Copernican @ Copernican @lemmy.world

Posts

14

Comments

567

Joined

2 yr. ago

As a Chinese American I in now way interpreted the comment as being a generalization about Chinese people. A haven is a place, normally referencing a port. I think it requires a lot more gymnastics to turn a statement about the country to a generalization about ethnicity.

Also, weird take to have and not also be critical of the headline of this article or language in the article itself. This comment uses the term "China" in the same general sense as the article.

A "haven" is a place, not a people. And a haven usually describes a place that has favorable laws, regulations, or attitudes towards certain behaviors. To me that is a government since havens usually have laws to support that. For example, a tax haven is a place where laws and government are organized in a way to be favorable to tax evasion.

China is a place and country. Chinese is a ethnicity. As a Chinese American myself, I had no confusion over what the commenter was saying. When we talk bout nations and their governments, it is pretty common to just refer to the country's name. I don't necessarily agree with the statement being made, but I did not at all take it as a ethnic or racial criticism.

I mean, I think it's not an unfair generalization for a country with a single party government. China is a nation state with one party. What else could he be referring to. I see the exact same generalozatons made about America, sometimes by Americans, and don't think it is bigotry, and also it's less justifiable a claim In a pluralist democracy. I think it's really a statement about the state and not a generalization of the people or race.

Advertisers by media (ad space). That ad space is usually defined by parameters or attributes. It could be based on characteristics of the user, like demographic or audience (like car shoppers), but often has other criteria of content attributes, and that can be negative attributes, like no ad space on porn sites or on pages where my direct competitors also have ads. So when Google misrepresents that ad space to the advertiser that had those specific parameters on the deal, it's a problem.

Contract violation for brand safety and media buy. Possibly fraud.

Imagine buying a vegan gluten free cake for 30 bucks. The baker gives you a dairy and gluten cake actually worth 15 bucks retail price.

1. Both students walk towards each other calling each other out.
2. Boy throws racial slur and shoved girl in chest. Boy stands ground.
3. Girl recovers from shove and retaliates with punch towards face.
4. Boy returns punch towards girl.
5. Fight ensues.

I think the girl was totally justified in throwing a punch from a moral POV. Boy is a piece of shit. But from a rules POV I think there is some ambiguity of 3 is defense or escalation. And from an admin POV you probably suspend both since you don't want either in school the next day or two until there is more time to review the situation and deal out discipline. I'm guessing part of the delay is that this happened right before a holiday. Curious if there is any update on the school review and disciplinary action for both students.

The point is there's a difference between a closed fist punch and open hand shove. I think she was justified and throwing the punch. I think the administration probably has to take disciplinary action for it though against her for that though. I just hope she gets a day or two and the other kid gets something way more severe.

I watch a lot of soccer, and to me if kind of looked like a yellow card offense, followed by an escalated red card offense, followed by a other red card offense. White kid definitely deserves a much more severe punishment and longer investigation. But I'm kind of thinking it makes sense for the girl to get a shorter suspension as well based on the video clips. I'm kind of curious what evidence the admin has access to when making the punishment. Was this video shared with them?

I always hate the blurred lines of administrative disciplinary action or criminal investigation. What is the schools role if a criminal investigation is underway.

Also, I think the article is missing some key facts, like durations of suspensions. I think some could argue that both the boy and girl deserve some suspension, but it by no means should be equal suspension given the racial charged aggression. Is there a difference between a closed fist punch versus a shove? Who through the first punch?

Did the article even mention the date this occurred? It just says last week, which was a holiday week. So come Tuesday not sure how long the suspensions have even been served and what the administration is deciding for next steps.

I hear you. But I think it's one of those things where it needs to be a regulatory or legislation change. If this is all permissible, I don't think there is really a moral choice for the consumer to make in choosing to use a rewards generating credit card or other electronic payment option. I think the consumer in this scenario is only making the rational choice to maximize individual ends if these are the rules of the system, because regardless of what they do they are paying for it.

But it if there is no escaping the ubiquitous credit card industry, shouldn't I take advantage of the points so I'm not paying the 2 percent with no benefit to myself?

The author "Richard Hunt is Executive Chairman of the Electronic Payments Coalition."

Can't have a discussion on any news about the war anymore without a bunch of comments like this these days.

Well I think he or she is referring to the "all religion is bad" arguments that are nothing about this particular case, which I agree that there is only 1 correct reaction here which is condemning this act.

I kind of think the 3rd party vote for president is a general election really depends on the state you vote in. If your state is a stronghold for a party and has a candidate that has no chance in losing, I think it makes sense to vote 3rd party if that aligns with your politics. But id voting in a contested battleground state, you have to be more strategic about your vote and be willing to compromise or vote for damage control to prevent the other candidate from winning. I think ideally participating in democracy is an ends in itself regardless of whether your candidate wins or not. All participants in an election should be able to look at results and get a feel for what the voice of the people is, and that does mean knowing what the minority voted for and in what numbers.

Because the truth and facts matter when discussing moral responsibility. It doesn't absolve Israel of other acts of war harming civilians. But this matters when discussing Hamas's responsibility over the death of Gaza civilians.

Which religious fascist are you talking about?

Specify please. There is nothing to respond to. What facts are you disputing