NateNate60 @ NateNate60 @lemmy.world

Posts

19

Comments

1,111

Joined

2 yr. ago

Year 3 of using Fedora and I still don't know what the equivalent of apt purge is

It is not because of a shortage of asphalt that potholes exist. It is a shortage of attention and money to fill said potholes.

There is no limit in the Constitution that prohibits individual US states from exchanging representatives with foreign countries or from expressing or sending support to them. However, there are some caveats, of course, and it's a very nuanced area of law that has interesting implications:

1. Accepting formal diplomatic representatives from another power is deemed under international law to mean recognising the independence and sovereignty of the power whose representatives you are accepting. Which essentially precludes formal diplomatic ties from consideration. This is why the US doesn't accept diplomats from the Republic of China (a.k.a. Taiwan) and refuses official Taiwanese diplomatic and service passports, but is more than happy to accept "unofficial" representatives.
2. Any representatives sent would not have the power to contract treaties as US states are not competent under US law to enter into treaties or make any other binding obligation to other countries. This is problematic because that means they can't even do as much as rent an office space in another country without the involvement of the US federal government.
3. The primary reasons that a country might consider hosting a diplomatic mission of a foreign power is so that they can (1) complain to the ambassador about that foreign power doing things that they don't like, (2) so that the foreign power can issue passports and visas within the host country, (3) so that consular services can be provided by the foreign power to its citizens or subjects living within the host country, and (4) negotiate treaties. Since US states don't really do anything abroad that can't be handled or complained about through the US Department of State, and because US states don't issue passports or visas, and because consular services to US citizens is already provided through the diplomatic missions of the United States, it is unnecessary for any country to consider hosting a US state diplomatic mission.

Cannot agree more. I say things all the time here that people hate and downvote me for but the numbers are even more useless here than on Reddit so it's difficult to care.

My friend, they are a multi-million-dollar corporation. There is no such thing as integrity, only profit. It just so happens that for the greater part of their existence, having the appearance of integrity has been the best way to achieve the real goal.

There are really two viable explanations for this:

1. Interference from Bezos
2. The Washington Post has realised that allowing this advert to run exposes them to legal risk from an erratic administration that is extremely sensitive to its public perception.

I don't think a BRICS currency will be successful in replacing the dollar unless the governments of the participating countries force their businesses to use it. The reason why transactions are denominated and settled in US dollars is because of the perceived stability of its value and the openness of the US financial system to international trade. People use the US dollar because they trust the American government to not excessively devalue it and for it to be reliably useful later on.

And yes, I recognise that all of these are under attack by the current US government.

I feel like she's more of a pragmatist while Sanders is firm and staunch in his ideology. AOC will bend the knee to the Party when she realises she needs to in order to get what she wants, but only just enough so that they don't hate her guts. Sanders had the luxury of being able to raise the middle finger to the Party because they knew they had to suffer him anyway owing to his huge popularity among the left. Sander's popularity allows him to remain ideologically pure. AOC doesn't have the power.

It's extremely frustrating to see this guy dropping one truth bomb after another just to have nobody listen to him. I wish Sanders was younger.

Edit: It's really sad, now that I think of it. Here is a man who has devoted his entire life to the betterment of his country. And here he still is, in his eighties, continuing to fight to prevent the rights and liberties that he in his twenties fought to create from being undone. If there was any justice in this world, he should have just now wrapped up his term as President of the United States and be enjoying the few years he has left on this earth in peace after having passed the torch to the next generation of Democratic leaders. Bernie Sanders, a true patriot and devoted warrior for the working class to the very end.

This is basically why Democratic politicians are less popular than Republican ones. A Republican president will be liked by 90%+ of his party and nearly no Democrats. A Democratic president is liked by half of his party and called a genocide supporter by the other half, and supported by nearly no Republicans.

I feel like every few years, the same thing happens:

1. A new study comes out that essentially says "left-leaning people are smarter than right-leaning people".
2. All the left-leaning people smugly say that it was obvious
3. Right-leaning people accuse the study of being fake or politically motivated
4. Everyone forgets a week later

During the era of payphones, a quarter was still significant money so it was still worth the time to adjust the machinery. Nowadays, there are typically only four machines that people regularly interact with that accept quarters:

• Laundry machines, which increasingly don't take coins at all and instead have card readers on them
• Parking meters, which also increasingly get replaced with signs telling you to pay online using a website or app
• Vending machines, which also usually have card readers.
• Self-checkout machines at grocery stores.

These machines take coins, but generally deal in such small-dollar amount terms that replacing the coinage mechanisms just isn't worth it in 2025. That's the biggest issue with coinage reform plans. Hell, not even when the UK decimalised their currency did they change the size and weight of the coins, for exactly this reason. An old shilling was the same size, weight, and value as a new 5p coin and no changes had to be made to the machines.

Now, the problem is that while coin usage (and cash usage in general) is on the decline, these systems must still function for the percentage of people who want to use cash. And you definitely have a moral right to use cash and be able to conduct your daily life in cash if you want, either for privacy reasons, or because for small transactions it's just simpler.

I have no idea how this screenshot illustrates your point but there is an "alt-left"... sort of. This term is not really used though. The term "alt-right" was used to describe far-right elements of the American population whose ideology was regarded to be extreme enough that mainstream centre-right politicians wanted nothing to do with them. "Alt-right" is (was) essentially a polite euphemism for right-wing extremism.

If you want, you could consider the left-wing version of this to be the socialist and communist groups, but they are politically irrelevant in the US, not only because the centre-left absolutely refuses to even acknowledge their existence but because the "alt-left" also hates the centre-left and isn't willing to co-operate with them to get into power. The "alt-right" holds political sway only because the centre-right realised they were useful in riling up the right-wing voter base and they could be used to get into power. Unfortunately, this really just meant that the centre-right has disappeared in America and been replaced with only alt-right or alt-right-sympathetic politicians. The "alt-left" of America is completely unrepresented in any institution of government. Again, I want to make clear that "alt-left" is not a term that is in widespread use but if you generalise the prefix "alt-", it's what it would mean.

I have to agree with the sentiment expressed by the social media posts shown in the article. If your country's electricity infrastructure is so fragile that a monkey could take it offline then it's probably time to take a hard look at investing in improving its resilience.

I will edit my original comment. There is no reason that they couldn't circulate in foreign exchange markets given the correct infrastructure. That infrastructure current doesn't exist and to my knowledge would be unprofitable to construct.

I want to add a third thing to this list:

3. Feeling left behind by mainstream political parties.

The parties in power surely pay lip service to the issues that concern the young but very rarely do they actually do anything about it.

These things don't need to make sense. They very much don't make sense. They are still real phenomena that need to be dealt with. You're expressing a sentiment that I find is very common on Lemmy—that if it doesn't make sense then it can be ignored.

If public sentiment is against a change that is perceived to be arbitrary and without benefit then you will encounter very real public opposition. There will be political repercussions to making this change. You will be slandered by pundits in the news and you personally will gain a reputation as a hard-ass who makes things hard for no reason (regardless of whether that's true or justified), which causes problems for your future job security as now politicians think they can score easy political points by firing you. It wouldn't be a consideration on Planet Vulkan, but on Earth, this effect is real and must be considered, whether you think it's logical or not.

Coins don't circulate in foreign exchange markets. They haven't circulated for over a century. There are, however, reasons for this. You've already correctly pointed out that one of them is because coins are heavier. The second reason is because ATMs don't dispense coins but they do dispense notes. When people go to the bank and withdraw money, they don't receive coins unless specially requested. And despite the need for small change in these foreign countries, the logistical challenges of providing coins to them over notes are still too high for coins to find their way into circulation. Coins enter circulation in the US when businesses order them from the bank, which in turn orders them from the Federal Reserve, which receives them from the Mint. Banks abroad don't bother with coins because they're far more difficult to transport and distribute than notes, making it an unprofitable service to offer account holders, and they can't just order them from the Federal Reserve—they need to go through a third party which increases costs. In addition to that, USD banknote-counting machines are prevalent worldwide. It's rare to encounter a USD coin-counting machine abroad. The logistical network to distribute USD cash globally is built for notes, not coins, and that's why trying to introduce coins in a foreign market is like trying to jam a square peg into a round hole. You're going to find that every single step is going to be ever so slightly more frustrating than distributing notes, which all adds up to the point of impracticality.

"Because that's the way it is" is very often a good reason not to do something new. That's because of the human aspect of introducing these reforms. There'd better be a very good reason to change or you will encounter a lot of public opposition just because people don't like change.

There is no reason that coins don't can't circulate in foreign markets but the fact remains that they don't (Edit: for lack of infrastructure to support the logistical challenges of distributing coins). You cannot explain that away. It is simply not possible to adapt in the situations I describe. Saying that "they'll adapt" is a very hand-wavey excuse that doesn't address the issues with retiring this denomination. Without a $1 note, people in the countries that need it will just not use the US dollar and will choose a currency that has the denominations they need. In Zimbabwe's case, people would be forced off the US dollar and onto a currency that is willing to provide them with the small change that they need. In that case, probably the South African rand.