I have seen a lot in my free time and researched if video games are causing violence, and there is really no precise answer. Many people say that they cause violence, and many say that they do not cause violence. In my opinion, video games do not cause violence, because after all, it's just a game. And really, it depends mainly on the person playing the game (due to mental issues and other things) and the type of game they play. It all depends on how the player's mind works. If they want to see and repeat violence, take away the game or let them play less graphics / violence games (without blood and SFC) that are in their age group. As long as you watch over them from time to time to see what game they are playing and if their behavior has changed, you should completely remove the game from them and introduce it to a different genre. Like RPGs, side scrollers and even free roaming games like Minecraft. If they want a good fright (and can handle it), then introduce them to the horror genre of the games. So what you should do when you hear that video games are causing violence is that you should allow your child to try out the game and see how it reacts and whether your child has negative or positive effects as a result. hear in the game. If your child has a positive influence, let it play from time to time as you watch it. If your child has negative effects, allow him to play less violent video games or introduce him to a new genre. If this does not work, take the game completely away and give it back to him if he does it a bit older.
[Gender Studies] Open question: why so much attention to violence against women when men are more victims of violent crimes than women?
Before you tell me to contact the school board, we did it. You are well aware of this, but since he is a 30-year veteran teacher, he can not be released.
– Offer first-time buyers free courses on safe maintenance, use and retention of firearms. Some organizations already offer such courses, but there has to be more scope to get people aware of these options.
– Offer tax breaks for those who buy a safe to store firearms. Many of the weapons used for violence each year are stolen from legally compliant homes.
– Urge insurance companies to recognize mental health as important as physical health. People in need of help should be able to seek them instead of letting their problems subside.
-Final and above all, encourage the media and politicians to stop convincing Americans that anyone who is not quite on their side is their enemy. We have somehow lost the ability to debate in a healthy way, and have become rageaholics. If the bad influencers only give the Americans a little air to calm down the hell, we could make progress.
Should animals not be in cages?
On my Windows 10 computer, I have the ability to set up a PIN with Windows Hello (I think that's because of this program). My regular Outlook password consists of more than 15 characters mixed with uppercase and lowercase letters as well as numbers and symbols. My PIN consists of only a few digits. Suppose I had an eight-digit password, that's just 10 only options. With something like the Hak5 Rubber Ducky, that's probably trivial, especially with a bit of social technology / research.
I did not personally try to enter some wrong PINS, but I wonder if anyone has an official source / literature explaining the security process.
var rm = "read_more …";
var o = "… read less";
Var setting height = 20; // 20; //
Fairy Tales to Strengthen the Gender Role … (+ Link to Domestic Violence …?)
The Duluth model of violence used by VAWA states that men are almost always the instigators of domestic violence, despite many studies on the contrary. Obviously, it is not gender neutral to encourage the police to assume that men are likely to be the instigators when in fact the opposite is the case.
Male victims are denied access to the vast majority of VAWA-funded houses for domestic violence. Obviously this is not gender neutral. When men call DV hotlines, they are regularly denied the same help that female victims receive. This, in turn, is not gender neutral.
Conclusion: VAWA was developed by feminists for women. This is not gender neutral.
AFAIK The recommended way to mitigate brute-force attacks is to lock an account, for example, for 15 minutes (possibly escalating lock time if the attack continues after that?), For example after five failed login attempts.
I understand the rationale (brute force reduction), but there is still one thing that worries me. Is not the site vulnerable to malicious account lockouts?
Less severe version: A little troll does not like user X, so he enters an incorrect password for account X five times in a row. Repeat after 15 minutes.
Stricter version: Full-blown DOS attack, automated brute-force attack against the Webstore's recently active users, just to trigger the locking mechanism. Let's say the site has about 1000 registrations per day. Attacking users who logged in last week = 7000 or less, actually less, say only 3500; 5 login attempts = 17500 login attempts, I do not know, but that definitely seems feasible, right? And that's a pretty popular site: for sites that are vulnerable to such attacks (Internet forums?), These numbers may even be two orders of magnitude lower!
I do not understand this practice. Is not it reducing brutal attacks that victimize password cracking, opening up obvious vulnerabilities to DOS attacks?