WhatsApp issues 24 hour ban for WhatsApp Plus users

I'm not sure that WhatsApp has a leg to stand on as reverse engineering is allowed, and could be opening themselves up to legal action. What I do find amusing is this classic FUD argument:

Because you never hear about the application specific voodoo that is in windows?

2 weeks ago I followed a local cop for several miles and counted 7 times that he made lane changes and merged onto and off the freeway without using his indicators. He was also slowly weaving from side to side to just outside the left and right sides of his lane. All classic symptoms of distracted driving. This cop suffered no penalty, yet I bet if the cop was following me and I exhibited the same behavior then I would have been pulled over (assuming of course that the cop would actually have been paying attention)

Last week there was an accident in Virginia where a minivan ran off the freeway. Several firetrucks attended the scene, and camped out in the lane next to where the car ran off the road. Some idiot managed to run himself into the back of one of the firetrucks at speed and kill himself. I still can't understand how you can't see the lights of a firetruck in the middle of the lane you are driving in, and not think to slow down or change lanes. And with this accident occurring on a freeway, its not as if the previous accident scene was hidden around a bend.

For bonus points, all 6 people in the minivan were wearing seat belts, and all survived with non-life threatening injuries. The driver of the car that ran into the firetruck was not wearing a seatbelt - and died. (of course a seatbelt won't help you if you run into a fixed object at high speed)

Police ID driver killed after crashing into Henrico fire truck

And if you look at the stats, about 1/3 of crashes are rear end accidents, and within that group a significant number of drivers didn't even attempt to apply the brakes. That last part was even in TFS!

You can't take away something that doesn't exist.

Please explain why you think I am wrong.

And that comes across as a "True Scotsman" logical fallacy, by suggesting that psychological manipulation is erased by distance.

Given that the case in question revolves around a guy supposedly manipulating women, I don't think it's unreasonable for the OP to frame the statement in terms of female victims. But I agree that abuse in general needs to be prevented.

There is a big difference between having a conversation with someone that touches on things vs actively seeking out and exploiting those things.

Lewin was an idiot, but if he actively groomed these victims, then he was not framed.

In the whole history of people being psychologically manipulated and abused, they *all* could have stopped it simply by saying no, and walking away. Yet they don't. Kinda suggests that doing so is very difficult to do, and that there are things in play that you are not crediting.

What he is saying is that people with psychological issues are more vulnerable to manipulation that those without them.

If you read the full article, towards the end it talks about this particular woman having various emotion issues including abandonment. It would seem that the prof in question exploited theses weaknesses in order to groom the woman into sending the naked pics etc.

In addition the article talks about various victims being from cultures where speaking out is not the done thing.

So while no-one was physically compelled to send anything, it sure sounds as if they were psychologically compelled.

After SNL, I always think about McGruber now.

First of all FFS put a link to the actual company in the the summary, and don;t just link to a blog talking about it. How hard is that to do? Local Motors

Ok .. its a 3d printed body of a car that slips onto a pre-built electric car chassis (from Renault according to their FAQ). But the big question I have is about this statement in the FAQ:

What I don't know about US car regulations is what is needed to certify a car as being able to drive on the road. The classic manufacturers basically get a particular model certified and then stamp out millions that conform to that, and have QA departments that verify what they produce is what the expect to be producing.

But in this case the car is effectively being made from scratch each time on a small jobbing basis. So does that mean that every instance of one of theses cars needs to be certified on a per car basis?

And now they are starting to burn the evidence that one particular class of devices ever existed. In another year we'll all be saying "RT, what was that?"