CitizenVectron

I'm not mixing it up, I was giving the answerer the benefit of the doubt on what they were trying to answer (and how the question was meant to trip them up).

I mean, she's correct in the context in which she's speaking—if she believes that someone born with birth-giving organs can identify as male, then a man can give birth. Obviously as a sound bite it will completely live rent free in the minds of right-wing people.

Lmao

I am glad to be in an industry (education) that is generally recession-proof.

Got a quote today to redo our kitchen countertops, and all I can say is: It was 50% higher than we anticipated, and we'll be politely declining, I think. We want wood butcherblock for the kitchen, and there is only one supplier in our city for the brand we wanted. The actual manufacturer is great, and they are the only food-safe and sealed wood countertop maker in Canada (that doesn't require constant oiling, etc). But...the supplier/installer is a big chain that doesn't have great reviews (though few do), and half their visit/quote was spent on promo videos showing how they are a member of BBB (red flag!) and stuff like that. Like...it's 2022, if you are selling that kind of image instead of just relying on your quality, then it's damage control. So, with inflation the way it is, and with a looming potential recession, I think we'll keep the big renovations in check for now and continue to invest and boost our emergency savings. I am very glad my wife and I are on the same page when it comes to saving/living within our means. We purposefully bought a house that we can afford on one of our salaries, if needed, don't carry any debt outside our mortgage, etc. Many people we know always insist we should spend more, get the new car, the bigger house, etc. But...while it's nice to have nice things (and don't get me wrong, I like nice things, and we do spend on things that matter), the future is always uncertain, especially with my wife's MS, so we're not going to put ourselves in a position where one of us losing our job (or interest rates rising, etc) risks everything we have.

Meta tells employees to stop discussing abortion at work WWW.THEVERGE.COM Meta says the topic can "leave people feeling like they’re being targeted based on their gender or religion." 100% it's men feeling like they are being targeted because they are men.

I figured we unfortunately need a thread on the rising battle in the US to roll back the rights and visibility of LGBTQ+ people. A Florida teacher felt she had to quit amid "Don't Say Gay" rhetoric - The Washington Post WWW.WASHINGTONPOST.COM One educator found her calling. The climate of homophobia surrounding Florida's "don't say gay" law upended it.

Working as intended: and But this is great for the people who wrote these laws. If they can replace competent teachers who care about education with ideologues who only care about indoctrination (and who will work in shitty conditions for low wages, for the cause), then they win.

The next culture war target of the right: ethical green investing. GOP directs culture war fury toward green investing trend | AP News APNEWS.COM SALT LAKE CITY (AP) — Republicans are coming out swinging against Wall Street's growing efforts to consider factors like long-term environmental risk in investment decisions, the latest indication that the GOP is willing to damage its relationship with big business to score culture war points. I bet the next thing will be insurance companies. Insurance is an industry that knows climate change is real because they see the actual costs. So, of course, they are starting to price that into products (from changing flood risk in new areas, drought risks for crop insurance, new areas with greater forest fire risks, etc). I bet we'll see Florida or some other state legislate that insurers aren't allowed to take climate risk into account when pricing policies.

This is an important point, and I think one that gets lost in a lot of polling about views on abortion: there are a lot of people who are individually against abortion, but also believe that it should still be the choice of the mother.

It feels like Russia is throwing everything it has at getting Severodonetsk. It's taking practically their entire military to move forward a few km. I think they will unfortunately take it...but will they effectively be spent?

It's one of those things that most people don't understand with stats. Another example is when someone is like, 80, and someone points out that they are past the life expectancy and could die anytime. This happened a lot with elderly deaths by COVID (making the deaths seem less tragic). But if you look at the life expectancy of people who are already 80, it's like 88+, because you no longer have to worry about dying as a baby.

His fans are morons:

But neither is a fertilized egg.

Can't wait until Cawthorn leads a coup and the NYT says "The last American President in a wheelchair was considered by some to be a great man—is Cawthorn the next FDR? His militants believe so."

Yeah I am very clear and consistent in my view: The less new sentience and sapience created, the better (on a universal, moral level) Existing life should be made as comfortable as possible (and society should be structured around this)

"If I can't slap an employee's ass, then it will be impossible for the scientists to get us to Mars."

Yeah I think the Conservatives will win. The main possibility of them not winning is a swing from NDP to LP in the final days of the campaign, similar to the 2015 federal election (if NDP voters value defeating Ford > NDP government).

In fact, we are kind of facing that now, where the baby boomer generation is too large for younger generations to support with the resources we have. Boomers have hoarded wealth, and now there will not enough to support them in their decline, so cuts will likely be made to end-of-life care, etc. Either that or most of society will revolve around just supporting elder boomers.

My opinion has nothing to do with poverty; I believe that all existence is a net negative, morally. Some people's existence is a positive, and many people's are negative. However, self-selection of those existing (by the sake of existing) will result in most people saying they are glad they are alive, even if their lives have had more suffering than joy/peace, etc. The cost/benefit morally of bringing a person into the world is my main issue, that you are rolling the die on if their life will result in major suffering. If a person is able to make that decision for themselves (to do something that will result in their own pain, be it physical or mental) then that's one thing. To make the choice for another without their consent (which is impossible for those who do not yet exist) is, imo, immoral. That is why I am generally some flavour of an antinatalist. Don't get me wrong, I am personally glad to be alive, and I devote much of my time to making others' lives as good as possible. I believe that morally the best thing you can do is make the existence of others as bearable as you can, and that society should revolve around this. I do not hate children, or people who have children, nor am I opposed to every birth, etc. I simply think that morally the act of creating sapience from nothing without consent (which cannot be granted) is immoral. Ultimately (and we are getting into the weeds here), the greatest risk is that we eventually lose agency in existence. Right now the best thing about existence is that it will end. The worst thing that could happen is some kind of eternal existence. It's why I am aghast when people say they would voluntarily upload their consciousness into a simulation if they could. Issues of originality/copy of yourself aside (which is also a question of continuity of your sense of self even when you sleep each night, etc), if someone else controls your existence (and the quality of it), then it's incredibly risky and by definition immoral. Imagine a worst-case situation where someone clicks the "torture for eternity" button in the simulation, and there is no way for you to get out. And then they make a billion copies of you and do the same thing. Real-life existence carries those same risks, but at least there is an end, so there is less moral risk. But that raises the question of if morality is even an issue if the thing involved ceases to exist (did it ever exist, once it is gone, etc). /End philosophical rant.

Also: $11 million for his family and business combined, from 2013 to 2018. So that's 6 years on the outside, which puts it at $1.83 million/yr. That's...not overwhelming, by business standards. The local Subway might be doing more than that.

*Something goes wrong in America* A: Hey we should fix that B: It's too late, it's past the deadline A: Yeah, but, it's a big deal. Why can't we just do it now? B: Some rich guys in 1776 won't allow it A: Oh okay yeah that makes sense, never mind, we'll just continue to suffer

I mean, on the one hand, yes, these platforms need 100x more regulation. On the other...if you let people stream things live, there is no way to stop bad things from being streamed live. And 2 minutes to shut a stream down is pretty fast.

The emergence of life in the universe was a mistake.

Yep: The far-right conspiracy wing is taking over conservative parties across the country.