• 0 Posts
  • 10 Comments
Joined 5 months ago
cake
Cake day: June 24th, 2024

help-circle

  • Yeah, the second part is not feasible in the way mentioned in the article with the victim being alive and talking - putting a fire extinguisher into someone’s behind and releasing it will kill the person unless major surgical care is delivered within a very short timeframe (and even then chances aren’t too good).

    Pressure injuries from to the rectum do exist, as people are both horny as well as stupid/assholes. But a fire extinguisher is applying a pressure in the range of 15 bar. That would instantly tear the complete lower rectum and colon, even in cases where the pressure valve would not have been actually inserted into the victims anus but only released closely to it, as the sphincter does open up from far less pressure. A patient victimised like that would either bleed to death within a short time frame(minutes to hours) or die from sepsis (hours to days) with the first option being far more likely. It requires massive surgical and critical care efforts to even make people survive that - and measures that are easily recognised decades later. The patient would receive a anus praeter (articial stoma in the abdominal wall) and require weeks to month in hospital - under ideal treatment situations and only if not dying before that could be started.

    Additionally the substances within a fire extinguisher are highly problematic - military fire extinguishers are almost always powder or foam based. The powder used is highly irritating to the body (and depending on the type plain toxic) and would absolutely killed a guy from the reaction alone. The foam is also highly toxic and irritating in this capacity and would likely also kill the person without medical care.

    So no,as a healthcare professional who has seen a fair share of torture victims from Assad’s torture chambers, that report does not seem valid to me. (And I am doubtful that a arab only publication would be allowed to visit a prisoner in these facilities…twice)

    Don’t get me wrong, I am very sure that there is torture and major human rights violations going on in the Israel’s “detainee/military prisoners” system and these are beyond bad. But creating false/fake news discredits the real reports.


  • Of course one could also make the effort and instead force these platforms to provide actually useful parental supervision,guidance and parental information. But a blanked bann of course is far easier and much more catchy.

    So the 14 year old that moved overseas/away can no longer legally play a game free for 6year and above in a private lobby. Neither can a 12 year old play with his divorced dad living out of state,even when they play a coop without any interaction with third parties.

    All educational resources on YouTube? No longer available. Renowned youth programs from outside Australia? No longer available.

    Even parents who let their kids use responsible to make sure they slowly adapt to social media are now criminalised. Getting your 13 year old a Facebook accounts have full control of so it can be member in two closed groups (local clubs) and chat with relatives? Nope,not possible.

    Technically even using WhatsApp or Matrix can fall under this ban,btw.

    Because it’s wording is so bad.



  • Their solution to central management (Capsman) is a burning mess, when WiFi6 came out for a long time(I think 2 years) you were unable to keep older and newer APs on the same controller, so you needed two Capsman instances. Roaming between them is very unreliable and generally their hardware is underwhelming in terms of antenna quality, etc.

    For one AP it is not as bad, but still annoying, if you want to centrally manage more APs it is a nightmare.

    I replaced my MK APs with Omada with the software controller on a LXC and couldn’t be happier - they play along nicely with my MT infrastructure and are way more reliable.

    I really love MT,but not their WiFi.



  • I don’t think Trump would be worse for them. It might actually part of their strategy.

    • While Trump was worse for them back then when he wanted to play “hardass”, it’s a different situation now. He is far more isolationist than before.

    • Harris has always backed both Israel and Ukraine. Both things are bad from a Iranian regime POV. For them it is much more desirable if Trump stops aid to Ukraine and Putin wins the war - which will keep Europe occupied for decades, out of their way in the middle east and very likely is favourable in a lot of ways to them. If Putin looses it will very likely mean a regime change in Russia - and the chances that Iran looses their last relevant ally are fairly big.

    • The same goes for Israel itself. Trump might have played “nice” with Bibi the last time,but it’s another situation now. If shit hits the fan even more than it does now, Trump will do whatever his base back home likes most. And while most of them are surely deeply against Muslims, they are also/maybe even more antisemitic. And if Trump will do nothing in a situation like that, he wins in the eyes of his powerbase (while Israel and the middle east as a whole looses). The only thing risky for Iran in that situation is the fact that Trump would be far less likely to restrain Bibi. But Bibi is on the way out anyway.

    • It might also simply be an “suggestion” from the Iranian “friends” in Moscow to influence things a little. Someone asks for a favour because a second crisis area puts the focus away from ones own front yard. And having an old friend/employee in the oval office surely helps.

    • Let’s not forget the perversion of regimes like Iran: A conflict with an old enemy can be a very stabilising factor for a dwindling regime. The lack of restraint Israel showed in Gaza and Libanon put even the more moderate forces in the middle east but also within Iran back on the “Israel is the arch-enemey” line. This is the point where the regime now can unite more moderate parts of their internal as well as external stakeholders behind a common cause with a slight “we told you so!”. That is sadly very much a benefit from a prolonged conflict for them.(Which Trump is far more likely to enable them to sustain)

    Anyway: Iran would be surely worse off with Harris - so they might have a lot of incentive to do what they can to get Trump into office.