GrymEdm @ GrymEdm @lemmy.world

Posts

73

Comments

644

Joined

1 yr. ago

I want to avoid being too abusive, but it's the not-so-clever person's idea of what a well-thought-out argument looks like. They are akin the folks who abuse "creative accounting" to dodge taxes, but not as well-researched (or rich enough to hire someone who is).

I hope to see the day when real news stops reminding me of South Park or The Onion. If unceasing growth requires that we regress back to child labor and loss of worker rights then it's probably not a worthy goal.

I have an American Jewish friend who, long story short, has been treated very badly by her Ashkenazi family since deciding to support Palestinian human rights. I've seen what it costs Jews to speak up, and so I have a lot of respect for dissenters who act with their conscience in spite of the target it puts on their backs. It's a difficult spot to be in, and I hope you can find some peace and reward in staying true to your ethics even in hard times.

I think you're making a reasonable point about keeping people safe. I can see the merit, but I don't like the school's choice because a) it feels like letting the bullies win and b) there's a national context of failing to protect or support pro-Palestinian voices or even suppressing them. This girl was specifically targeted for harassment and there's no mention that USC tried to intervene on her behalf. Now, whether it's actually a security or political concern, she won't be allowed to speak as valedictorian because she's Palestinian and pro-Palestine.

Also, I won't pretend that I'm an expert on speaker security, but there definitely are other controversial figures that are allowed to speak at public events including at universities. USC is a major educational organization and should have the resources to provide safeguards. It doesn't sound like they're even going to try, and (just my opinion from context) I suspect the reasons to be political with their excuse being a convenient lie.

For anyone interested in the science, here's a video from Harvard psychiatrist/instructor Dr. K from HealthyGamerGG going over research on non-consensual pornography (deepfakes, revenge porn, and the like). The most impactful point he makes is, "After non-consensual pornography is released over half of the people who are involved want to kill themselves". There's a few minutes more of content for those who want to watch, including talking about increased rates of depression, anxiety, PTSD, etc., especially when the porn goes public.

I'll admit I used to look at deepfake porn, but I stopped immediately after hearing that and the rest of that video. Not because religion or society disapproves but because I want my entertainment to be consensual and fun - not so destructive that it makes the unwilling participants suicidal more often than not. I think there are ways to do porn properly that involve worker protections, respect, and of course consent. So I think this statute has a pretty solid foundation in severe harm reduction as per the research.

This sounds a lot like, "let's abandon democracy where every vote counts equally and return to 'might makes right' by making sure we have the most weapons at hand on election day".

When it happens I just try to remind folks that while it's ethical to oppose many Israeli policies, there are tons of Jewish dissenters who are allies. Basically every time people will agree. One of my most powerful examples is Breaking the Silence, an organization that gathers, confirms, and publishes testimonials from IDF veterans about the reality of life in Occupied Palestinian Territory. 100% Jewish, and Jewish soldiers no less, and still 100% dedicated to making sure the truth is known no matter the cost.

Interesting fact: Einstein cheated on his wife with, and eventually married, his first cousin. "Their mothers were sisters, thus making them maternal first cousins. The couple were also paternal second cousins (i.e. their fathers were first cousins)."

Another interesting fact: as many as 80% of all marriages historically were between first or second cousins. About 10% of all marriages in the world today still are, and up to 50% in some areas.

Now if you don't mind, I have a banjo to tune.

Waking up when the weather changes:

No, I don't pledge allegiance to the monarch.

This sounds like some "sovereign citizen" crap finding it's way into Canada. The only thing that stance is good for is schadenfreude when a judge makes "SovCits" aware of the fact that they are, in fact, subject to the law.

I really, really hate that it feels like there's a new ethnicity it's ok to distrust/suppress/wish harm upon. The article talks about official efforts to ban Pro-Palestinian voices, including (ironically) Jewish Voice for Peace. I am so much happier on Lemmy because there are far fewer posts with opinions like "Palestinians are only getting what they deserve because of Hamas" etc. Even though people have disagreed with me (albeit not often) I have yet to debate anyone making those kinds of arguments.

I'm frustrated waiting for the rest of the world to catch up and realize that there's no "ok race" to assume is some brand of evil. There's no ethnicity that it's bad to advocate freedom, happiness, and healthiness for. E.g. even though I post a lot about Israel, I take time frequently to make it absolutely clear that I know Israel doesn't represent all Jews and that judging based on ethnicity or birthplace/residence is wrong.

Probably the same reason that they make vampires sexy - the allure of the forbidden. Mr. Evil Kirk is the poisoned fruit.

Israel’s allies need to apply meaningful pressure to keep this planning from being acted upon. No matter what your position on the Gaza war or support for Israel, another strike against Iran is an avoidable additional escalation with serious risks.

Israel's allies need to apply meaningful pressure to keep this planning from being acted upon. No matter what your position on the Gaza war or support for Israel, another strike against Iran is an avoidable additional escalation with serious risks.

That's the face I made about a week into trading Reddit participation in for Lemmy participation or just break-from-social-media time. Conversations feel more genuine, there's less overbearing moderation (at least in my experience), and if there's nothing new on Lemmy I've probably spent enough time reading forums anyways. I'm only keeping my 13-year-old Reddit account to keep track of old favorited posts and specialist forums like specific video game tips.

According to Israeli sources, the defense was very costly for Israel. "Israel's interception of hundreds of Iranian missiles and drones overnight has cost Tel Aviv around $1.35 billion (up to 5 billion shekels), Israeli media reported. On Sunday, the daily Yedioth Ahronoth quoted Brig. Gen. Ram Aminach, the former financial advisor to the Israeli chief of staff, as saying that “the cost of defence last night was estimated at between 4-5 billion shekels ($1.08-1.35B).”

What I'm wondering is: if the US did most of the interception, is the price tag for that to US taxpayers included in that quote or did they pay even more? The USA pays for a lot of Israel's Iron Dome defense to start, so what's the final price tag for Americans?

Edit: I kept looking but couldn't find any info beyond different versions of what I already linked. I guess it's just a question to think about for now. For me, the large expense is yet another reason among several why Israel should let not continue this back-and-forth with Iran.

Please don't. The Iranian attack was a limited response that they let everyone know about days in advance and only targeted military facilities. Iran has also said it considers the matter concluded, even though they only inflicted minor damage and as far as I know didn't kill anyone. Contrast that with the Israeli attack which targeted an embassy (which aren't supposed to be targets) within the borders of a foreign country and killed several people including senior Iranian officials.

Iran punched back to let you know they would if pushed, and they even pulled the punch. It's over for now, so don't keep pushing.

I can empathize that this sucks to go through because I haven't read anything to suggest she had murderous intent, but even accidents have consequences. There have to be penalties for setting up dangerous conditions to make sure that happens as rarely as possible. It's why charges like "involuntary manslaughter" exist.