zkfcfbzr @ zkfcfbzr @lemmy.world

Posts

22

Comments

396

Joined

2 yr. ago

Here it is for this community we're in right now, as an example:

Probably a good time for me to mention I don't actually use Voyager though. I just use the desktop site. No clue how or even if you can find this on that app.

It's obvious you already know this, but posting for others who might be unaware:

If you see deleted comments, you can go to the bottom of the community's sidebar and click the "Modlog" button above the mod list. It'll bring you to a page like this where you can see all mod actions in that community including the full text of deleted comments. Here you can see the two in OP's screenshot were (rightfully) removed for being conspiracy theories.

It's sad to see the voice of reason getting downvoted (currently +4/-8) while the baseless conspiracy theory is wildly upvoted.

Is Musk a piece of shit? Absolutely. Is he playing a major part in enshittifying the entire country? Also absolutely. But is he using custom software in Teslas in an embarrassingly bad attempt to murder random people he's likely never even heard of, in a way that would generate incredibly bad press for his company whether it succeeds or fails? Are the people upvoting this fucking serious?

Ars ate the onion?

I'll go a step further and say that, while I agree that vigilantism in general is bad for society, I don't think that's a universal truth. Targets and motives and effects matter. Sometimes vigilantism is both necessary and good. And that happens when the system itself becomes badly biased against true justice - where things are so bad that the people perpetrating the mass injustices aren't even considered to be breaking the law, let alone just not being prosecuted for it. Not to Godwin things so quickly on purpose, but it would have been considered vigilantism to kill nazis as a German citizen in the 30's and 40's. I think most people today would agree that it would nonetheless have been completely justified. I'm not saying we're that far gone just yet - but I'm saying when things get to the point where vigilante justice is the only justice, and when the system itself is structured to support injustice...

I'm also not sure what Luigi did fits a strict definition of 'vigilantism", but that's kind of irrelevant to the point. In a way he's kind of an anti-vigilante? Using crime to handle horrible people who technically aren't legally criminals?

Either way, there are a lot of things deeply wrong with the US currently, on a systematic level, and it's clear to almost everybody that the justice and healthcare systems are are major parts of that unwellness. The system as a whole has been getting worse and worse for decades. It's frankly surprising that it took this long for something like this to happen - but I'm sure it won't be the last time.

It's clear that a lot of people are feeling the same sort of way - it's not often that a law-abiding citizen is publicly murdered and the nation, as a whole, celebrates and sends their well-wishes to the shooter. People wouldn't react that way if they already felt the system was serving justice acceptably.

I eat cereal like twice a year, if that. But yeah, when I do, one box tends to last me two meals. I don't really eat breakfast - when I have cereal it's because I'm craving it, and it's liable to replace my dinner at that point.

I just fill the bowl with a lot of milk then take the box of cereal with me, and keep refilling until either I'm full or the milk's all gone.

They really couldn't figure out that that first [indecipherable] is "fourth"?

Companies will raise their prices (to "what the market can bear"), but they will never be able to raise prices enough to offset the positive effects of UBI. It's not like your internet bill is going to go up by $2000/month if they suddenly know you're getting $2000/month in UBI. Your typical person makes purchases from dozens of different companies. An increase of "what the market can bear" won't be all that much.

And afterward, the effective purchasing power of the vast majority of people will have increased - most noticeably for those who currently have nothing / very little. Least noticeably for those who are reasonably well off already. And for those who are currently doing extremely well off, their purchasing power will end up dropping.

Disclaimer: I have no idea what I'm talking about and I made all numbers in this message up.

I do. They're cool.

Absolutely. FDR did more for the working class than perhaps any other president, and he was absolutely filthy rich. Adjusted for inflation he'd be a billionaire today.

The pinned post on lemmy.world right now clarifies that discussing jury nullification for crimes that have already happened, such as this, is perfectly acceptable. It's only discussing it with respect to crimes which have not yet been committed which is against the TOS.

I liked Big Bang Theory

Most uplifting news I've heard in a while, I'll take it

As someone who actually weighs their liquids. it's really not. Instead of pouring liquid into a measuring cup until it reaches how much ever you need, you put a cup/bowl on the scale, tare it, then still just pour in liquid until the scale reads how much ever you need.

If anything it's easier because it's more consistent. You can also re-tare and continue pouring more liquids or other ingredients into the same cup/bowl, cutting down on dishes.

The only annoying part is the first time you do it on a new recipe, where you have to do both measurements, so you can write down the mass for future reference.

You don't need control of the House to work on bills that you don't even intend to pass until the next session of congress, though. There's nothing stopping the Republicans, Democrats, or even average citizens from writing bills right now that are intended to be voted on by future sessions of congress.

And the House of Reps voting on the bill next week is also meaningless, because the bill has a 0% chance of passing this session with the democrats in control of the senate - and the House of Reps would then have to pass it again once a new session starts. Which, they probably will - but that doesn't make the vote next week somehow less meaningless. So the headline is pure clickbait: Congress isn't about to "gift" Trump anything. The gifts will come next year.

That's it, yes - each state gets as many electoral votes as it has congressmen, including senators. Most states award all of their electoral votes to whoever wins the state, with no proportionality to it at all - only two states (Nebraska and Maine, neither one large) do anything proportional with their votes.

With a system like that it's easier to see how things can end up with the less popular candidate winning - they can, for example, sneak by with 50.1% of the vote in just enough states to win, but bomb it out with 20% of the vote in all the other states. That's an extreme example specifically for the purpose of illustration, but less extreme versions of that are usually what happens.

The electoral votes also aren't distributed entirely fairly - the number of electoral votes per person tends to be larger for less populated states. The less populated states also tend to be Republican states. So in a very real sense, each person's vote counts for "more" in those states, and "less" in states with high populations. I don't believe it's really possible to fix this problem without vastly increasing the number of electoral votes, but congress currently has its size capped at 535 members for what I consider not very good reasons.

Yes, the whole system is trash from the ground up. But much of its structure is defined in the constitution itself, which is very difficult to change.

Faithless electors have never once affected the outcome of a US election.

This is not correct. The electoral college is exactly as susceptible to giving the win to the person with fewer votes as it was in 2000 and 2016. It's also not an issue that's due to any state in particular and is not an issue that can be solved by individual state action. The NPVIC would fix it but requires the cooperation of many states and is not in effect, and has stalled pretty hard in recent years.