an egregious abuse of power that the President has by virtue of being President. Outside of this category of cases, impeachment is generally foreign to our traditions and is prohibited by the Constitution.

The “distinctly presidential powers” bit is a high bar to clear. Examining the case for Nixon on that basis, and only some of the reasons for wanting to impeach him hold up.

Richard Nixon nearly faced four counts. One failed count, for tax evasion, was completely inappropriate, Sunstein argued: Though an obvious violation of law, it had no bearing on Nixon’s conduct of the presidency. A second charge, for resisting subpoena, is possibly but not necessarily valid, since a president could have good reasons to resisting a subpoena. A third is more debatable: Nixon was charged with covering up the Watergate break-in. Nixon might have been more fairly prosecuted for overseeing the burglary, Sunstein argued, but nabbing him for trying to use the federal government to commit the cover-up was “probably good enough.” Only the fourth charge, of using the federal government’s muscle to prosecute political enemies, is a clear slam-dunk under the Founders’ principles.

Clinton’s impeachment, argued Sunstein in that same Penn Law Review essay, was less well-supported:

I suggest that the impeachment of President Clinton was unconstitutional, because the two articles of impeachment identified no legitimate ground for impeaching the President.

Sunstein explained the intent of the members of the Constitutional Convention in a Bloomberg article back in February. It’s interesting in the light of the Russian collusion investigation that the debate about impeachment at the convention centered around treason.

James Madison concurred, pointing to cases in which a president “might betray his trust to foreign powers.” Gouverneur Morris added that the president “may be bribed by a greater interest to betray his trust; and no one would say that we ought to expose ourselves to the danger of seeing the first Magistrate in foreign pay without being able to guard against it by displacing him.”

So what about Trump? Sunstein doesn’t offer much (no apparent mention of collusion with Russia):

Sunstein, having scolded legal colleagues for playing pundit, was reluctant to address the question directly. Setting aside the impossibility of impeaching Trump under the present circumstances of GOP control of Congress, Sunstein said he was wary of trying to remove the president simply for being bad at his job. Nonetheless, he said Trump’s prolific dishonesty might form a basis for trying to remove him.

“If a president lies on some occasions or is fairly accused of lying, it’s not impeachable — but if you have a systematic liar who is lying all the time, then we’re in the ballpark of misdemeanor, meaning bad action,” he said.

If I were a betting person, I would wager that Donald Trump has a better chance of getting reelected in 2020 than he does of being impeached (and a much better chance than actually being removed from office through impeachment) if the Republicans retain their majority in Congress. Although their healthcare bill has hit a hiccup due to public outcry (and it’s only a hiccup…it will almost surely pass), Congressional Republicans have shown absolutely no willingness to do anything not in the interest of their agenda…so why would they impeach a Republican President who is ticking all of the far right’s action items thus far?

Tags: Bill Clinton   Cass Sunstein   Donald Trump   legal   politics   Richard Nixon
Read the whole story
deezil
41 days ago
reply
While a bleak picture, the last paragraph, and last sentence specifically mean that the national nightmare is not over. And Kottke, as is most often, is right about it.
Louisville, Kentucky
Share this story
Delete

oak23:the level of pettiness, stubbornness and thriftiness

1 Comment


oak23:

the level of pettiness, stubbornness and thriftiness

Read the whole story
deezil
56 days ago
reply
This is like watching power washing. So satisfying.
Louisville, Kentucky
Share this story
Delete

Putin’s playbook for discrediting America and destabilizing the West

1 Comment and 5 Shares

Last week, journalist Jules Suzdaltsev wrote:

Just wanna make sure you all know there is a Russian handbook from 1997 on “taking over the world” and Putin is literally crossing shit off.

The book in question is The Foundations of Geopolitics: The Geopolitical Future of Russia by neo-fascist political scientist Aleksandr Dugin, whose nickname is “Putin’s Brain”. The book has been influential within Russian military & foreign policy circles and it appears to be the playbook for recent Russian foreign policy. In the absence of an English language translation, some relevant snippets from the book’s Wikipedia page:

The book declares that “the battle for the world rule of [ethnic] Russians” has not ended and Russia remains “the staging area of a new anti-bourgeois, anti-American revolution.” The Eurasian Empire will be constructed “on the fundamental principle of the common enemy: the rejection of Atlanticism, strategic control of the USA, and the refusal to allow liberal values to dominate us.”

The United Kingdom should be cut off from Europe.

Ukraine should be annexed by Russia because “Ukraine as a state has no geopolitical meaning, no particular cultural import or universal significance, no geographic uniqueness, no ethnic exclusiveness, its certain territorial ambitions represents an enormous danger for all of Eurasia and, without resolving the Ukrainian problem, it is in general senseless to speak about continental politics”.

The book stresses the “continental Russian-Islamic alliance” which lies “at the foundation of anti-Atlanticist strategy”. The alliance is based on the “traditional character of Russian and Islamic civilization”.

Russia should use its special services within the borders of the United States to fuel instability and separatism, for instance, provoke “Afro-American racists”. Russia should “introduce geopolitical disorder into internal American activity, encouraging all kinds of separatism and ethnic, social and racial conflicts, actively supporting all dissident movements — extremist, racist, and sectarian groups, thus destabilizing internal political processes in the U.S. It would also make sense simultaneously to support isolationist tendencies in American politics.”

Ukraine, Brexit, Syria, Trump, promotion of fascist candidates in European elections (Le Pen in France), support for fascism in the US…it’s all right there in the book. And they’ve done it all while barely firing a shot.

Tags: Aleksandr Dugin   books   Brexit   Donald Trump   politics   Russia   The Foundations of Geopolitics   USA   Vladimir Putin
Read the whole story
deezil
71 days ago
reply
Louisville, Kentucky
angelchrys
71 days ago
reply
Overland Park, KS
Share this story
Delete
1 public comment
DMack
71 days ago
reply
haha, nice
Victoria, BC
Next Page of Stories