Yes, there were some investigations and convictions, but nothing to on a scale that would deal with problem, nor any systematic change to a level paying huge amounts of money to scammers.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K0ck7hTsug8

"I just been swipin' for EDD

Go to the bank, get a stack at least

This ** here better than sellin' Ps

I made some racks that I couldn't believe

Ten cards, that's two-hunnid large"

(For context, "EDD" is California’s Employment Development Department.)

Just yesterday someone posted a "photo" of a 1921 where a submarine lost power, and built sails out of bedsheets to get home.

But the photo posted looked like a post WWII two submarine, rigged like a clipper ship, rather than the real life janky 1920's bed sheet rig and characters everywhere.

Actual incident (with actual photo): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_R-14

I've been burned in the long past when trying to be helpful to an activist. The accuracy of information provided was never a consideration.

But wow, are tariffs (and other micro taxes) disruptive on getting things done efficiently.

The rest of the article seems to misunderstand FMEA style "write down every conceivable bad scenario in the universe, how bad it is, and then what you have done to stop it", and then spins this as "look at all these horrible known issues they knew about". I hope a jury doesn't view it the same way, because it would be an epic bad for safety everywhere if engineers writing down a list of bad things to avoid and mitigate was forbidden by company lawyers.

Here's the breakdown on more recent conflicts:

WWII, 625 total recipients, 13 Irish, 2.1%.

In the Korean War, there were 152 Medal of Honors, 3 given to Irish, or 1.9%.

In the Vietnam War, there were 271 Medal of Honors, 13 given to Irish, or 4.8%.

There were 36 Medal of Honor medals given out in the wars in Iraq and Afganistan. Of these, 3 are marked as Irish on that page, or 10.7%.

Fun idea, fun site!

The article itself is good, and worth a read.

You can read the full article on the author's own substance here. https://walkingtheworld.substack.com/p/is-it-euro-poor-or-am...

Also, given that this is not a huge number of people, relative to public transportation in NYC, it would probably not make much of a budget increase.

Even the suicide data that they decide is the proper measure of mental health, and according to them proves that teens don't have a problem, shows a 2x increase in teen girl suicide.

I'm going to so something I almost never do, and flag, since this is just bait. I would love to read a case for this with a better argument however.

See this classic from 2015:

https://medium.com/signal-v-noise/press-release-basecamp-val...

AI spam is bad. We've also never had a valid report from an by an LLM (that we could tell).

People using them will take any being told why a bug report is not valid, questions, or asks for clarification and run them back through the same confused LLM. The second pass through generates even deeper nonsense.

It's making even responding with anything but "closed as spam" not worth the time.

I believe that one day there will be great code examining security tools. But people believe in their hearts that that day is today, and that they are riding the backs of fire breathing hack dragons. It's the people that concern me. They cannot tell the difference between truth and garbage.

"Agents" is way too big of a word. Just cogs in a corporate theft machine.

There's a lot of reasons I'm sure, but the biggest is because before a hack they asked for help doing something simple with a crypto address that was later used to test run the 50 million dollar theft that was North Korea. And also trying to drop North Korean linked malware is another data point.

This also hits my point about both dangerous and amateurs. They pulled off pretty sophisticated heist but, had to ask for help, asked for help using a crypto address tied to the theft, and blew the cover on an identity they had been building up for a year.

Here's a twitter thread I put together of both my conversation and others with this particular account:

https://x.com/danielvf/status/1905642180749775189

You are talking about North Korea attackers from a theoretical point of view. For many people dealing with them is just a normal part of work. It's not an unknown that needs to be worked out logically from an armchair.

I'm saying this as someone who personally chatted with a North Korea persona that later tried to drop exploits on people, and the persona belonged to hacking group with at least one 50 million dollar heist. I've also seen the screenshots on many chats with North Koreans.

The skill and IQ level varies widely, from super smart to super unskilled. And these roughly get sorted out into different groups with different MO's. North Koreans aren't some uniformly skilled group. You could be targeted by a team of world class bytecode exploit geniuses who rehearses every move, or by the equivalent of Milton from Office Space.

Dissing Kim is something that is not currently widely permitted in NK. Just isn't worth personally.

Not saying no one from NK never will, but so far almost everyone will immediately stop the conversation at this point. There are plenty of crypto people who have monthly or weekly encounters with NK job applicants.

In the past, they just tried to break into bank computers, then into crypto company's computers. For the last two years, they've been working on getting people into crypto companies.

But now they appear to have enough people to spare than they also have groups working on "honest" employment as remote workers, who may not even have theft as the first thing on their mind.

Here's a federal case where a US woman was convicted of helping North Korea steal the identities of 70 people, and then remote in as them, to do remote work:

https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/pr/arizona-woman-pleads-guil...