BraveSirZaphod @ BraveSirZaphod @kbin.social

Posts

0

Comments

1,142

Joined

2 yr. ago

"Bump" is a galactically humble description of a collision with a container ship weighing nearly 200 million pounds.

To illustrate this more cleanly, the momentum of a loaded Boeing 787 flying near top speed is 17,760,000 N.s. For this ship going at just 10 km/h, the momentum is about 260,600,000 N.s. In other words, the bridge would need to be able to sustain the equivalent of 14 9/11 attacks, simultaneously.

The way to tolerate incidents like this is to add multiple points of isolated failure so that even if one point is catastrophically destroyed, only a portion of the bridge goes down while the rest remains intact. I don't think there are many, if any, structures on the planet that can withstand that much force

I completely understand the frustration with Congress. The main obstacle there is the filibuster in the Senate, and the simple fact of the matter is that there was zero chance Manchin and Sinema would ever be willing to kill the filibuster over something like the Equality Act (something which Biden has routinely urged Congress to pass, I'd add).

At the end of the day, there's really only so much that can be done given the structure of the American government. The federal government's authority to interfere with state laws is quite limited, particularly under this Supreme Court, and structural biases in the government make it much much easier for Republicans to stop something than it is for Democrats to do something, all while Republican state governments can act freely at the level of their state. Oftentimes, there's isn't some magical hidden 'play dirty' lever that Democrats could easily pull but refuse to. Short of simply holding a gun up to his face, Biden literally could not make Manchin vote any particular way (and I'm sure he wanted to several times). Despite that, the Respect for Marriage Act was still a genuinely strong legislative achievement.

And to be clear, I don't mean to invalidate your frustration or say that any of this situation is right. But ultimately, there are reasons the mess is the way it is, and if we want to move things in a positive direction, we have to understand the rules and know what the available moves actually are.

Lastly, I'd add that the Biden White House, particularly the DoJ, has genuinely done quite a lot in order to enforce LGBT protections wherever they legally can, including routinely interpreting discrimination by sex to be inclusive of gender identity. Here's a general timeline:

https://www.hrc.org/resources/president-bidens-pro-lgbtq-timeline

Nothing, though the budget reconciliation process allows for one filibuster-proof bill a year if it primarily deals with the budget.

That said, the filibuster is just an internal Senate rule. A majority could simply eliminate it at any time, but that of course may come back to bite them when the balance of power shifts.

What specific protections that actually fall under the Executive's unilateral authority are you looking for? The Presidency isn't a kingship, and the federal government's authority to interfere with state laws is limited, particularly in the absence of a friendly Congress.

Re: Housing, discrimination based on gender identity or sexual orientation is illegal and you can file a complaint with the Department of Housing and Urban Development if you experience it.

https://www.hud.gov/programoffices/fairhousingequalopp/housingdiscriminationandpersonsidentifyinglgbtq

Harassment is, for better or for worse, a pretty high bar, and the President absolutely does not have the power to prevent people from being assholes to us. If healthcare is in reference to HRT, the administration has been heavily involved in pushing back against state laws, but again, there are constitutional constraints.

That aside, I like to think that the Pride flag flying at embassies is a very nice signal of what America can stand for at its best, particularly in countries where LGBT people won't otherwise see any kind of support at all. It's obviously not the same thing, but as a gay kid from a tiny rural southern town, it was always cool when I traveled to cities and saw Pride flags or saw Pride campaigns on TV as a way to know that not everyone was like my hometown.

To say that I am disappointed would imply having had expectations, and I've long since stopped having those here.

Meta will probably be pretty cautious and strict about what inbound content is allowed, since they have a global quagmire of laws and regulations to comply with and cannot just open up the firehose without significant legal risk. I'd imagine they'd only accept content from vetted instances that agree to some amount of common policy.

In which case you essentially return to the status quo right now, where the Fediverse is a small group of somewhat-ideological tech enthusiasts.

The funny thing about Lemmygrad people is that you could tell me that this comment was an intentional caricature and it'd seem just as likely as it being genuine.

To compare forced labor camps where the alternative is being murdered to people making the active choice to volunteer to serve as moderators is a comparison so lacking in perspective that I'd expect to only find it on Reddit, but I guess Lemmy has managed to foster the same kind of behavior.

Are you going to compare Reddit killing the API to the Holocaust next?

If you're under the impression that Israelis universally support Netanyahu, I have a feeling you've never actually talked to any.

He'd be gone by lunchtime.

Why?

There's this narrative that Israel is completely dependent on US aid and would be powerless without it, but I don't think that's obviously true. What military is going to meaningfully threaten them? Jordan has no interest in another giant wave of Palestinian migrants (given that the last one led to a coup attempt), nor does it have a significant military. Lebanon hardly has a genuine government. Syria is a mess. Egypt does have some legitimate power, but also has no interest in a massive war right next to them.

The only regional power capable of meaningfully threatening Israel is Iran, and Saudi Arabia and the rest of the Sunni coalition do not want massive expansion of Iranian influence.

Not to mention, Israel has already defeated all of its neighbors, simultaneously, twice. I'm fairly confident that the only thing that would actually happen if the US stopped sending aid is a bit of a dent in the Israeli economy.

This is just exposing that you don't actually read the New York Times.

Here's an article on the plight of Gazans in Rafah in the face of a potential Israeli invasion.

Here's an overview on the gang situation in Haiti as the government is functionally collapsing.

And here's an article discussing the increasingly common practice of restaurants charging significant cancellation fees.

Meanwhile, the NY Post has such great stories as:

• Kate Middleton officially hits rock bottom
• Rudy Giuliani's ex engaged to Palm Beach energy exec after six months of dating in 'whirlwind romance' (Exclusive!)
• Unions want full control of schools and our kids — we can't let Albany allow it
• Activists lobbying to 'morally' allow trans kids to change their bodies are only doing more harm

Kenya is one of the major supplier of UN Peacekeeping forces. It's not at all unusual for Kenyan forces to be involved in something like this, anywhere in the world.

And for better or for worse, optics matter. You really don't think that the US military moving in wouldn't bring a storm of controversy and accusations of neo-colonialism?

I'm gonna take a wild guess that most Lemmy people use Android, and the suggestion that someone might prefer an iPhone is triggering to someone whose sense of superiority comes from their choice of operating system for some reason.

Biden could be spontaneously replaced with Mao Zedong and that still wouldn't suddenly make a Congress with a Republican House start passing laws.

No, it is not, and I'm not going to allow you to just walk back your claims after some inconvenience. To quote you yourself:

This just means that Sweden will have [to] send their troops to fight wars in middle east for oil companies.

No, it doesn't. NATO membership does not mean that anyone is forced to fight wars in the Middle East. If that were the case, all of NATO would have been roped into the Iraq invasion, but they weren't. The vast majority told America to fuck off during the invasion, and only lightly participated in some minor training operations with the Iraqi military afterwards.

And again, Sweden not being in NATO did not prevent it from participating in other NATO campaigns in a voluntary capacity. Your claim that Sweden joining NATO means that it's going to be forced to participate in all these Middle Eastern wars against its will simply does not stand up to even a cursory look at actual reality. You can believe whatever you like since it appears that you're immune to facts, but anyone else reading this should know that you're not saying anything based in actual evidence.

Also, if you really think that ten Norwegians trying to teach Iraqi soldiers how to resist the groups that later became ISIS is an example of the "horrible things" that NATO does, that says much more about you than it does about NATO. The world is actually more complicated than "US brainwashes the world into killing the third world because oil".

Cheers.

And again, the only mandatory after Article V have been monitoring and patrolling US airspace for a few months after 9/11 and some maritime operations in the Mediterranean to protect shipping and prevent terrorism and smuggling. All those other NATO operations were voluntary, and other NATO countries have happily told the US to fuck off when they don't want to be involved.

Also, Sweden, despite not being in NATO, also participated in operations in Afghanistan. Your premise that being in NATO necessarily causes you to be involuntarily dragged into gallivanting around the Middle East is simply false. Other nations have autonomy and agency, actually. Not everything is about America.

This was all after the invasion to support the fledgling new Iraqi government.

If ten trainers from Norway training the Iraqi military to resist terrorist attacks is your idea of an example of gross western imperialism, you'll have to forgive me for not being hugely convinced.

Unless you're implying that Gaza is a part of Israel, which truly would be a pretty bold claim that not even Netanyahu makes, I'm pretty sure not even you think that there's a genocide in Israel.

NATO didn't participate in the invasion of Iraq, so what exactly are you talking about?

You might remember the term 'coalition of the willing'. The only major ally the US actually got to come along with us to Iraq was the UK. Everyone else rightfully sat out of that mess.