I’d trust what the NHS has to think about it over some random on lemmy
Agreed that you shouldn't trust random Lemmy comments. But the NHS on this issue is very driven by politics, rather than actual evidence of what provides the best outcomes for people. Here's a well referenced analysis from a few years ago. And for example, the Dutch Health Council has a very different position than the NHS - I mention that mostly to illustrate that any given national health organisation isn't inherently right, but I do also believe the Dutch one follows the scientific evidence more closely.
So no, nobody should be excluded from this discussion.
I get where you're coming from but I fear that by making a point about "regret", you've (perhaps unwittingly) contributed to scaremongering in contradiction to the available evidence (which points to that being only a tiny fraction of trans people). I don't think it's unfair to ask you to check your facts before posting and/or acknowledge a correction.
... make a life altering and irreversible decision ...
Not providing healthcare is also a life altering and irreversible decision. As others have commented here, the later in life treatment is started, the more irreversible dysphoric changes will happen to that person's body in the meantime, with generally poorer mental health outcomes. In particular, puberty blockers' function is to pause those irreversible changes, not to cause changes.
Or for the hell of it, write your web client with its encryption code in plain js rather than minifying it or using a framework. Then someone can view source on the web page and literally see the client source which is running.
Not the most maintainable solution of course, but highly transparent.
It's not the server code which is the question though, it's the client side, which either way is downloaded from somewhere you control (whether in minified js to run in the browser, or binary blob of a desktop app). A malicious developer can quite easily insert different code rather than the published source in either situation.
I guess if you have a traceable build pipeline which is entirely under control of a trusted cloud provider, that might do it.
But if so then there's no reason you can't make the web client "binary" available in the same way, as say a webroot zip or a container image. People can run it themselves against your backend api, or audit the frontend code your server is serving against the trusted version.
Something along these lines is a good idea, but be aware you need extra considerations to keep the e2ee intact. If like most websites you would send the password to the server to login, and if you derive the private key from the password, suddenly the server would have your private key.
There's probably something you can do with hashing before sending to the server on login, but I don't have enough confidence to be definitive on that.
The user's going to have to trust your code one way or another. Making it a separately downloaded extension/application, rather than some js in the browser page, doesn't change that.
A lot of relay boxes will both detect the switch position and toggle the power, so you should be able to get rid of all smart plugs that you were planning to use for this light.
You may have better luck with a smart zigbee switch to replace the switch. Be careful that it complies with your local regulations etc.
If you want the aesthetic of the current switch, you can alternatively get relay modules which would sit in the box behind the switch and connect both to the switch and the socket.
If you don't want to mess with the in wall wiring, you can get covers that sit over a wall switch and contain/mount a battery smart switch.
If none of that suits, sounds like you're on the right track with powering the light from a non switched socket and using the presence/absence of a second device to identify the switch position. But I don't have advice on the fine details.
Your take doesn't really fit with the timeline described in the article. If the police hadn't screwed up, it would have come out before he became MP (and presumably he wouldn't have).
It would be interesting to know how much of this is because the same factors which trigger care proceedings are also likely to harm the mother, and how much is because the care proceedings cause the harm. Either way, it's a big number and clearly more support needs to be available.
I think we also have to remember that the care proceedings are there to protect the child, and in theory are already a last resort after support has failed. Though I'm sure there's work to be done to improve that in practice.
One train developed a fault which caused it to stop. The second one, as seen on its dashcam, drove through a red signal (which it should have stopped at) and into the back of the first. They are still investigating why the second one didn't stop at the signal and whether that might include brake failure, safety system failure, driver error, and/or any other factors.
Agreed, the words on the screen are not alphabetical (I'm just theorising there's a hidden database column which is).
But in my book, if they're mostly alphabetical, that implies the intention was to be fully alphabetical and something's gone wrong. But maybe that's just me 😂
Agreed that you shouldn't trust random Lemmy comments. But the NHS on this issue is very driven by politics, rather than actual evidence of what provides the best outcomes for people. Here's a well referenced analysis from a few years ago. And for example, the Dutch Health Council has a very different position than the NHS - I mention that mostly to illustrate that any given national health organisation isn't inherently right, but I do also believe the Dutch one follows the scientific evidence more closely.
I get where you're coming from but I fear that by making a point about "regret", you've (perhaps unwittingly) contributed to scaremongering in contradiction to the available evidence (which points to that being only a tiny fraction of trans people). I don't think it's unfair to ask you to check your facts before posting and/or acknowledge a correction.
Not providing healthcare is also a life altering and irreversible decision. As others have commented here, the later in life treatment is started, the more irreversible dysphoric changes will happen to that person's body in the meantime, with generally poorer mental health outcomes. In particular, puberty blockers' function is to pause those irreversible changes, not to cause changes.
Resilient to these kinds of problems? Apparently not
I feel like dadjokes would also appreciate it
I'm glad we have the BBC and I follow its news, but it has its problems and deserves criticism on some fronts.
Not an exhaustive list by any means but it's very prone to legitimising harmful attitudes by false equivalence, and it's very TERFy/transphobic.
Or for the hell of it, write your web client with its encryption code in plain js rather than minifying it or using a framework. Then someone can view source on the web page and literally see the client source which is running.
Not the most maintainable solution of course, but highly transparent.
It's not the server code which is the question though, it's the client side, which either way is downloaded from somewhere you control (whether in minified js to run in the browser, or binary blob of a desktop app). A malicious developer can quite easily insert different code rather than the published source in either situation.
I guess if you have a traceable build pipeline which is entirely under control of a trusted cloud provider, that might do it.
But if so then there's no reason you can't make the web client "binary" available in the same way, as say a webroot zip or a container image. People can run it themselves against your backend api, or audit the frontend code your server is serving against the trusted version.
Something along these lines is a good idea, but be aware you need extra considerations to keep the e2ee intact. If like most websites you would send the password to the server to login, and if you derive the private key from the password, suddenly the server would have your private key.
There's probably something you can do with hashing before sending to the server on login, but I don't have enough confidence to be definitive on that.
The user's going to have to trust your code one way or another. Making it a separately downloaded extension/application, rather than some js in the browser page, doesn't change that.
Yep. Had to go find the history in settings to actually read it.
A lot of relay boxes will both detect the switch position and toggle the power, so you should be able to get rid of all smart plugs that you were planning to use for this light.
The relay should have these connections:
You may have better luck with a smart zigbee switch to replace the switch. Be careful that it complies with your local regulations etc.
If you want the aesthetic of the current switch, you can alternatively get relay modules which would sit in the box behind the switch and connect both to the switch and the socket.
If you don't want to mess with the in wall wiring, you can get covers that sit over a wall switch and contain/mount a battery smart switch.
If none of that suits, sounds like you're on the right track with powering the light from a non switched socket and using the presence/absence of a second device to identify the switch position. But I don't have advice on the fine details.
Your take doesn't really fit with the timeline described in the article. If the police hadn't screwed up, it would have come out before he became MP (and presumably he wouldn't have).
It would be interesting to know how much of this is because the same factors which trigger care proceedings are also likely to harm the mother, and how much is because the care proceedings cause the harm. Either way, it's a big number and clearly more support needs to be available.
I think we also have to remember that the care proceedings are there to protect the child, and in theory are already a last resort after support has failed. Though I'm sure there's work to be done to improve that in practice.
Here's the initial statement from the RAIB https://www.gov.uk/government/news/collision-between-two-passenger-trains-near-elstow - pirc_lover had it about right
One train developed a fault which caused it to stop. The second one, as seen on its dashcam, drove through a red signal (which it should have stopped at) and into the back of the first. They are still investigating why the second one didn't stop at the signal and whether that might include brake failure, safety system failure, driver error, and/or any other factors.
Oh that one's a word wrap https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Svalbard_and_Jan_Mayen
Agreed, the words on the screen are not alphabetical (I'm just theorising there's a hidden database column which is).
But in my book, if they're mostly alphabetical, that implies the intention was to be fully alphabetical and something's gone wrong. But maybe that's just me 😂
I thought about codes but wouldn't that put Germany before Denmark? Maybe there's some other code system
It's not claiming, but it quite clearly is.
It's just that Great Britain and the Hellenic Republic have a different display text.
I think I found it on a random internet list, but thanks for the link. Now I know many more ology words...
Ferroequinologist: one who studies trains