Jimmycrackcrack @ Jimmycrackcrack @lemmy.ml

Posts

34

Comments

863

Joined

2 yr. ago

Is it... people?

Wait soylent is real? It's it green?

Yeh it's going to be every voter and non voter getting drafted so it's really not a rational thing to wish for angry or otherwise.

I don't live in the states but there's similar systems in some department stores here in Australia and I suspect, but don't know, that applicable law in these cases is broadly similar. The store and their employees aren't law enforcement and can't arrest you or have any legal recourse for you ignoring their demands to stop and allow your receipt to be checked. They likely also have the right to refuse service to you and deny you entry to their premises and so long as this isn't being done for a small number of specifically forbidden reasons (such as on the basis of race for example) they don't need a legal justification to do so. This would mean that refusing to comply with their receipt checking policy might be enough if they see fit, to decide to deny you entry to their stores going forward. Many large department stores are incorporating facial recognition and don't it seems feel the need for proper informed consent beyond some printed signage saying that but entering you're consenting, so the practicality of them doing this is at least a little bit higher these days but I guess there's no way to assess how likely this really is.

Or a terrorist

Even if they didn't, you generally recharge in your house where hopefully not everyone can see your stuff.

I guess they might say if you include the deportations it'd be over 100%

ok, meet in the middle, shove a firecracker up his arse and attach some wings to him.

Can't believe they couldn't find a way to include one more t in that acronym, I mean come on, at this point you're just obligated to.

Haha what the fuck?

Kinda, but I'm more or less resigned to the inevitability of it and I'm actually proud of myself, like a little kid, when I go out to eat and DON'T somehow end up wearing part of my dinner

I didn't know who that was before looking it up and I totally thought you were taking about the Pokemon lol

Look it was a long thread okay.

I haven't been presented with any Ts and C's. Do they apply if I already installed Firefox before this?

This is the most obvious answer but given OP's strong feelings on the matter, they presumably already thought this would be the best course of action and would already be doing it were it so easy. They didn't say it directly but I think the problem they're having is that their colleagues are not only themselves choosing to waste their time in this manner but because they are, they are expecting it of OP and it sounds like they're having some kind of conflict about it that they've brought up with OP directly. I'm guessing some of them have complained to OP or indicated to them that they're "supposed" to be ready by 12.30 even though they're wrong.

This makes it difficult because in that scenario OP can't simply plough on doing their job to the letter of the contract and just ignore the others, they have to choose to actively fight it out with them or just relent and start arriving early. It sounds like what they're having the dilemma about is if it sounds reasonable to have that fight, given that although it feels important to OP, they recognise that it's more about the principle of the matter than the objective scale of the problem. Seems like they recognise that 5 minutes of their time wouldn't be that big a deal as their colleagues have concluded, making it seem petty or disruptive to have that fight and all the awkwardness that will ensue just for those 5 minutes, but the principle that they should have to give up any extra time at all, regardless how long, just because their workmates are doing it is troubling OP.

Depending on how whiny and motivated his colleagues are it might be advisable to pick their battles and let this go, but if they think they're in a position to stand their ground and not have to suffer too many consequences and loss of standing with their workmates then of course they should, and even encourage others to do the same. I don't think we have enough of an idea what their workplace is like to know which one of those situations they're in.

But I thought the entire basis for people wanting a product like ground news was that it can be difficult to get facts or to have a firm grasp of reality where it pertains to the types of events we'd call "news" because the only way in which people other than active participants in the events or journalists, can gather such facts is through media. Since one doesn't reliably know what facts have been omitted or distorted when consuming media, the main way to get another perspective and hear different narratives, framings and details of the story are through any media other than the one you're consuming. This can be misleading because there is a lot of it and in addition to the possibility of outright materially incorrect facts, one could also be gathering the facts within the framework of a perspective that serves agendas or corporate necessities or biases inherent to a given publication. With a lot of different media options including many one mightn't even know about and with opacity surrounding what media is subject to what biases and agendas among other influences the process of comparison and analysis based on multiple media sources is cumbersome and time consuming and likely incomplete. What the ground news guys are claiming to offer is a service where they do some of that work for you and some kind of a methodology by which they do their analysis.

Whether one trusts them to do it, or if their analysis is fair, or how thorough they are or if their criteria and methodology provide a useful framework for analysis is a different question similarly hard to answer but I don't see how your proposal for comparing against "facts" isn't going to fail for the same reason simply consuming news media uncritically to try and stay informed would. Unless you're experiencing events first hand or personally conducting journalism you're always going to have limited capacity to know what the facts are or how they are distorted by the media from which you get them.

Even better then, your speech would be so memorably bad that people would be even more certain it was you and you couldn't have been elsewhere.

If he's you and you want to be free of your life and wish it could be someone else's problem then your duplicate is just going to run a mile and thank their lucky stars for this break.

I'm pretty nice. I think it'd take some more intense circumstances like in Dark Matter before I or a copy of me wanted to kill anyone. I wonder if I'd be ok with taking turns for time with loved ones.

Teabris