Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)N
Posts
4
Comments
342
Joined
3 yr. ago

  • Yes. Or treat trans women as women. Because that's what they are. Name a situation where you think this would be problematic and I'll show you why it's patently absurd.

  • Fun fact: the infamous "cripple fight" from South Park is a shot-for-shot remake of the fight scene from They Live

  • Rawr

    Jump
  • While this is good advice, best practice is to always get your yubikey in pairs and keep them synchronized. One should remain in your home, in a safe place (as you described) while the other should remain on your person or outside the home (e.g. in a safe deposit box)

    It's more of a pain in the ass for sure, but handles the theft scenario more effectively

  • 😍🤩 Contextually relevant Depeche Mode 🤩😍

  • I was wondering wtf you were talking about until I remembered I have the entire tankiesphere blocked. Oh the blissful, golden silence 😁

  • If you think even 50% of her campaign decision making reflected her personal politics you are mistaken about how the DNC operates.

    As I said, on paper she was a fine candidate to start a campaign with. She could have easily converted a win if the party as a whole hadn't totally rejected anything progressive long before she took to the campaign trail.

    People forget that after you get elected you still have to collaborate with Congress. Presidential candidates are absolutely beholden to the will of the DNC, and their party platform. They will not hesitate to torpedo a presidency as retaliation for failing to toe the company line

  • That was 4 years before she, you know, was vice president for 4 years. That tends to provide valuable experience.

    I'm not gonna pretend I liked her but she wasn't a bad candidate to begin a campaign with. But then she ran to the right in an insane way

  • Definitely seems likely!

  • Atta girl, Patty! This is what we sent you for.

    Not gonna pretend she's not part of the establishment, but her and Maria Cantwell have been our picks for the Senate for several elections now and with good reason when you look at the alternatives.

  • PSA: While chewing plastic is usually benign, silly cat behavior it can sometimes indicate something is off/wrong

    Pulled from Purina's info page on plastic-chewing:

    • Although unusual, diseases like hyperthyroidism in cats, feline diabetes, anemia or dental issues might cause a cat to chew on plastic.
    • Stress or anxiety can cause cats to show changes in their behavior and chewing plastic can be one of many signs that your cat is feeling anxious
    • It is natural for cats to eat things that they can gnaw and chew. If they do not have this in their diet or provided in appropriate enrichment opportunities, they might be feeling the need to exercise their teeth and jaws on inappropriate items.
    • Many unusual behaviors are driven by pain – and chewing, gnawing, and eating often inappropriate things can be one of them
    • Cats can show compulsive cat behavior patterns, similar to OCD (obsessive-compulsive disorder) in humans.
    • Your cat might be telling you that they’re lacking some nutrients by biting plastic. If they feel like they’re missing out on something, they could resort to biting and chewing on other things

    Learned this lesson the hard way once, so spreading the knowledge just in case :)

  • Yup. And as I just responded to someone else, it IS extremely important to act on your values even when it seems fruitless (so long as you're not giving up an opportunity for more effective action later by doing so)

  • As I said in my original reply, I am not arguing in favor of continuing to buy these products. Just making sure everyone is coming at this with as complete an awareness of the reality of the situation as possible :)

    I firmly agree that you have to act on your values even when it seems fruitless

  • Space Ghost; "Moltar, eject the warp core!"Moltar: "We don't have a warp core."Space Ghost: "Good work!"

  • As I said elsewhere, there is no doubt that any attempted 'boycott' has already been factored into their calculations.

    If you can shatter their predictions, good on you. But I'm not holding my breath

  • The loss of your revenue has already been factored into the decision. They know some people will think and act as you do. It's just a question of how many.

    Maybe you can get enough people to move the needle, I guess. But I'm pretty sure they have a pretty good grasp on how the silent majority will behave

  • IMO you're aiming your ire at the wrong target. This is what happens when major economies apply tarrifs to components used in retail products that ship globally.

    They're not doing it to "appease Americans", they're doing it to protect their bottom line. Blame capitalism. Blame "fiduciary responsibility". Blame Trump. But the execs at these companies don't really have a choice here.

    It works like this:

    • Tarrifs, if passed only to US consumers, would raise the price of the product by, let's say, 30%
    • A bean counter determined that the loss of revenue from decreased sales in the US with that kind of price hike would be more than the loss of revenue if they spread the cost across the globe.
    • In other words, the math looks something like (US-sales@130% + Global-sales@100%) < (US-sales@115% + Global-sales@115%)
    • Fiduciary responsibility forces leadership to do whatever is best for their bottom line, or they risk being ousted AND sued by shareholders for failing to act in their best interests
    • Now that they know which approach is more profitable, their hands are tied unless they can make a REALLY compelling case why taking a big loss now will create a bigger win later (which is extremely hard to do in this kind of situation)

    The whole system fucking sucks. It's grotesque. But that's what's going on here. Not some "oh no don't anger the Americans" politicking.

    It's about dollars. It's always about dollars. And multiple countries have literally written laws to force publicly traded companies to maximize dollars for shareholders.

    I don't say all this as some argument for buying Xbox/Sony products. I simply want to point out that the problem here is the system itself, because even if Sony or Microsoft were to drop out of the business tomorrow, the next publicly traded company to fill the void would do the exact same thing.

    And there are plenty of other problems with privately owned businesses.

    Pick your poison 🤷

  • Wesley figured it out?! Wesley?! This is a real low point. Yeah, this one hurts.

  • It shouldn't be that confusing, considering this is literally the challenge lawmakers (honest ones, as rare as they are) face.

    There's a great blog post by Neil Gaiman (despite recent revelations about his misconduct) that talks about "why we must defend icky speech".

    Long story short, the law is a blunt instrument. If you cannot clearly and accurately define the terms being used in the language of the law then you wind up with a law that can be applied beyond the intended scope. Like when you write laws about freedom of religion and then wind up with The Satanic Temple erecting statues of Baphomet in court houses. Or banning the Bible from library because it contains depictions of violence and sexual deviancy or promiscuity

    These issues aren't just academic. They have real-world consequences. Like, there have literally been legal rulings made based on the presence or absence of an Oxford comma

    Is that kind of pedantry useful to the average conversation? No, of course not. But there are people trying to make laws that target women, or trans women, and if they can't accurately define what a woman is then the law can be used to target people they didn't want targeted.

    Which is one of many reasons why trying to target trans folks with legal authority is a fool's errand

  • Lol check my post/comment history and see how fucking wrong you are

    Literally caucused for Bernie.

    Everyone is so ready to pick up a pitchfork that you fail basic reading comprehension.

    I'm literally just trying to think of ways they could have EXECUTED this. I said nothing of the legitimacy, fairness, justice, or legality of the behavior

    It is the bread and butter of capitalist fucks to operate just barely within the letter of the law.

    This was never apologia and your (and others) penchant for picking a fight is toxic as fuck.