honey_im_meat_grinding @ honey_im_meat_grinding @lemmy.blahaj.zone

Posts

0

Comments

119

Joined

2 yr. ago

My immediate concern with tags is descending into what Twitter has become: hashtags have been meaningless for a long while since there's too much wrongly tagged stuff, different communities often use the same tag for different things, or there are ten tags all for the same thing. All of which means we'd need some form of moderator role that handles tags, and while I think it's doable, it might take some trial and error to figure out how exactly we divide tags between moderators, how tags are proposed/created, and how tags are grouped/combined (e.g. food, foods).

Also @fedia.io, not sure what's going down on that instance but the several unhinged comments I've seen today all came from there. Maybe it's just a coincidence.

So not only will you be able to get it, the people who get it to you can’t be big corporate shitheels.

Cannabis Social Clubs have existed in Europe for a while under a legal gray area, e.g. in Spain. I imagine that's why Germany went with a non-profit cooperative model instead of the US' (recent) for-profit corporate approach. Although Canada's approach of a state monopoly is similar to what Norway does with alcohol, which is another way to socialize the profits of drugs.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabis_Social_Club

I swear the “fuck cars” crew are completely deluded from reality.

I see people say what you're saying (bus vs car road damage elasticity) in "fuck cars" communities, I don't really see why you've decided to attack them collectively. But it's a pop-community, they're going to be wrong every now and then either way, please give them some slack. Their purpose is to make an average person aware of car dependency and that it's generally a negative thing, so that actual urban planners with technical knowledge have an easier time arguing for and implementing realistic solutions, and they'll take into account the variables you bring up. Think of "fuck cars" like a form of lobbying except it's done by common people with good intentions - similar to how Japanese coops lobbied for better food safety standards decades ago - rather than wealthy corporations.

Personally there are a few UX issues with the controls. Like getting stuck after diving into prone (I believe it's because you have to press run after you land to get back up, there's no action queueing), climbing over stuff you didn't want to climb over because of auto-climb, and a few other similar things. Both of the above have resulted in me and friends dying during intense moments, and because it's caused by the game not listening to what you want to do, it doesn't feel good to die that way.

Reminder that US state agencies helped Bolsonaro

In March 2020, the Intercept reported that Brazilian prosecutors had secretly collaborated with the US Department of Justice and Federal Bureau of Investigation in a manner "that may have violated international legal treaties and Brazilian law". The Brazilian Ministry of Justice had not been informed; making this collaboration illegal. They also found that money paid by Brazilian companies in the US were funnelled back into Brazil; chief prosecutor Deltan Dallagnol said he would use part of this sum to set up an "independent fund to fight corruption". This attempt was then deemed unconstitutional by Brazil's Supreme Court. It was reported that Mr. Dallagnol had called Lula da Silva's arrest “a gift from the CIA”. Leslie Backschies, the head of the US FBI's international corruption unit, alluded to this incident when discussing the sensitivity of anti-corruption investigations in a 2019 interview with AP news saying “We saw presidents toppled in Brazil”.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Car_Wash#Leaked_conversations

This is it, notice how Google Trends[1] shows a rise in "30 year old boomer" not long before "boomer shooter" becomes more commonplace. It's just the whole applying "boomer" to things like being stuck in their ways or boomer-like behavior, rather than age, that took off a few years back.

[1] https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=US&q=boomer%20shooter,30%20year%20old%20boomer&hl=en

The average politicians may not present themselves as being smart, but the lobbyists, think tanks, advisors that interact with them and influence their behaviour are not dumb. Rather than assuming it's either malice or ignorance, we can instead opt for a more middle ground assumption: it's both malice and ignorance, symbiotically feeding off each other.

There hasn't been any scientific consensus change on whether porn is actually harmful to view for underage viewers, much less how much harm at various ages (i.e. should we lower it from 18, or raise it). Meaning, anyone who outright claims it is, is likely falling for populist rhetoric feeding off our cultural aversion to nudity and sex, not scientific truth.

It gets even worse when you consider how instrumental porn is to us queer folks who often learn more about their sexuality through the medium, esp. when you consider consumption rates of queer folks vs straight folks. Or when you consider the queer folks who use sex work to earn money because they're treated worse in other jobs simply for being queer.

Let this sink in for a second: it took us less than a decade of anti-porn laws being proposed to being implemented without scientific consensus (in the UK, Germany, the EU now, Canada is currently doing the same...). Meanwhile we dragged our feet for decades on climate change and still are. That alone should make this whole trend smell fishy, like it's being done with ulterior motives.

Ask yourself this: has Bitcoin had - or is it trending towards - a net positive impact on our world? In other words, is it worth investing in long term? If it isn't you should treat it as a short term investment and get out as soon as you've made a profit - and you've literally 4x'd your investment. The fact that we're talking about the price in c/News is already a bad bubble sign and reminiscent of all the other times we've had crypto bubbles.

How much electricity does the world banking system use? (Answer: a whole lot more)

Per capita or in total?

No surprise that a housing cooperative is doing a 4 day work week. It's so sad that the 2010s' political push for more cooperatives died with the change to Kier's Labour in the UK. We could've had far more democratic businesses today that would be more open to trialing 4 day work weeks - actual risk taking, unlike our current dictatorial bosses who have to be dragged into the future while they wait for others to take the risks they're too cowardly to take.

Google drank so much capitalist koolaid they thought the company needed internal competition when the main reason they remain so big is because they have big chunks of monopoly power in several key tech fields

Putting someone in a home is more important than getting them socialized medical care

I get your point and I agree, but allow me to reframe this dichotomy a little: housing is health care - it literally saves lives. These issues are intertwined, and socialized housing should be part of a socialized health care strategy.

What possible use is that?

I've noticed "has this sub gotten more right wing recently?" posts reaching the top post of the day in the last 6 months or so. r/norge and r/unitedkingdom being examples. You can automate bots that change a subreddit's consensus on certain topics by bot-spamming threads pertaining to those topics, especially in the first hour of a thread going up. I don't know if that's happening, or if it has more to do with the Reddit protest that saw mods abdicate their positions last June and new mods being responsible for the change... but it could also be a bit of both.

In the EU they're getting a digital euro which allows them to avoid bowing down to Paypal, Payoneer, and all the services interlinked with them (e.g. Patreon) - the ancillary services can even offer digital euro payouts instead, too. So as long as what you're doing is legal, you can break the Paypal/Payoneer terms of service as much as you want and avoid their privately enforced authoritarianism that goes beyond the scope of the law for whatever reason. So those problems are being solved as we speak, depending on where you live.

Kind of, the central government did this in response to Mayor of London Sadiq Khan:

In December 2023, Gove used his powers to "call in" Khan's rejection of the project, overturning the Mayor's rejection and turning the final decision to DLUHC ministers.

But the project did withdraw anyway:

However, in January 2024, MSG wrote to the Planning Inspectorate officially withdrawing its plans for the project.

I suspect it has more to do with London being left by advertisers right now. A few years back the tube had all the advert slots filled, always. Today, the advert slots are usually half filled and it's been like that for years. I expected it to change after COVID lockdowns ended, but it has persisted all the way until now.

It makes me wonder if these anti-porn laws are happening because queer people seem to be more likely to watch porn[1], and because of that, conservatives are looking at it as a causal thing rather than a correlative thing. If porn does help with getting to terms with your sexuality, then these laws should be worrying to the queer community. What conservatives may be doing here is trying to statistically decrease the amount of queer people in society, as getting rid of porn may reduce the amount of people who are aware of their own bisexuality, and those people may never engage with and/or have as much empathy for the queer community as a result.

[1] https://www.thepinknews.com/2019/02/28/more-porn-watch-more-likely-bisexual/

There are also valid reasons for disabled people to be against SUVs, and the abundance of cars in general: pollution creates disabilities, and so much pollution comes from car tyres. I know, because I have a disability that's associated with said pollution, and I wouldn't wish this on anyone else so I really hope we can replace car use with less polluting methods as soon as possible. And then there's the more physical way: cars crashing into people also creates disabilities. If you're disabled, you're probably more likely to have sympathy for all the other disabilities that cars contribute to creating, and would prefer if SUVs and cars were replaced by other methods.

Why you acting like we can only do one of these things?

I'm not, please don't assume that. It sounds like we're in agreement here, so I'm not debating you, but rather adding to your post, I suppose. It sounded like you wanted to extend the conversation towards solutions to the housing crisis in general.