Cataphract @ Cataphract @lemmy.ko4abp.com

Posts

1

Comments

54

Joined

2 yr. ago

1. those of us paying attention, and have a basic grasp on history, know
2. incredibly ignorant and short-sighted
3. isn’t a fucking game, and it’s not a joke
4. throwing away votes on Cornell fucking West
5. get with reality
6. take responsibility for ushering in the end of our Republic

These are the types of conversations that are non-productive and show you have nothing meaningful to add without belittling or insulting others with opposing opinions (which I will not engage with for my own sanity if the same rhetoric is used in a reply). If you wish to converse about actual policies or facts with references/sources, then I'm here for that. I will address the only two points you made in your 150+ word reply from this point on.

What about Florida means I should remove my free will of choice to protect my free will of choice? Because a southern conservative state is passing conservative policies? What is the next presidential run of Biden going to do about the Florida microcosm in which you have evoked as reasoning? Here are some references in which I see the battle inside of Florida to continue at the state and local level,

• DeSantis Crony SHREDDED By FED UP Florida College Parent

• Ron DeSantis booed at memorial for victims of Florida mass shooting
• At New College of Florida, a ‘ridiculously high’ number of faculty are gone(quiting)
• Ron DeSantis' Approval Rating Has Collapsed
• DeSantis fatigue grows among Florida Republicans as 2024 campaign falters
• Opponents hold 'day without immigrants' in Florida to protest new restrictions
• Florida Insurance Crisis Explained: Why Multiple Insurers Are Leaving State
• Disney Files Another Suit Against DeSantis’ Board Seeking Damages From Feud While Gov. Tries To ‘Move On’

I think we view the microcosm of Florida differently, one of fear and one of hopefulness.

"Republicans surpass Democrats in terms of their voter registration numbers recently for the first time in state history...Democrats sort of gave up on Florida this cycle and chose to spend their money elsewhere. And, you know, you can argue whether or not that was a correct strategy, but they did obviously have victories elsewhere. But their margins in Florida were just - the losses are so gigantic, in part because the Democratic candidates there received very little support from national donors and really faced a massive fundraising disadvantage. So they weren't really able to get their message out there." (npr-2022)

So a state that the democratic party purposefully didn't fight to support is now our fear to continue supporting the democratic party?

“Republicans focused on the ultimate goal,” said Fernand Amandi, a Miami-based Democratic pollster who helped former President Barack Obama win the state in 2008 and 2012. “They thought things out in 10-year cycles. They built a permanent campaign apparatus. They started recruiting candidates to run for local office and springboarding them into higher office. They registered voters and managed the margins.” (the hill)

Please explain to me how I'm suppose to "get" Ranked Choice Voting (RCV). Do you know of it's history and/or any legislation brought forth by the one party we are allowed to vote for? We're coming up on near 200 years after the civil war, how many states have RCV currently in main elections and how was that achieved? 2, only 2 states both with ballot initiatives from other sources and not introduced by the Democratic party. One from Alaska which was heavily funded by outside the state (source) and another in Maine which the Democratic Governor refused to sign,

On September 6, 2019, Governor Janet Mills allowed the bill to become law without her signature, which delayed it from taking effect until after the 2020 presidential primaries in March (source). A "people's veto" in 2018, approved by voters, rejected parts of the new law that sought to delay RCV's implementation until 2022. (source).

RCV has been pushed in spite of the democratic parties antics, but their the only way to achieve this option? Have you noticed that all of this discourse has nothing to do with Cornel West in which you've already used profanity with his name as a means to disenfranchise with no true reasoning? You're being strangled and are asking them to please continue while begging them to save you.

Sanders said he agrees it “certainly is not” the best economy the U.S. could create, he called on progressives to coalesce around Biden..... I think we’ve got to bring the entire progressive community to defeat Trump or whoever the Republican nominee will be, [and] support Biden

(bold by me)

This is just kinda sad and heart breaking. I just don't get it, with this rhetoric there is never an end and it's for a candidate who's not even that great of a choice for the people. Now it's not even "Trump" that's the reasoning, just....anyone who's the republican nominee?

“Where I disagree with my good friend, Cornel West, is I think in these really very difficult times, where there is a real question whether democracy is going to remain in the United States of America.

This is a guy who fought in the civil rights era, he above anyone else should know Democracy will always be threatened.

Democracy is a system of government and form of liberalism in which state power is vested in the people, or the general population of a state based on principles of liberty and free will. source

How is true Democracy being upheld if you're voting under duress with fear mongering threatening to take the very thing that's being stolen when told this is the only path forward? The republican party is a shit show right now. The red wave scare that never happened in 2022, the front-runner nominee indicted under multiple charges, the completely abysmal performance of the republican debate, in-fighting between their zealous factions, on and on we must not look at the reality of what's happening before us. We must simply check-mark the D box without looking into anything and all will be saved.

Can you recommend any good soldering gear for an intermediate level? I've done plenty of soldering over the years but have always used crappy low end products. It's always been a struggle to properly do a clean-true solder (not just heating the solder like I see everywhere) even though I try to meticulously maintain my equipment. I'm hoping that it's just the equipment I use and a higher end one will make things a breeze like I see the professional's use.

It's really a pain in my ass. On top of maintaining the equipment I have whole setups I've constructed to hold wires and equipment snugly so I can properly apply heat. I purchased a high temp kit but it's cheap as well and still sometimes run into the same problem, with the smaller components and projects though I'm afraid to use it and overheat something that can't handle it.

It would explain my dentist. Definitely an expensive hobby with what I get charged.

Could you elaborate further on what you're saying? I've read the article, seems like standard security clearance stuff for sensitize material. Musk didn't become a citizen of the US till 2002 if what I'm reading is correct and I don't think they have a problem hiring staff from outside of the US.

I've just recently ran into a new company advertising besides slot lights and it made the movie unwatchable. Slot lights will usually throw in 2-3 ad breaks which really annoy me because the audio levels are always pumped way up and it breaks the immersion in the narrative, followed with scattered smaller banner ads littered throughout the run time.

This new company slapped a huge banner ad that takes up 1/3 of the screen that's present during the entire run time. Just insane when it comes to marketing because I can't even remember the company and made me switch off. VPN + torrent will be a blessing when I can find better versions and get off these streaming sites that just carry them.

While the current definition certainly fits that description, it actually has a longer history.

Woke is an adjective derived from African-American Vernacular English (AAVE) meaning "alert to racial prejudice and discrimination".[1][2] Beginning in the 2010s, it came to encompass a broader awareness of social inequalities such as sexism and LGBT rights. Woke has also been used as shorthand for some ideas of the American Left involving identity politics and social justice, such as white privilege and slavery reparations for African Americans.

The phrase stay woke has been present in AAVE since the 1930s. In some contexts, it referred to an awareness of social and political issues affecting African Americans. The phrase was uttered in recordings from the mid-20th century by Lead Belly and, post-millennium, by Erykah Badu.

(source)

I saw someone else on another post the same, the piped videos have been working for me. I am on firefox desktop though not mobile or through a 3rd party app if that makes a difference.

I don't know about upholding time honored traditions, seems contradictory and subjective to me when your later stance includes an example of the Quran (another time honored tradition you don't agree with). I don't agree with making it illegal for anyone to attend school so it seems like a double edge sword that's based solely on a personal morality which is hard to codify for an entire population.

I also agree a private protest is no protest at all, but it becomes complicated when you're targeting a religious group's texts just because bad faith actors are using it for control. Even burning their flag seems weird when it's not the people of that country making the decisions but by the administration in charge (I'm not sure on what the target for the protest should be then in that case though).

Constitutionally you have to make a decision, I believe this has been debated and somewhat agreed upon though that access to a happy life (access to healthcare and freedom of religion) is more important than the right to "burn shit" as one has been documented and burning is not mentioned in most or any constitutions. Though freedom of expression is, which again becomes complicated when that expression is wished to be expressed through destruction of property (public/private). Again, I don't have a particular stance on this subject but just pointing out contradictions in the arguments to better understand the ideology behind everyone's thoughts.

Personally this feels like a contradiction.

They can be arrested or just refused entry if they are known to be connected to extremist groups. They should be screened as any other person traveling to Denmark..... bad domestic actors use it as a means to push some other (anti freedom) agenda.

State surveillance measures taken after 9/11 is part of the anti-freedom agenda to me. To effectively screen or establish connection to an extremist groups requires enhanced surveillance for effectiveness and arresting anyone with even a distant connection seems dubious (what type of connection, family, friends, being tricked into going to one meeting, etc). The people defining what an "extremist group" is can also be nefarious if bad actors are in play (think of the anti-communism/socialism scare that is portrayed in the recent Oppenheimer flick).

Plenty of good or interesting points being made by both sides so I appreciate the conversations. I'm not too sure of what the problem is though when the discussion and article mostly revolves around public spaces. Usually there are gathering/event requirements around anything that constitutes pyrotechnics or the use of fire in a performance as that can be a hazard and special precautions need to be followed (fire extinguishers, etc). I'm not too sure about the laws currently on the books of most countries but I doubt many places allow you to just walk up to a street corner and start a fire whether the item you're burning is your property or not.

I'm also confused on the double standard of what constitutes public or private when it comes to online media. I think this is something that needs to be fleshed out more in this day and age. For instance the article references a current law Denmark has on the books,

The ban is expected to be added to a section of the criminal code that bans public insult of a foreign state, its flag or other symbol.

Is social media/the internet a public space? If so, does posting a video recorded on private property and then uploading it to said online public space nullify the private property? I've seen a lot of people use this double standard only when it benefits them. For instance, if you typed out something online that's considered "free speech" but violates civil law because of it's context then they are in the wrong. On the flip side, if you record a video of someone having a conversation at a private backyard bbq and upload it, has the person broken a law when they weren't in "public" during the recording?

The ban above is a great example to use. I, myself, feel like the criminal code goes a little too far with no public insults of a foreign state. How does that work out with the scenario I presented when the video gets released. I'm not sure if the criminal code even touches on the digital aspect of it, or who is at fault (the uploader, the person making the statements, or the hosting site).

Another ironic stance I'm seeing is the freedom/protection of expression being used to allow the public burning of books and condemning those who are against it. There are specific and recognized groups which receive protections under the law from discrimination and targeting of hate speech (the Denmark suggested law also covers bibles so it's not just a Quran issue). Are we picking and choosing who these protections are allowed for based on our opinion on whether we agree with them or not?

For example if religious text burning is allowed for a public display, are all forms of expression then allowed? Burning a cross in front of an historically African American church, burning a pride flag at a pride march, burning baby dolls in front of an abortion clinic, political rivals, medical clinics that perform care for transitioning, hell even nazis burning disney shit outside of disney world?

If you're of the belief that all of this should be allowed under the umbrella of freedom of speech/expression, what do you feel should be the governments stance on protection of it's citizens from harassment in public spaces? Should the government even address these problems, or is it the same as no one should expect privacy in a public space so therefor expect persecution and harassment as well? How does this not effect businesses and organizations from being targeted with hostile forces? I'm reminded of the civil rights era, groups of white nationalists armed and congregating outside of a business to intimidate anyone of color from using the premises or social services. Groups will maintain these tactics and multiply if there is no resistance from a governmental stance, this will only heighten confrontations when opposing groups are formed to combat these scenarios leading to civil unrest, physical harm/altercations, and potentially death of innocent bystanders if something were to escalate.

I am not of any of those targeted groups, not a policy maker, and have an indifferent stance so I'm open to honest debate on everyone's side. I also feel like the remarks made by OIC needs to be investigated,

The Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) called on its members to take appropriate action against countries where the Quran was being desecrated.

Any group that can be seen as calling for harm to members of that countries population should have legal ramifications in that country, but I'm unsure of what they mean when they say "appropriate action" which is why I said it should be investigated further.

I don't wear headsets but I have a similar shape (not sure if it's as pronounced since I haven't shaved it like that). The article goes onto explain that it takes near 300lbs of pressure to dent the skull and if anything it's just soft tissue/fat being weird, which can go away through massage and giving it a break lol.

I guess if you're wearing something as tight as a belt it might make the fat form around differently. I'm skeptical though, I just don't know what kind of devices these guys are specifically wearing and the weight/time duration so I guess anything is possible.

Eventually they might be concerned with our mental well being and find simple tasks we can do to keep ourselves busy. To make it more efficient they could construct indoor spaces where we can be with other pet-humans doing tasks until they're ready for us to return to our cages.

and yet every single online grocery shopping I've been on refuses to have a filter or sort by price per weight option. It's even more incredibly infuriating when you have to click into an item's description or calculate it yourself, extra bonus hell points to the sites that change the weight metric so it's an extra step to figure out what the actual comparison is (probably more a US problem with ounce/pound conversion).

Are there any personal thoughts or insights about the article you wish to share?

Hail of a good pun line going on.

I don't want to jump in on @zeppo@lemmy.world 's chance to reply but he stated basically what I would've replied with above. I believe that UBI wouldn't change how things work, it would reset it to a previous economic time but with more equity since everyone would get it (getting back to livable wages because it's supplemented by the UBI). The government's have shown a failure of holding capitalism responsible for distribution of wealth (stagnant Fed minimum wage, forcing unions to accept terms/not strike) so subsidizing wages seems more of a greener pasture than our current trajectory.

You would still be able to start your own business, I don't think anyone is calling for UBI mixed with communism (government owning all production). Rather, some breathing room to return to more prosperous times where you have more options.

• Working + UBI = more savings (possibly as a jumping point so you can start your own business)
• 1 working adult ( and 1 at home adult) + 2 UBI = a stay at home parent to help raise children without going into debt
• Education + UBI = less financial impact for higher education since the problems aren't being addressed
• Disability + UBI = able to afford medications, food, and rent at the same time (a current problem also not being addressed)

I agree the "freedom" some would experience would be hardships trying to live off of it. It's hard and mentally draining work to be more self sufficient as humble homesteaders will attest to(it's a rather well put together video from a contestant on the "Alone" series). But, atm most people can't afford to start their own business or even realistically consider leaving their current workplace. Dropping into higher education for a career change without incurring enormous interest is near impossible without support (as climate regulations are needed, some jobs will have to be lost and those people need reassurances they can find a new path). Hell, use your UBI supplement to help take a vacation more than once a decade if it helps with mental health, fix a car instead of purchasing a new one (lower climate impact), etc etc.

There's just a plethora of problems atm that constantly get politicized or fail to have common sense policies implemented to help the situation. UBI would be a catch-all for a lot of those programs. Instead of battling it out on each front constantly (lobbyists, activists, personal conflicting interests from those elected), this would be a nuclear option to end the war (feels insensitive with the current Oppenheimer/Japan stance, but was the best metaphor I could come up with atm).

I agree, it's difficult for anyone to truly grasp how big space is. The problem is we're not interested in 99.9999999...% of space, we're interested in key points. You can drop one grain of bright pink sand on a mountain and no one would care or notice. If you only concentrate that on one path up the mountain and back down, eventually the infinite number of people traversing/dropping on that path will be noticeable and have an effect.

lmao, I didn't catch that so thank you. I was in a stupor when I wrote that and meant astronomy lol. I added the sciences in because there's a plethora of different fields that require clear observations and wasn't sure what the best terminology was to include all of the possibilities. Instead I completely missed the mark with the wrong base word.

I must have an overactive imagination because I can think of plenty of problems that unregulated space industry could cause.

Industry requires infrastructure and support, when speaking space terms everything is way more expensive so cost cutting will be rampant on all systems. Centralized space communication hub? No, we're gonna be bombarded with signals since maintaining the equipment on ground is cheaper (astrology sciences would suffer). Way to many objects in an orbital plane? Not their problem till eventually it becomes a catastrophic event as our own planet can become (Kessler Syndrome). More mass requires more fuel? Dump all the junk at every opportunity clogging space lanes (micro meteors and radiation will no longer be the main safety concern for travel).

I could go on and on, think about the current state of shipping and logistics. We already have events where ships were forced to sit for weeks outside of docks waiting to be unloaded (source). The space faring ships will only increase in size. What do you do with the useless containers they ship the contents back to earth with? The cost would be too high for re-usability getting it back into space. What about the workers who are at an unregulated site and their conditions?

I agree it's a conundrum of how do we advance when advancement causes destruction. It's something I've wrestled with when considering the Fermi paradox. Either you live harmoniously with the planet and die when it's environment changes, or you use that sucker up and get out of dodge before the next mass extinction takes you and nearly all of the living creatures out. I'm hoping in the future we meet some neighbors that can show a middle ground works well to persuade out current trajectory.