499

submitted 11 months ago by EherVielleicht@feddit.de to c/memes@lemmy.ml

29 comments fedilink hide all child comments

all 31 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] DannyMac@lemmy.world 25 points 11 months ago

After watching a YouTube video that detailed the situation and environment he was in (a horribly mismanaged overcrowded correctional facility), I think he did kill himself because he knew he was fucked and was going to live the rest of his life as far removed from the lifestyle he was accustomed to as possible. He had already tried to kill himself previously. The people watching him are among the staff that are over-worked and have to maintain order in an already overcrowded facility... yeah, there will be gaps in observing him.

However, regardless of whether he killed himself or not, the rich are always keeping their best interests first at the expense of others. The real crime is that they're killing us, just much slower.

[-] CADmonkey@lemmy.world 10 points 11 months ago

I've wondered if he wasn't killed by some cabal of moneyed pedophiles, but was instead put in a situaution where he would just kill himself, thereby keeping their hands "clean".

[-] TheFogan@programming.dev 10 points 11 months ago

To me I think majority of conspiracy murder... still may have merit, without actually lifting a finger.

IMO I don't think the real question is "did the government establish a hit on JFK, MLK, The twin towers etc...".

but rather, did someone in power get a note saying "this is likely to happen and here's how to prevent it", and it get burried.

[-] PetDinosaurs@lemmy.world 7 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

did someone in power get a note saying "this is likely to happen and here's how to prevent it", and it get burried.

That's just how reality works.

If you followed up and dealt with every low probability event (and most events of interest are low probability and most every low probability event would get a note about it in a large, properly functional government), first, it would be impossible, and second, you'd end up doing more harm then good.

Here's a good explanation.

It shows up best in the medical field because who doesn't want to catch a disease earlier? Right? And, no matter who pays for it, there is money in extra medical treatment (despite the harm that unnecessary medical treatment causes, and the fact that if you underscreen, you also cause problems, and those are more likely to embarrass you).

The jist is when you screen (like a mammogram or some political quant writing a note about their thoughts), there is some probability that the information is wrong.

A false positive is when you find that event/question/prediction/whatever A is true, but it is not in fact.

Then there's false negative, when you find that A is false, but it is not. (Additionally, true positive and true negative)

When you screen for "rare" events (which includes a lot of things that we might not think of as rare, or rare enough, like breast cancer or potential criminals), a vast majority of the people that screen positive will be false positive. The lower probability the event, the higher the false positive rate. It doesn't really matter much to the math what the false negative rate is.

This is extremely counter intuitive to people, even when you've been shown the extremely simple math, it takes a while to internalize.

This is just a trivial example of Baye's rule.

It's also why you'll never be able to treat mass shootings as a mental health issue or predict crimes unless you're willing to put a lot of innocent people in jail.

[-] PipedLinkBot@feddit.rocks 1 points 11 months ago

Here is an alternative Piped link(s):

Here's a good explanation

Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.

[-] TheFogan@programming.dev 0 points 11 months ago

Right, but the point is, it may very well be that they were difficult to catch without going into harm on the other side (IE in say 9/11's case having the bar set so high that they'd have grounded air traffic for 15 false positives before actually stopping the attack). Likewise say JFK or MLK's assassinations, also probably infeasible, having to widen perimeter or advance security on quite a large distance from where they were traveling and speaking.

In epstiens case though, it seems like a high profile national news level criminal like himself. could have very easily been sent to a much better guarded prison, not taken off suicide watch etc... IE it seems like all the red flags were there that he would have killed himself if he could... and he was left in a situation where doing so was not difficult, and the cost of ensuring he didn't kill himself would have been pretty low. It's one dude that's expected to stay in captivity, on a case that the whole world was watching. Not really that infeasible to have a 24/7 rotation that has one person dedicated to him at all times.

[-] PetDinosaurs@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

That's conspiratorial thinking.

You have a "plausible" explanation of which there isn't really any good evidence, and where the lack of evidence is a condition for the explanation.

In any case, you're assuming that a "little" decision like supervising Epstein one on one was was made by an exceptional person (and presumably as intelligent as yourself), but the reality is that anyone accomplishing big things needs to delegate almost all of their work.

The people operating there were not viewing this event as too special. Most people who are that forward thinking are not in that position.

[-] newIdentity@sh.itjust.works 16 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

I really don't know what I should think about it. He might've killed himself, but he also might not have done it.

Edit: but I'm pretty sure that McAfee killed himself.

[-] StalksEveryone@futurology.today 22 points 11 months ago

McAfee didn’t kill himself Malwarebytes did

[-] FiniteLooper@lemm.ee 11 points 11 months ago

Norton deleted the tapes

[-] blanketswithsmallpox@lemmy.world 10 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

The dude killed himself lol.

Prison workers are overworked, underpaid, and the vast majority of them don't give two shits about the people they're working with. They're trying to get in, do their time, and get out just like 90% of other people working an hourly job.

The dude was a rich multimillionaire who peddled children to the rich and wealthy in a cell with nothing, with the expectation of being killed by others at every corner, both from inmates knowing he was a pedo and the rich trying to silence him.

There may have been some greased palms regarding giving him the ability to kill himself, but even that's doubtful. Prison is an absolutely horrible, vile, shit hole for most everyone who steps foot on the property. The dude was seeing the grass greener on the other side through the loop of that noose.

[-] Wage_slave@lemmy.ml 5 points 11 months ago

MAGA: But he was one of the good guys. Not like hunter bidens penis.

[-] gonzo0815@sh.itjust.works 4 points 11 months ago

He did though, but they obviously let it happen.

[-] EherVielleicht@feddit.de 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

"HE GOT A GUN!!"

[-] seitanic@lemmy.sdf.org 4 points 11 months ago

Not this shit again.

[-] BellaDonna@mujico.org 3 points 11 months ago

It seems really obvious that it was either extra judicial "justice" that the guards and other parties conspired on, or he was put into a witness protection program for giving up contacts and this fact is so critical to take down trafficking rings that everyone must play along with him being dead.

I can't imagine other rational outcomes, he was high profile, and I absolutely expect Americans to think the vigilante justice is justifiable here, and lots of people would openly support that too. If he had compelling enough information on high profile individuals though, I can absolutely believe a deal was cut for his life, and his death faked.

[-] CeleryFC@beehaw.org 2 points 11 months ago

Buttery males

[-] saltesc@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

I dunno. I get the feels either side is more likely to flip views if they knew they agreed on something.

"Well if the x believe that, it must be wrong! Rabble rabble rabble..."

Then they realise they both agree that he did kill himself and flip again...

[-] Gradually_Adjusting@lemmy.world 12 points 11 months ago

forming opinions in opposition to ideas

It smell like reactionary in here

[-] photonic_sorcerer@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 11 months ago

That's more of a trump thing, personally I'm a fan of facts and evidence.

[-] JokeDeity@lemm.ee 3 points 11 months ago

Conservatives do that, normal brained people don't.

[-] Cleverdawny@lemm.ee 1 points 11 months ago

Yeah, he definitely killed himself

[-] kofe@lemmy.ml 2 points 11 months ago

Occam's razor, tbh. The guards falling asleep and all that could still have been organized for him to follow through on his own plan. It's one of those things we may never know, but iono, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence

[-] Cleverdawny@lemm.ee 1 points 11 months ago

Yeah, and it's just not surprising to me that a very rich pedophile kills himself on his second attempt right after getting his lawyers to take him off suicide watch

[-] notenoughbutter@lemmy.ml -2 points 11 months ago

I don't even know the guy

can we stop only posting irrelevant political memes?

this post was submitted on 28 Sep 2023

499 points (94.6% liked)

Memes

45180 readers

1458 users here now

Rules:

Be civil and nice.
Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

gary_host_laptop@lemmy.ml

sexy_peach@feddit.de

cyclohexane@lemmy.ml

cypherpunks@lemmy.ml