- 0 Posts
- 28 Comments
4·4 days agoI specifically will boycott places if their ads annoy me enough.
I want a replica of the ocarina from Lunar: A Silver Star Story.
It’s such a beautiful instrument.
26·4 days agoJust make it long with an intermission.
Lots of old musical films did that. Like Oklahoma!, Fiddler on the Roof, and Hello Dolly.
7·7 days agoI’ve heard this story before, it’s not a new incident. It’s also getting a lot of coverage from lots of media.
Similar story, 2014: https://www.cnn.com/2014/07/31/living/florida-mom-arrested-son-park/index.html
2·14 days agoFinding the correct bolt size, thread pitch, material, and trusting that when I order grade 8 bolts, I’m actually getting grade 8 makes Amazon quite a pain in the ass.
If it’s something I don’t care too much about, yea Amazon is fine. But when I want to trust my life to it or it’s going to take some serious stress I’m going to want McMaster.
13·18 days agoI would literally prefer a steaming pile of shit as president than Trump.
6·20 days agoBlack and white as VR
A political first
It’s been open less than a year!
Are you American?
That. Doesn’t. Work.
Full stop.
Let’s say for a moment that progressives and Democrats did that for whatever issue they personally felt strongly about.
First, we have to acknowledge that the Republicans ARE NOT doing that. So they’re vote count doesn’t change and they win
Second, people will disagree on the same issue. You can’t capture everyone on every issue. Refer to the first point, Republicans win.
Third, there will be huge factions each with their own issue. A candidate cannot sway all these single issues groups. See the first point, Republicans win.
What first past the post representative democracy means is to vote for the viable politician that MOST ALIGNS with your political position. Not the one that EXACTLY aligns. If you build the third parties at the local and representative and Senate level. Maybe you can get there, but for now, this is the political system we have to work in.
2·23 days agoFile an injunction. Put up every legal barrier to prevent this asshat from having an audience.
There is a big population of women who are past childbearing age that are voting for Trump. It’s fucked up, but just getting women to vote may not work. They need to get young women to vote.
So many elderly women are going to be voting who no longer have skin in the abortion game.
One article I read said that the representative race was much closer. It might not affect the president, but could affect other positions.
Voting doesn’t mean you support them.
You aren’t giving them money, you aren’t campaigning for them. You are saying that between these two, admittedly fucked up, parties this is the one you think that will be better.
So for the presidential election, vote to reduce harm - not to increase it.
If you want to do better, support, fund, campaign for third parties down line. Local elections and build the momentum until they become a viable presidential candidate. Work to reform the electoral system that can dismantle the two party system.
But don’t think voting for Harris is de facto supporting the Democratic party.
Which means that I have three options
I do not have three options, myself.
It is said that Americans have three options, the best of which only might improve the situation where one country is terrorising another country by killing innocent people, every day.
So are you American? It sounds like you aren’t and, if not, why are you advocating for people not to vote or vote third party?
The problem, as I see it, is that there is literally no chance for a third party to win the presidency.
Which means that I have three options:
- Vote Trump. Someone who has called for more violence.
- Vote Harris. Whether I’m happy with her or the Democratic party or not. Try and mitigate as much killing and harm as I am able to. Actively try to prevent things from getting worse.
- Vote third party/Don’t vote. Either Trump or Harris will win, and I can claim my conscious is clear. If Trump wins, I will have not done what little I could have to lessen the evil. I have to be okay with someone who is far worse getting into power
We can’t solve the genocide by voting third party. All we can do, all that the little power granted to us can do, is try and prevent it from getting worse. So if you want to prevent as much killing as you actually can, if you want to give the most people the opportunity to live, then morally as I see it, you need to vote Harris.
Is she perfect? No. Hell no, man. But she is the candidate that with this genocide happening, and it is happening regardless of who is getting in, who will give the most Palestinians a chance to live. A third party candidate isn’t making it to the White house so a third party candidate can NOT lessen the harm.
Failing to save someone’s life, implies they made decisions in an attempt to save the life. That they tried, and were unsuccessful.
But in this case, they made decisions which directly prevented Micah from receiving the tests that would have given them the opportunity to save his life.
The decision, and action, to dissuade Micah’s mother from seeking further medical care directly lead to his death. The decision, and action, to discharge him without adequate testing directly lead to his death.
The ER team on the third visit sounds to have tried and failed to save his life, even the decision to wait for blood thinners until more thorough testing was likely correct since they were most likely unaware of the risk of the formation of blood clots in the child.
The primary care doctor and the first ER team negligently made a series of decisions and actions that allowed a child to have an illness go undetected until it became fatal. They had the training and knowledge to know how serious the symptoms reported were and that the child’s recovery was not in line with the illness they had initially diagnosed him. They may have had procedures they didn’t follow which if they had would have prevented Micah death. If those are identified, then yes, I would say they caused his death through inaction.
Does it rise to criminality? No. But it’s likely malpractice.
If posting on Lemmy was a job…
Depending on what people do, the government already has their fingerprints.
Personally, I work around schools so I had to get a background check and fingerprinted for that. I also am licensed to handle explosives, both federally and at the state level. I been fingerprinted for that. I’ve gone through TSA for hazmat endorsement on a commercial driver’s license. That needed fingerprints and a background check.
Getting fingerprinted to get through airport security is the least of my privacy concerns.
But my threat model isn’t the TSA. They aren’t a concern of mine, although I do opt out of their facial recognition.
I am concerned with internet surveillance, corporate surveillance, and communication surveillance.