When Tom Cotton says "little Gazas," what he means is "little communities of people I reflexively hate and want to see die, and you should hate them and want to see them die too."
Kevin Roberts remembers when he could get a bacon cheeseburger, fries and a drink from Five Guys for $10. But that was years ago. When the Virginia high school teacher recently visited the fast-food chain, the food alone without a beverage cost double that amount....
They thought by raising wages, owners would cut into their own bottom lines.
I don't think anyone actually thought that.
They're simply making the point that the problem is not the wages paid to the employees, as you imply, but the obscene salaries paid to executives and franchisees.
That the American execurives and franchisees are not going to take the necessary steps to correct that problem pretty much goes without saying, but that doesn't in any way change the fact that that is the problem
And that in no way contradicts, or even really addresses, my point, which is not about overall expenses, but about the distribution of them - the portion that goes to employee wages vs. the portion that goes to executive compensation packages.
TikTok doesn't engage in speech at all. TikTok is s platform on which people engage in speech. Those people include Americans.
So TikTok being legally considered a person or not, having rights or not and so on is irrelevant, since TikTok's nominal rights aren't being violated in the first place. The rights of the Anerican people are the ones that would be violated - they are the ones whose freedom of speech would be restricted.
IANAL but I presume that's the argument they're using - that when they say that it's a violation of the first amendment, what they mean is not that it violates their supposed freedom of speech, but that it violates our inalienable freedom of speech (as it in fact, and obviously, does).
So... aren't these wannabe twitter competitors going about the whole thing bass-ackwards?
I saw a broadly similar article the other day about some sort of shakeup in the Mastodon board of directors.
It's as if they think the way do do an internet startup is to first appoint a board of directors and hire a raft of executives, then... um... you know... um... do some business... kinda... stuff....
I for example, expect him to no longer require nutrition labels to be on packaged and canned foods. We're all just going to have to eat what we can and play it by portion sizes....
It was all, always, just about themselves. They claimed to love the country because they just saw it as a rightful extension of themselves, and they claimed to love democracy because they just saw it as the process by which they got what they wanted.
Now that they're faced with the fact that the country necessarily also accommodates other people and that democracy means that other people can get what they want, they have no reason left to pretend that they ever really valued either one.
So they're instead diving headfirst into xenophobic fascism, in the hope that they can recreate a world in which the country exists only for them and the government serves only their interests.
I guarantee that the ADA works for whoever is the biggest source of revenue, and thus the biggest funder of executive salaries.
That's just how it is in a system of hierarchical organizations. The executive positions inevitably come to be held by people who have come to hold those positions because they were the most willing and able to do absolutely whatever it takes to fight and claw and scheme and backstab their way into them. And those people not only aren't inclined to serve any interest other than their own - they necessarily aren't even equipped to. If they had any actual integrity, decency or empathy, they wouldn't have been able to do everything they did to win the competition for the position they now hold, and it would've gone to some other scheming, manipulating, self-serving psychopath.
And thus, we end up with something like this. Inevitably.
The Libertarian party has never been particularly libertarian (I discovered that when I briefly worked for them back in the '80s).
For a while there, through the 90s, the libertarian movement in the US was still relatively libertarian, which is to say, advocates for the liberty of each and all, and it was fairly common to see a distinction made between "libertarians" - advocates of the ideology - and "Libertarians" - followers of the party, who were pretty much just misled idealists and the opportunists who were misleading them.
That all started to change with 9/11 and the Bush presidency, as the movement as a whole started shifting toward right-wing authoritarianism and the party stopped pretending that it had ever been anything else.
Even then though, there was still a vestige of true libertarianism here and there.
That ended though when the GOP co-opted the Tea Party movement and transformed it from a series of protests against Bush's Wall Street bailouts to a traveling right-wing carnival of hate. Virtually overnight, any pretense that US libertarians valued individual liberty (other than their own) entirely vanished, and the few remaining genuine advocates of liberty abandoned the movement.
At this point, the US libertarian movement as a whole has morphed entirely into an especially toxic version of right-wing authoritarianism, and I would fully expect them to support whoever seems most likely to let them shoot people. And that's Trump.
The idea of a libertarian party has always been a bit self-contradictory, though not entirely. The basic idea of libertarianism (narrowly defined - not the broader use of the term in things like the political compass) is specifically to minimize but not entirely eliminate government. That's what distinguishes it from anarchism.
So there's necessarily an immediate issue - which specific functions of government need to be kept in its minimized form? And that's where a party (or something like it) can legitimately come into play. It's still a bit self-defeating though, since such a party obviously should be sharply limited in scope and influence, but that's not the nature of hierarchical organizations. It's not that the idea is immediately contrary to the espoused ideals of the movement, but that it pretty much inevitably will one day grow into something that is.
I don't and never have held with no-true-scotsmanning the supposed wing alignment of whatever it is that one or another person thinks needs to be kept in a "libertarian" system. I always leaned much more toward the left than the right as far as that goes, but I never felt any particular threat from those (the majority even 40 or 50 years ago) who leaned to the right more than the left. Like me, they were fundamentally simply opposed to the whole idea of institutionalized hierarchy, but believed that some amount of it was unavoidable, so they, like me, were prepared to argue for their preference, rather than just taking the fundamentally authoritarian position of, "This is the way it's going to be because we say so, and if you oppose us, we'll shoot you."
I think that the transition to the latter stage was inevitable regardless of which wing the US movement leaned toward. It's not really a trait of the right or the left per se, but a trait of the dominant group, when it's reached the point that its dominance is so well-established that it comes to be seen as a justified state rightfully defended. And unfortunately, as history has shown repeatedly, both political wings are entirely able to reach that point, and at that point, the specific ideology doesn't even really matter any more, since the actual point of the organization is protecting and furthering its own privilege and power, and ideology just determines the rhetoric with which they surround that entirely self-serving endeavour.
Or more simply, I think that if US libertarianism had come to be dominated by left-wingers rather than right-wingers, it's likely that all that would mean in the long run is that the current version of it would be dominated by tankies instead of... whatever the current lot should be called (neo-feudalists? anarcho-fascists? gun nuts? mall ninjas?)
“[Razer] falsely claimed, in the midst of a global pandemic, that their face mask was the equivalent of an N95 certified respirator,” Samuel Levine, director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection, said in a statement....
This shouldn't be an exception - it should be the rule.
At the very least, companies should be fined every single cent that they made off of something criminal, and really, they should be fined much more than they made.
If they're fined less than they made off of it, it's not even really a fine. It's just the government taking a cut of the action.
Yes - the way I said it leaves the possibility that they have to pay at minimum their profit, and no - that should not be the case. They should have to pay at minimum their total revenue.
Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn talked about exactly that in the USSR in Gulag Archipelago.
He said that in the entire time he was in the gulags, he never met one single person who hadn't been legitimately tried and convicted of an actual crime. And the key was exactly what you describe - the Soviet laws were so extensive and byzantine that whenever any official wanted to disappear somebody, all they had to do was investigate them enough to figure out what laws they'd inevitably broken, then try them for that.
That's how authorotarian scumbags implement a police state while maintaining a superficial appearance of justice and the rule of law.
And it's guaranteed that American authoritarian scumbags know that.
Civilizations, just like individuals, have a finite lifespan.
Just like individuals, the details vary from one to another. All are born at a specific moment and all then grow, but their deaths, like individual deaths, come in a myriad of ways.
The US is relatively young, but it's almost certainly not going to get a chance to peacefully grow into old age, because it's effectively riddled with cancer, which is growing and spreading almost entirely unchecked.
So saying the quiet part out loud has now extended to bragging about being a psychopath.
It seems that nearly every day I see another thing that future historians will be able to cite as an example of the alarmingly self-destructive behavior in the days leading up to the collapse of the US.
Why would Gazans attack a pier being built to being them aid?
It's far FAR more likely that the attacks were carried out by Israelis. It wouldn't be the first time they attacked people trying to provide aid to the Gazans. Hell - it wouldn't even be the first time this month.
In response to Bray’s toot, Evan Prodromou — one of the creators of ActivityPub, who is currently writing an O’Reilly book about the protocol — noted that this “is also the argument for using the ActivityPub API.” He described the API as “an open, extensible API that can handle any kind of activity type — not...
Serious question - why is this considered a problem? I don't get it.
It doesn't seem to be for convenience, since you'd still have to sign up for and sign in to different sites separately (which is obviously unavoidable - the alternative would be centralization, which is exactly what we're trying to get away from).
Is it an ego thing? So that people can conveniently establish a sort of identity brand in the fediverse? Is it all about accomodating would-be influencers?
Or is it some sort of psychological thing? Like people just feel uncomfortable with separate identities spread around the fediverse? Like they're somehow disjointed and fragile?
I can't make sense of it. I have easily a dozen accounts spread around the fediverse, mostly but not all under the same name, and I have no issue with that. I don't see a problem that needs to be solved. To the contrary, if anything, I'm wary of the idea of consolidating them - that just feels too much like moving back to centralization, just by a different scheme.
Just imagine you go to a fediverse site, click “log in with ActivityPod”
It makes me nauseous just thinking about it.
That's where the whole thing went wrong. When things started getting centralized, the internet started turning into a walled, commodified, ad-infested, bot-generated shithole controlled by a handful of loathsome megacorporations.
That's exactly the sort of shit I want to get away from, and I rhought that getting away from that sort of shit was the exact point of ActivityPub.
Privacy would also increase because you could control every aspect of you identity
I don't think that's true.
I see no possible way that a centralized identity can be more private that an array of separate ones. And rather obviously, with a centralized identity, you don't control every aspect of it, because it's an established fact - when you go to a new site and sign up with that identity, it is exactly and only what it's already been established to be, and it's immediately tied in with all the others that use the same identity.
On the other hand, when I go to a new site and create a new identity from scratch - one that only exists on that site - I actually do control every aspect of my identity. It's whatever I make it right there on the spot, and it shares exactly as much or as little detail with my other identities as I want it to.
Granted that I'm very cynical, I just can't escape the feeling that all of this is cover for the real goal, which is simply to centralize the fediverse, so that a new group of opportunists can squat on top of another piece of the internet and extract rent from ir. We're being told that this "problem" needs to be "solved" because "solving" it will, so they hope, create the next Google.
It's a single identity that would be used to log in to all relevant sites. How is that not "centralized?"
There is no reason identity has to be tied to the platform using the identity
The reason I prefer that is that then that identity is specific and limited - it's not me on all sites, but just me on that site. Me on another site is an entirely separate identity.
...and no reason why there needs to be a central identity store.
But with this, there is, for all intents and purposes, a central identity "store." That's how it would work - I provide whatever ID is used as a trigger and then the site would access "my" "store." And presumably that would be an ongoing process, since another of the things that's being floated is the ability to essentially federate all of my content across instances.
And all of that is going to have to be hosted somewhere, and if I don't use my own hardware, then it's going to be hosted on someone else's hardware, and that means that they - not I - ultimately have control over it. Sure, they can promise that I maintain full control, but that can, as has happened far too many times in the history of the internet, just be a lie.
Granted that that's the case currently too, again, it's decentralized. Each individual instance just has control over my identity on that instance - not over my identity fediverse-wide.
In fact, right now my identity IS centralized to lemmy.world and I have no control over that.
Only your lemmy.world identity, which isn't you.
Is that the part I'm missing? I still don't understand what the supposed problem is in the first place. Is it that you feel that your lemmy.world identity is in fact "you?" Like that particular online identity is identical to your actual real world self, so not being able to use one and only one identity throughout the fediverse is existentially unsettling?
I'm still trying, and failing, to understand how this is a supposed problem in the first place.
Anyway, only your lemmy.world identity is (by a stretch of the term) "centralized," and only to lemmy.world, and I guess to whoever it federates with. But that's not you - that's just one internet handle, for one site.
And the worst that can happen is that lemmy.world does something shady, in which case you can just create another identity at another site. And that last, as I understand it, was always the central point of decentralization - to make it so that harm that might be done was limited to only the one instance on which it was done, and couldn't permanently harm the broader fediverse or an individual's access to it.
Having one central identity though means that any harm done to or through that identity is done throughout the fediverse, and to the affected individual on all instances. That seems like a recipe for trouble, and seems to be directly contrary to the ideal of decentralization.
Your solution to create as many identities as you want is great for avoiding having one identity, but not an example of decentralized identity.
How is it not? My identity on the fediverse is spread around multiple accounts on multiple instances. That's about as "decentralized" as it gets.
Yes - each identity is tied to a specific instance, so can be said to be "central" to that instance, but again, all that means is that that one instance can potentially cause me harm on that one instance. The rest of my identities are out of their control.
So with this single identity scheme, imagine that it's somehow compromised or violated or held for ransome or whatever. That affects every single individual account I have throughout the fediverse. While with the way I currently do things, all it could ever do is affect the one account I have on one instance, and dealing with it would be just as easy as avoiding or closing that account. All the rest of my accounts, and my fediverse access broadly, would remain entirely unaffected.
How is that not the better alternative, and much more to the point, more in keeping with the ideal of decentralization?
What you seem to be against is forcing you to have only one login. That does go against the model we are talking about.
And it isn’t what’s being suggested.
Yes - that isn't what's being suggested. And that's entirely irrelevant.
The correct way to measure the threat a proposal poses isn't by what's specifically being proposed, but by what the proposal, if enacted, carries with it - what it necessitates, implies or even just allows.
As I mentioned before, and this seems to me to be the biggest potential threat vector, unless people host their identities on their own hardware, that information is going to be on someone else's hardware. And that's not going to be a charity - it's going to be a business, that's going to profit off of it somehow. If this proposal goes through and is relatively widely adopted, there will one day be an industry leader in the identity-hosting business, and that company will have leverage over the fediverse as a whole. And at that point it would be easy enough for them to, for instance, strike a deal with the biggest instances so that the instances, in the name of security or convenience or whatever might suffice, only accept registrations through that particular service.
I'm not saying that that will happen - only that it could. And that's enough, in my estimation, to make it a bad idea, because if the history of the internet has shown us anything, it's that if there's a way for someone to control something and profit off of it, someone will control it and profit off of it, and the original proposal that made that possible doesn't mean a damned thing.
You're only describing what would happen at the instance level, and skipping over the fact that the whole thing hinges on your identity on each and every instance actually being one and only one identity that would reside in one particular place. It would actually exist on, and be federated from, one particular server somewhere.
What that means, and the part you're leaving out, is that whoever controlled that server would control your access to the fediverse as a whole - not just on one particular instance, which is the reality with instance-specific identities, but on all instances of all services.
The only way to avoid putting control over your access to the fediverse as a whole in the hands of one company would be to maintain your server on your own hardware, and as the article itself notes, most people can't or won't do that. So most people will end up with their identity on all instances of all services under the control of one specific company. Which is very much NOT the case now.
Now, if someone wants to somehow use their control over my fediverse access for some self-serving purpose - either maliciously or simply as a goad with which to extract profit from me - they're necessarily limited to one identity on one instance of one service because that's as high as it goes. They might, for instance, hijack or disable or demand a subscription fee for access to my .world identity, which resides on .world's server. All that would mean to me though is that that one particular identity on that one particular instance would be compromised. I could still access the fediverse, and even access .world, just by coming in through my kbin identity or my lemm.ee identity or my .ml identity or whatever, since all of those are out of their control.
With this scheme, if someone wants to use their control over my fediverse access for some self-serving purpose, they have one specific place to do it - at the one specific server on which my identity is hosted and from which my identity is federated. With one move, they could hijack or disable or restrict extort payment for my access to ALL instances of ALL services, all at once.
More it's just the way I've pretty much always been. Before I was even really aware of it, I apparently figured out that I couldn't control the outside world but I could control how I reacted to it, so that was what I focused on. One could sort of say that I did it simply because it made sense to me, but even that makes it sound more conscious than it was. It's more that it just never occurred to me to do things any other way.
It was only much later that I discovered that there was a philosophy called "stoicism" that advocated that.
Hey guys, what are your thoughts on the existence of extraterrestrial life and the potential involvement of governments in concealing or studying such entities.
I recognize that the universe is so vast that it's likely that life forms other than us exist in it, but that's the extent of it.
I've seen no verifiable evidence that they in fact do, so I don't "believe" that they do.
Really, I don't "believe" in much of anything for which there is no verifiable evidence. I don't even understand how that works - how it is that other people apparently do. It's not a conscious choice or anything - it's just appears that there's a set of requirements that must be met before the position of "belief" is triggered inside my mind, and one of those requirements is verifiable evidence. Without that, the state of "believing" just isn't triggered, and it's not as if I can somehow force it, so that's that.
As far as I can see, governments are comprised almost entirely of psychopaths, opportunists, charlatans and fools, so I see little likelihood that they possess concealed knowledge regarding any nominal extraterrestrial life. First, and most simply, if they did possess any such knowledge, it's near certain that somebody would've blabbed something by now.
Beyond that though, I think it's exceedingly unlikely that any alien life form capable of traveling interstellar distances would, on arriving on the Earth, seek out contact with a government, much less limit its contact to a government. If they're that advanced, it can only be the case that they, in their own development, either never bought into the flatly ludicrous and clearly destructive idea of institutionalized authority or overcame it before it inevitably destroyed them, and in either case, I don't see any reason why they would lend any credence to our mass delusion that this one subset of humanity forms a specially qualified and empowered elite that rightly oversees everyone else's interests. That's our delusion - not theirs.
As civilian casualties continue to mount in the wartorn Gaza Strip, reports of Israel's use of artificial intelligence (AI) in its targeting of Hamas militants are facing increasing scrutiny. A report by the Israeli outlets +972 Magazine and Local Call earlier this month said that Israeli forces had relied heavily on two AI...
The other answers mostly sum it up - it was initially made illegal primarily as a way to establish an "other" with which to frighten conservatives.
There's another thing that hasn't been mentioned yet though that I've long thought is relevant - is part of the reason that marijuana specifically was for so long (and still is in some quarters) so condemned.
Imagine you're a corrupt politician, and you want to sell your constituents on the idea of going to war in the Middle East (so you can collect some bribes from defense contractors and oil companies) or instituting mandatory sentencing (so you can collect some bribes from prison contractors) or cutting taxes on the wealthy (so you can collect bribes from rich people and corporations) or any of the other, similar things that corrupt politicians want to do
Who would you rather try selling that idea to? A bunch of pot smokers or a bunch of drinkers?
I think part of the issue is that marijuana appeals to a part of the population that really is, to corrupt politicians and their cronies and patrons, "undesirable." When they want to get the people all fired up in support of their latest bullshit, they want somebody with a beer in their hand, drunkenly shouting, "Yeah! Kick their asses!" Not somebody with a joint in their hand, muzzily saying, "Hold on a minute - you want to do what?"
Right, but it's not a paradox - it's a conundrum. It's not just that the person saying it is part of the first group, but that they necessarily are.
Since people want to believe that they "know better," there's a strong urge to count oneself among the second group, which immediately places one in the first.
I forced myself to go back a little to Reddit recently. Because while I endorse and love the existence of the Fediverse, I can't in good conscience, tolerate the instability of it. Any other time I go somewhere, I'm met with a page that says KBin is working on resolving issues, then I go somewhere else and it's fine....
This isn't "the fediverse." This is one instance. "The fediverse" is a network of interoperable instances, each one owned and maintained separately.
Personally, I think the best way to interact with the fediverse is to maintain accounts on multiple instances. I have a dozen or so accounts total, and regularly use four or five of them. They're all under the same name, so they're all "me," but they're spread out instead of everything being on one account on one instance.
The main reason I prefer that is that every instance is different. Even though they're all interacting with the same broad pool of content, they each have a different userbase with different preferences, which means that they each have a different set of federated instances and subscribed communities. There's a fair amount of stuff I'll see on one instance but not on another, and it follows the overall focus of the instance. So whatever my mood might be or I might be interested in, I have an account on a suitable instance to match it.
Another advantage though, and directly on topic, is that I always have an alternative if one of them is having problems. Since each instance is privately owned and maintained rather than being owned by a corporation and maintained by its staff, there's any number of quirks and difficulties and failures. And that's just the way it is - the people running these instances are just ordinary people who are basically donating their time and resources, and they don't owe us anything. We get whatever we get, and have no right to demand any more than that.
With accounts on multiple instances, it doesn't matter if one or another of them has difficulties at the moment, or even if one shuts down completely (as two of my favorites have), since i can just switch to a different instance any time.
Kbin is special. It's an entirely different piece of software from Lemmy (and a better one in many ways). But it was written primarily by one person - Ernest - and he's also the owner of this instance. And while he's a great guy, he's also a single individual with other interests and responsibilities, and with some health issues. So it's a great place running on a great piece of software, but it has some difficulties and is often slow and/or glitchy. That's fine - I still like it here, so it's one of my most-used accounts, and I can always use a different one on a different instance if this one is too much of a problem.
I expect a wave of internet users to get upset and call paying for used services “enshittification”, because people don’t realise how much running these AI models actually costs.
I am so tired of this bullshit. Every time I've turned around, for the past thirty years now, I've seen some variation on this same basic song and dance.
Yet somehow, in spite of supposedly being burdened with so much expense and not given their due by a selfish, ignorant public, these companies still manage to build plush offices on some of the most expensive real estate on the planet and pay eight- or even nine-figure salaries to a raft of executive parasites.
When they start selling assets and cutting executive salaries, or better yet laying them off, then I'll entertain the possibility that they need more revenue. Until then, fuck 'em.
I don't expect anyone to start a web site or service or to give me or anyone else access to it at all, much less for free.
I'm just making the very narrow point that when a company chooses to do all of that, and manages to make enough money to build a plush corporate headquarters on some of the most expensive real estate on the planet and pay its executives millions or even tens or hundreds of millions of dollars, then starts crying about not making enough money, that's self-evident bullshit.
If anybody's acting"entitled" in that scenario, it's the greedy corporate weasels who spend billions on their own privilege, then expect us to cover their asses when they come up short.
I appreciate that earnest made a post yesterday, or maybe it was the day before, saying that he is not dead and hasn't given up on kbin. It's not on this magazine, so I'm not sure where it was since this seems to be the most appropriate one, but in any case....
Personally, the main thing I want is for all of the pissers and moaners to go away, so the rest of us can just enjoy this place in peace. And that'd take some of the pressure off of Ernest, which would be good for him and, in the long run, good for the instance. You can all move to mbin - it was pretty much built by and for concern trolls and drama llamas, so you should be right at home there.
Yeah - this place has its issues. That's the way it goes on what basically amounts to a hobbyist platform on a decentralized system. And it's part of why I have multiple accounts scattered around the threadiverse - when one is having problems, that likely just means I'll use it less until things settle down, which is fine. It's not like I'm paying for any of this.
I like this interface and I like Ernest. That's enough for me.
I didn't say anything at all about moderators or admins. My point is very narrow and specific - I want the concern trolls and drama llamas - the people who post threads like this one - to fuck off. I'm tired of them pissing and moaning because this new, free, making-it-up-as-we-go-along forum doesn't live up to their expectations. Fuck 'em. Ernest doesn't owe them anything and if they're so unhappy, all they have to do is get the fuck out, then they won't have to deal with the place and the rest of us won't have to deal with them.
Very little evil is actually a direct result of evil people doing evil things. The vast majority of it comes to be through ordinary people doing banal things - things that, like building weapons, are questionable at best, but that they excuse because it's "out of my control."
The thing is that it's not out of their control. Yes - if one individual makes the decision to not take part, that's not going to have much of an effect, but if every person who feels the same way makes that same choice, that absolutely WILL have an effect.
And there's only one way to make it so that every person who feels the same way makes that choice, and that's for each one of them, individually, to look past that "it's out of my control" bullshit excuse and go ahead and do it.
Everything on any significant scale is out of individual control. Individuals just possess a very limited amount of control over affairs on a national, much less global, scale. But that's really entirely beside the point. The point is how you choose to exercise the small amount of control you have. Will you use it for good, or for evil?
the other workers at the factories don’t change their opinion.
And some number of those workers have the exact same opinion that you do - they're opposed, but they don't think they can make a difference.
And if all of you stopped waiting around for some charismatic leader to tell you what to do and just went ahead and made the choice you prefer, you would make a difference.
Then every single person who takes any action would make a difference in the world and change the situation, which obviousy isn’t true.
How did you not get my point?
We'll try it this way:
Thirty people live in a town.
Ten of them, with a leader, want some policy implemented
Twenty of them oppose the policy.
The ten with a leader organize and push for the policy
The twenty who oppose it stand around with their thumbs up their asses, each of them telling themselves that they can't accomplish anything by themselves.
The policy gets implemented
Or
The ten with a leader organize and push for a policy.
The twenty who oppose it each, individually, pull their thumbs out of their asses and stand up and say they oppose it.
Each of those individuals, making their individual choices, finds themselves surrounded by nineteen other individuals who made the same individual choice.
They easily outnumber the ten who want the policy and the policy fails.
That's exactly how and why individuals going ahead and making their individual choices instead of failing to do it because "I can't make a difference by myself" can make a difference.
All they have to do is stop waiting around for somebody to lead them, pull their thumbs out of their asses, and just go ahead and do it on their own, each one as an individual.
I know some of you consider this as documented whining. I hear you but won't stop sharing my opinion and reminding. I recommend continuing commenting on the original post to keep it a bit organized (this post is a link to it)...
I’m really worried about the state of the US despite being a white male who was I’ll coast right through it. I’ll also accept “I don’t” and “very poorly” as answers
I deliberately avoided having kids and I don't have any particular existential dread, so I'm just sort of sitting back and bemusedly watching it all play out. I just read the latest bit about one or another obscenely wealthy and/or powerful blatant psychopath doing or saying something gibberingly insane and I marvel yet again at the fact that the world is run by literal lunatics and nobody seems to even notice.
And when it stops being cynically amusing, I shut it off and go do something else.
And I have the same reaction I have to most of these types of things - I wonder what it tastes like, and wish I could try it.
I've never understood why these things trigger such uproar. It's not like it's poison or some sort of bodily secretion or something - it's just a somewhat unusual but entirely edible ingredient. And it could be good. So what's the problem?
Elon undoubtedly has folders full of cool images he's saved, so while he was still focused on the "X" idea, he rummaged around and found that one and thought, "Yeah! This is gonna be sick dude!"
Thus are decisions made by the world's richest teenage edgelord.
Opinion | Will A.I. Ever Live Up to Its Hype? ( www.nytimes.com )
How the right is weaponizing pro-Palestinian campus protests in the US ( www.theguardian.com )
Republicans are using a narrative of chaos and ‘philosophical divisions on Israel’ among Democrats to sink Biden’s campaign...
Americans are choking on surging fast-food prices. "I can't justify the expense," one customer says ( www.cbsnews.com )
Kevin Roberts remembers when he could get a bacon cheeseburger, fries and a drink from Five Guys for $10. But that was years ago. When the Virginia high school teacher recently visited the fast-food chain, the food alone without a beverage cost double that amount....
TikTok sues U.S. government, says ban violates First Amendment ( www.cnbc.com )
Jack Dorsey departs Bluesky board | TechCrunch ( techcrunch.com )
If Trump wins this year's general election, aside from Project 2025, What would you expect him to do? ( kbin.social )
I for example, expect him to no longer require nutrition labels to be on packaged and canned foods. We're all just going to have to eat what we can and play it by portion sizes....
What's a candy that's practically crack for you?
[serious] If Project 2025 becomes a reality. Would you fight in a civil war?
Does the American Diabetes Association work for patients or companies? A lawsuit dared to ask | Neil Barsky ( www.theguardian.com )
The ADA just settled an explosive legal case accusing the organization of betraying people with diabetes
Donald Trump Will Speak at the Libertarian Convention. It’s Not as Weird as It Sounds. ( www.motherjones.com )
FTC fines Razer for every cent made selling bogus “N95 grade” RGB masks ( arstechnica.com )
“[Razer] falsely claimed, in the midst of a global pandemic, that their face mask was the equivalent of an N95 certified respirator,” Samuel Levine, director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection, said in a statement....
Just saw this while getting gas. Why is it illegal to get less than 4 gallons? ( lemmy.world )
What predictions about the year 2030 do you feel most certain about?
The Court Just Sealed Everyone’s Fate, Including Its Own ( newrepublic.com )
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/14751971
Prove Im wrong ( lemmy.ml )
Kristi Noem killed her pet dog, "Cricket," after the animal misbehaved on a hunting trip, she says ( www.salon.com )
Exclusive: U.S. pier attacked during construction work off Gaza coast - I24NEWS ( www.i24news.tv )
One Login: Towards a Single Fediverse Identity on ActivityPub ( thenewstack.io )
In response to Bray’s toot, Evan Prodromou — one of the creators of ActivityPub, who is currently writing an O’Reilly book about the protocol — noted that this “is also the argument for using the ActivityPub API.” He described the API as “an open, extensible API that can handle any kind of activity type — not...
What's your favorite profound quote?
Do you believe in Aliens?
Hey guys, what are your thoughts on the existence of extraterrestrial life and the potential involvement of governments in concealing or studying such entities.
Israel's 'Where's Daddy?' AI system helps target suspected Hamas militants when they're at home with their families, report says ( www.businessinsider.com )
As civilian casualties continue to mount in the wartorn Gaza Strip, reports of Israel's use of artificial intelligence (AI) in its targeting of Hamas militants are facing increasing scrutiny. A report by the Israeli outlets +972 Magazine and Local Call earlier this month said that Israeli forces had relied heavily on two AI...
Why is alcohol legal if it's much more harmful than marijuana?
What is your favorite paradox or conundrum? I am partial to can god kill god?
The monotheistic all powerful one.
Can KBin not like, freak out at any turn when surfing on it? ( kbin.social )
I forced myself to go back a little to Reddit recently. Because while I endorse and love the existence of the Fediverse, I can't in good conscience, tolerate the instability of it. Any other time I go somewhere, I'm met with a page that says KBin is working on resolving issues, then I go somewhere else and it's fine....
Are We Watching The Internet Die? ( www.wheresyoured.at )
Ernest needs to quickly delegate or this instance will quickly die ( kbin.social )
I appreciate that earnest made a post yesterday, or maybe it was the day before, saying that he is not dead and hasn't given up on kbin. It's not on this magazine, so I'm not sure where it was since this seems to be the most appropriate one, but in any case....
Do you think it is ethical to work for a company that builds drones, weaponry, or supplies parts to the military?
What is going on with kbin - a week has passed with no sign of any life ( kbin.melroy.org )
I know some of you consider this as documented whining. I hear you but won't stop sharing my opinion and reminding. I recommend continuing commenting on the original post to keep it a bit organized (this post is a link to it)...
How do you guys cope with the fact that the world isn't getting any better?
I’m really worried about the state of the US despite being a white male who was I’ll coast right through it. I’ll also accept “I don’t” and “very poorly” as answers
Every day we stray further from God's light. ( lemmy.world )
Twitter’s new X logo wasn’t made by an in-house designer. It’s from an old podcast ( lemmy.ml )
Twitter’s new X logo wasn’t made by an in-house designer. It’s from an old podcast hosted by one of the cult that Elon took from his replies.