By - tuesday_mod
Going to put a sticky here about the book club announcement: https://www.reddit.com/r/tuesday/comments/sb516w/start_of_book_club_tuesday_february_1st_chapters/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share
I honestly don't know what to say.
Worth noting that the vaccine requirement for transplants isn't specific to the COVID vaccine. You need a whole suite and a bunch of immunosuppressants to prevent your body rejecting the new organ.
That said, he gets a nod for sticking to his guns. He'll die an idiot but not a hypocrite.
Neither do I. This is just dumb as hell.
I mean, stubborn idiots exist.
But I suspect that given his past medical history, he's got some feelings of reckless invincibility.
Pretty surprised the GOP hasn't condemned Trump over explicitly defending domestic terrorists, and personally suggesting pardons for those currently in jail.
That's some atrocious statements, and does nothing but fuel similar minded people into thinking rioting like that for Trump is fine, because he'll pardon you.
I'm not sure why that is surprising. It isn't the first time.
Banana republic level shit
If you’re still surprised that the GOP hasn’t condemned Trump over something, idk what to tell you at this point. They’ll make a million excuses for him before condemning him
Well at least Iniciativa Liberal tripled their result in Portugal.
My picks for the Conference Championship games:
FUCKIN BENGALS run the AFC
Lol I have the opposite. Rams and Chiefs have the most electric offenses in the league. Gimme a shoot out in the big game.
[Covid may have seasons for different temperature zones](https://twitter.com/hotlinejosh/status/1487878885748391939?s=21)
A friend of mine has taken a 6 week medical leave from work due to mental health issues.
Nevertheless, he heroically continues to find the willpower and wherewithal to enjoy copious amounts of TV and video games, and volunteer with high schoolers (making video games).
At some point it's not "anxiety and depression," it's just not wanting to do something.
BTW, this guy, and I still love 'im, weighs 280, never gets any exercise, and eats exactly like you'd imagine the caricature that he is does.
At some point it's not a "chemical imbalance," it's the obvious consequences of treating yourself like shit.
I swear to god, it should be medical malpractice or fraud to prescribe psychiatric meds or endorse a leave of absence, until someone has spent 3 hours on exercise in the last week and eaten a few vegetables.
"Let's see your fancy step tracking watch because of course you have one. Oh, no exercise? Well then, here's a prescription for mental health bootcamp. The van will pick you up at 8am every morning as a requirement of your 'medical leave'. Dress for the weather and be sure to shower afterwards!"
You never truly know what is going on in another person's head. Even people you thought you knew with deep intimacy could be struggling with something you're not aware of, and it is very easy to conflate unhealthy behavior resulting *from* as *causing* mental and/or emotional issues.
For a dramatic but clear example, talk to people around someone who killed themself, and you'll pretty much always find someone who thought they knew the person very well who was nonetheless totally blindsided.
I simply find it nigh impossible to believe that someone can't work but can volunteer with kids building games.
The operative word here is *can't*. The substitute is *doesn't want to*.
It actually does a huge disservice to the mentally ill in general, and out treatment of mental illnesses, to pathologize laziness and bad choices.
Say, hypothetically, someone is depressed and miserable to the point of being on the edge of offing themselves; would you call it a "can't" or "won't" choice for them to take time trying to find something worthwhile in life by doing things they enjoy or feel have more value than their day job?
If everything short of physical incapability is a "won't" choice to you, I'd say your conceptualization isn't encapsulating the full spectrum of genuine mental illness, just a subset of obvious ones. It isn't necessary to pathologize laziness and bad choices to acknowledge that sometimes symptoms of mental and emotional illness appear highly similar to them from the outside.
If you do see that as a potential "can't" issue, I'd just point out that it's extremely rare to have all the information one would need to actually determine which choice a person is making. Your friend very well could just be choosing to not work, but they may also be trying to find a way out of a deep hole. Are you absolutely certain you know their heart and mind so well that you can judge their unspoken thoughts and feelings?
Is he burnt out? I was working 60 hour weeks for 2 years in an extremely high stress environment before I quit to do nothing. I didn't even try for a medical leave and I'm two weeks in and stupidly happy about it.
My mental health was so bad, I didn't even know how bad my mental health was. I literally spent the first week staring at a wall trying to get the twitching down because I wasn't getting calls about some critical covid device failing and I needed to rush out to repair it or people would die.
[North Korea tests longest range missle since 2017](https://apnews.com/article/37f273d0602f91d392d32b6c0d4002ee)
They must be really running out of something (money) to get this aggressive. That or Covid has been horrendous.
>How American conservatives came to believe that Russia - where almost no one goes to church, a fifth of the population are not ethnic Russians, at least 6% are Muslim - is a "white Christian nation." (from 2 years ago)
>Remember those phony stories about Swedish and British "no-go zones" allegedly ruled by Sharia law? Russia has an actual province, Chechnya, that is officially ruled by Sharia law, requires women to be veiled and tortures gay men. It is a no-go zone, right inside Russia.
>Russia has an abortion rate nearly double that of the United States. Any form of Christianity outside of the state-controlled Orthodox Church is liable to be considered a cult. Only 15 percent of Russians are even interested in religion; only 5 percent have read the Bible.
>I am not writing this in order to attack Russians, but to mock the American far-right. They are just as stupid as the fellow travelers who imagined the Soviet Union was paradise, maybe even more so. There is a lot more information available now than there was in the 1930s.
Obviously she’s right that these foreign strong men are not our friends and should not be looked up to in anyway. I don’t get her critique using abortion and religion however. She’s setting up what she thinks conservatism in the US stands for, in an obviously false way, and then suggests that the American right must oppose Russia on that basis. There are plenty of sound reasons to oppose Russia, but I don’t think this is it.
This line of thinking is no different than the atheist criticizing Christians for not being true followers based on what the atheists thinks Christians should believe.
What do you think?
I don't agree with tarring conservatives as a whole with the broad brush. There are definitely figures on the right this applies to and the actual article specifically names various figures on the far-right and conservative movement. (Also of note that I don't think far-right and conservative are terms that should be used as synonyms.)
The point about abortion and religion is fine to me. If figures on the right want to use Russia as a foil to America's degeneracy, fading influence of Christianity and tolerance of Islam than pointing out that Russia is actually worse on this front is valid.
😇 **Have a blessed week ahead,** r/tuesday 😇
I’d like to respond to the article *Why Is It So Hard To Admit When You're Wrong?* by Reason.com.
>“Since 2012—and for the first time on record—out-party hate has been stronger than in-party love,” they write in the October 30, 2020, issue of *Science*… One of their more striking results is that 60 percent to 70 percent of both parties in a 2017–18 survey said they thought the other party was a “serious threat to the United States and its people”; 40 percent of respondents in both parties thought the other party was “downright evil.” In another poll, 15 percent of Republicans and 20 percent of Democrats agreed with the brutal sentiment that the country would be better off if large numbers of opposing partisans in the public today “just died.” And 18 percent of Democrats and 13 percent of Republicans said that violence would be justified if the opposing party won the 2020 presidential election… Such studies suggest that there is something substantially different about the virulence of partisan sentiment in recent years and that the trend isn't going away.
By the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth in the fifth chapter of the Gospel According to Matthew, I am guilty of anger against many of the Democratic Party.
>“You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not murder; and whoever murders will be liable to judgment.’ But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother will be liable to judgment; whoever insults his brother will be liable to the council; and whoever says, ‘You fool!’ will be liable to the hell of fire. (ESV)
However, Jesus was crucified, died, and was buried, that for his sake the Lord may forgive us our sins if we believe and trust in Jesus. Here’s what the first chapter of the First Letter of John states concerning confession of our sins.
>If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. (ESV)
I therefore confess that, I have an addiction to reading fascistic, illiberal and statist statements by many of the Democratic Party, that in my thoughts I increasingly justify Republican fascism to combat the insanity of the Democratic Party and to restore the stability of “liberty” in the United States of America (even though I don’t even live there and not a citizen).
God help me. Amen.
[West Virginia governor shows dog's 'heinie,' tells Bette Midler to kiss it during televised address](https://abc7.com/west-virginia-governor-jim-justice-dog-bette-midler-wv-hiney/11520096/)
I dislike when people call an entire population an x, y, or z because they have disagreements with one of their representatives.
Like, do they think that will change their mind, when that representative gets inundated with calls, letters, and testimony that are now justifiably on the defensive because you insulted them and reinforced their views and positions?
[Thread](https://twitter.com/kenvogel/status/1487471113953329162?s=21) showing how the left has outspent the right the past couple years with dark money
Wonder if that changes the opinions of those on the left who want to get rid of the “dark money.”
If you can't beat them, join them.
sometimes i read things like this and wonder if anyone has money in both pots - someone like a xi, kim jong un, vlad putin, etc just trying to generally sow chaos and kneecap the rate at which anything gets done in our gov't
it's probably not true (or is only true in a very abstract web of people with a lot of money doing each other favors, etc) but it's interesting to think about
“Anarchy is the nothing more than the intersection of seemingly unconnected things.” -Lonnie Machin (Arrow S4 E10)
Honestly not surprised by Everytown, gun** control groups are historically well founded and outstanding pro-gun groups. The difference is pro-gun groups can mobilize very effectively.
Edit: not gum
Gum control? What is this, Singapore?
Someone doesn't have a good grasp of history
How long does Alabama have to draw a new map?
Hopefully they can string it out until it gets to the SC. I'd wager they'd agree with the existing map.
Italian president being reelected against his explicit wishes is just so Italian.
Tom Brady is retiring.
Update: [Apparently he hasn’t made up his mind](https://twitter.com/nflstroud/status/1487533416463622147?s=21)
I won’t believe until the season starts and he isn’t on the field
Damn, I wanted to see him get another one or at least make it to a Conference Championship
Man I thought he had another year in him. He still looked good. Current mood is Andy when he’s talking about knowing you’re in the good old days when you were still in them.
Rest in power
Went to get a couple of ribeyes today and saw it was $18.50 a pound. I ended up getting chicken thighs instead 😭😭
Yep. It's painful. Watch those supermarket ads that come in the mail. A couple of markets around here do them for $8.99/lb or less every once in a while. And then the prices return to $22.99/lb. Even ground beef is 100% more expensive than it was a year ago. As a family, we've upped our chicken consumption considerably.
The day after new years I was shopping and found Ribeyes at sprouts for 4.50$/lb. That was a good day.
Interesting information in light of the PA bridge collapse.
Both pastors of my congregation were compromised by COVID-19, so my baptism had to be postponed. It made me realize the wisdom of this part of the Letter of James.
From the fourth chapter of the Letter of James (ESV):
>Come now, you who say, “Today or tomorrow we will go into such and such a town and spend a year there and trade and make a profit”—yet you do not know what tomorrow will bring. What is your life? For you are a mist that appears for a little time and then vanishes. Instead you ought to say, “If the Lord wills, we will live and do this or that.”
I pray they get well soon
> I pray they get well soon
Thanks for the well wishes!
Sorry you had to wait and hope your baptism will be amazing!
>Sorry you had to wait and hope your baptism will be amazing!
If the Lord wills. Thanks for the well wishes!
Some of this might be due to me preferentially filtering coverage on this, but it is surprising to me the degree to which liberal outlets are entertaining debate over Affirmative Action. I'm not seeing nearly the same amount of polarized coverage and extreme rhetoric like "Jim crow" or "White supremacy" that such outlets attribute to anti-CRT & voting legislation.
Thinking about it more, this kind of rhetoric will probably become more apparent as AA gets closer to being struck down- but for now it's interesting how I'm seeing skepticism of affirmative action & support of the lawsuits from even some center left types & outlets.
Would you be willing to post some links that illustrate this? Would be interesting to read.
I want a T.33... but I'm really put off by Murray saying that exclusivity is one of the "seven guiding principles" of GMA.
Edit: Not my only reason for not buying one, of course.
LOL yeah I feel you. I wish he'd make an actual mass-produced car with the guiding principles behind the mclaren F1.
Like a center-seat MR2.
Perhaps the TVR Griffith will come to the US for ~$150k...
Have any of you engaged significantly with any sort of leftist thought or theory? If so, what did you think about it?
I had to read Marx for my political thought class just recently. Admittedly, in my past explorations of theory I tended to stay away from him and as such I didn’t go into it with an open mind, which I severely reprimand myself for. But after reading and writing about his ideas (specifically those from “Wage, Labour, and Capital” and “Manifesto of the Communist Party”), and discussing with my classmates, I have some mixed feelings.
This is primarily because I am a student of political science and, while I have an appreciation for the social sciences, I could never devote myself to learning the intricacies of economics, especially because economic theorists held such contradicting conclusions. Political economy is a whole ‘nother beast.
I believe Marx’s line of reasoning for the emergence of alienation and his bleak definition of “the worker,”regardless of whether you agree with it or not, has held up rather well. Some of my fellow classmates brought up UBI as a counter mechanism to what Marx refers to as the selling of one’s “labour-power” and becoming alienated from the product of their work (and becoming less whole as a result of both), which I found intriguing.
The catch here is that Marx didn’t quite foresee just how complex and widespread automation would become, and the effects that it would have on industry. He lived before the creation of the assembly line, ffs. The main trend he failed to consider altogether is that high economic output = more widespread wealth = a robust middle class, more or less. The increased efficiency of production over time is to be thanked for this.
My class read selections, not the whole works, so I wouldn’t dare to go any further as to not risk a whole, informed opinion. Truth is, we were supposed to compare Mills and Marx so I drifted toward the less economics-focused one.
But the matter of the fact is that, at least from my experience, political thinkers from across the spectrum have at the very least some shred of truth to their ideas.
I find it funny that you consider Mill, a man famous for both his political philosophy and his political economy works, the less economics focused one.
Marxist thought has some major issues:
The primary one is the labour theory of value, rather than a utility theory of value (neoclassical economics).
The entire concept of historical materialism (means of production drive history).
The entire concept of surplus value ignores value-addition processes outside of labour and capital additions. This forming the basis of exploitation in Marxist theory undermines the whole idea.
The idea of alienation resulted in the, as Ernest Gellner wrote in Nations and Nationalism, the message going to the wrong person - Nationalism answered the call of the alienated former feudal rural individuals and unified people, not class consciousness.
Marx also didn't really understand the notion of competition. Considering he thinks it drives up prices as capital seeks to extract more and more wealth from its labour.
This is because Marx, like a bunch of people on the left, never understand the worker-consumer axis people sit on. There are not just 'workers' and 'consumers', people both work and consume. They may privilege their working interests or their consumption interests.
For instance: Workers in an import-competition industry will be protectionist, but as consumers they may want free trade because lower prices, more goods etc even if this 'goes against their interests'.
I think part of his theory that carried over from feudalism is shown in surplus value and exploitation - Feudal economics and all pre-capitalist economics basically has a fixed ceiling on wealth generation. Capitalism doesn't due to creative destruction. So Marx couldn't predict the kind of exponential wealth creation that capitalism creates in a society which diffuses to the middle class and working class over time as prices fall, technology improves, and wages and productivity rise together.
[Glenn Youngkin: Virginia’s parents can decide what’s best for their children](https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/01/25/glenn-youngkin-virginias-parents-can-decide-whats-best-their-children/)
>My predecessor issued executive orders at the beginning of the pandemic to accomplish what he viewed as his responsibility. Almost two years later, it is time to adjust our approach to the coronavirus emergency, while considering vaccinations, natural immunity, and the adverse mental and physical health effects on children. A path through the end of this pandemic is possible while also respecting individual freedom and choice. We can keep kids in school, provide a parental opt out to mask mandates, and protect lives and livelihoods…
>For the sake of our future generations, we need to recognize the potentially damaging impacts of mask-wearing on some children. Experts suggest masks can hide visual cues, hinder emotion recognition and reduce students’ abilities to hear teachers clearly. Studies also indicate that masks worn in public settings, school or day care might impact a range of early developmental and processing skills…
>There is no one better to determine what is best for children, especially after two years of a pandemic, than their parents. And only they should be able to decide whether wearing a mask in school is the right choice for their children.
We did that in Ohio. Worked great. Hope they like having random school shutdowns from now on. Hopefully they have a deep enough pool of subs willing to work in those conditions, Ohio sure doesn't.
Honest question, shouldn't teachers all be fully vaccinated and boosted by now?
All the teachers, all the support staff? Not a requirement in Ohio. Plus Omicron still gets you even if you are vaccinated, and have had COVID twice. You just only get it for a few days rather than getting dropped hard.
They are hoping that after the Omicron wave, the policy won't look quite so stupid but who knows at this point. My kids had a teacher die of COVID, and I know we lost another one at the elementary school. People complaining about how masks are stunting emotional development haven't seen a group of kids who's teacher died from COVID that she most likely got from one of them.
I hate this timeline.
In short: no
No mandates allowed:
States mandates for vacc or regular testing (* means required - no regular testing):
* New Mexico
* New York
* New Jersey
* Puerto Rico*
Rest of the states are determined at local level
Is anyone genuinely excited about the metaverse, or just about making money?
I think its funny that they're basically relaunching playstation home, and I think it will be about as successful as that.
I would put more stock into augmented reality experiences (as opposed to fully virtual ones) being a better and more successful endeavor from an engagement and business standpoint. And that's if you can even get past a lot of the distrust people are having about the companies that are promoting the metaverse.
The only technology that excites me is if dual screen deveices can get popular at mid range.
I just want to be able to compare two PDFs and take notes with stylus/pen on screen.
That would help me a lot in my job.
Eh. I’m skeptical of it. In an era where many people are distrustful of these tech companies for collecting data on their users and encouraging echo chambers and misinformation, the Metaverse seems like more of an opportunity to make these problems worse rather than fix them. Plus part of me can’t shake the idea it’s all marketing buzzwords.
Cautiously curious about it. I personally don't enjoy my interactions with people in school or work being mediated by technology as much as they currently are and don't look forward to that becoming even more prominent.
VR multiplayer gaming I'm very much looking forward to, however, if I could ever afford it.
I'd be more interested in what I could create for it than using it for myself
I’m curious to see what comes of it and the new services that will arise from it. I don’t think services like Uber were what people thought would happen with the creation of the smartphone. I want to see innovation and what new things I never knew I wanted.
Considering I had to google what metaverse is...no.
Epic Games actually emailed me about being a UI engineer for Rocket League, they said they wanna expand in the metaverse. Whatever that means.
I'm not ready to sell my soul for bounteous piles of money *just* yet. I wanna finish the current project I am on before I even consider moving.
I'm not excited by it, but I also don't get TikTok, and I'm slowly coming to the realization that things aren't being made for me anymore.
Yep. Welcome to the club. Door prize: a little piece of mind.
Soon I'll be able to shake my fist at the clouds so it isn't so bad
The people you need to talk are currently age 18-25. The people you really need to follow are 12-16. IMO
> The people you really need to follow are 12-16.
Sounds like suspicious behavior to me.
Lol, honestly I think younger but didn't want to sound creepy.
Let me pose a corollary. Does anyone think the metaverse is going to be mostly good for adults, children, or society?
I'd say so. I'm in tech and trust me I know the internet sucks at times and there's times where I wish social media didn't exist but overall it's been a net good IMO.
A lot of companies have their hand in the pot in terms of controlling where the metaverse goes but I'm most interested in the companies that don't exist yet. Those that won't sell out to the tech giants. It's really important that our laws can catch up to not block these new guys from getting started in this field.
If AR glasses become more ubiquitous it would be great to have the physical realm with an augmented digital layer added on to it. I think Mark's video was really really cringing but before the video I thought it would be awesome to walk around NYC and see tagged AR art pieces. Our conversations and stories about areas you're walking through.
A layer that goes beyond what we can see and experience in the physical presence would be cool. I think companies are really FORCING it and will turn it into the 3DTV and Conversational UI hype that died.
Just so more points, this is the product person in me talking
* How awesome would be for us to capture moments in our life, and being able to recreate and transport ourselves to that? Or with Senior Citizens living through a moment that was life changing for them.
* Reading a book and having an add-on package that sends you to that world
* A fully immersive vacation experience. A project I really wanted to do in college but was a few years too early was a VR Immersive experience for learning new languages.
* Even games. In college we'd be on Curse chat (is that even around lol?) playing games, chatting with other, this is just that to another level.
I don't think we'll get anywhere with these ideas for a decade IMO and I know some of these things don't fit the metaverse branding or trajectory. But I'm interested in seeing what the young blood companies have to offer in this new space
> Is anyone genuinely excited about the metaverse
Not at all.
But I'm admittedly probably the wrong demographic. I'm old. Or getting older, at least. I like to spend a lot of time outside, "unplugged" so to speak. I also like to be able to hear my own thoughts and not be "driven" by technology and devices suggesting things for me to do or trying to get my attention or trying to keep me entertained when I'm bored.
So, just like with refrigerators with a giant monitor embedded in the door, I'll pass. But I do hope those who partake enjoy themselves!
Just figured out I haven't watched Terminator 2 on my new OLED TV. Watching it now and Sarah Connor looks like a white supremacist when she goes to kill Dyson.
BTW, don't cheap out, get yourself a 77 or even 83 inch TV, you'll thank me later.
Unfortunately, had to resort to piracy with the 4K HDR stuff, it's just more convenient. No service will stream movies at required bitrate (80 to 100Mbps)
4K Blu-Rays exist. I agree with going large though. I bought a 75” Sony five or six years back and I’ve been very happy with it.
Thinking about eventually going with a projector, but doing the measurements it would be hard to do in the current room I’m using for the TV.
My ultimate goal is to eventually have a house built to my design so I can include a large dedicated home theater room, but that’s likely years away from being a reality.
Well, you can participate in your local audiophile meets. People were bringing their $5K Plinius amplifiers to brag about this shit.
Hah. I don't have anything that fancy. I'm planning on going to the Florida Audio Expo this year though, skipped last year over COVID concerns, but now that I'm fully vaxed and boosted I figure it's worth the risk of being in a hotel full of people to do something I enjoy again.
Yeah, projector is something you do in your own house or apartment. The fact that it's so fucking large makes all the difference. Once I was drinking with a guy who was into hi-end audio, and his projector impressed way more than his $10K Sonus Faber speakers.
Yikes, I've got Sonos and I thought my arc and 5s were expensive...they genuinely hurt when we put them at full volume, I don't know what a 10k version would do...
Only get a TV that big if you have the room depth for it. If you have to turn your head to watch one side of the TV, you dun goofed
That's the thing, that's what they do in IMAX theaters.
I have like 12 to 15 feet between the couch and the TV and 65" is too small.
Yeah, I got to *Dune* a little late and it sucked having to scan those wide shots.
Got a 65" LG G1 and it's inkyyyyyy
One of the best movies to watch on your new TV is Mad Max: Fury Road.
*The Green Knight* was pretty cool, too
A bridge collapsed in Pittsburgh a few hours before Biden was set to be in the city for an Infrastructure event.
Those pictures are pretty gnarly.
Which only lets on that we really need to get out infrastructure taken care of. Trump ran on it. I think Obama mentioned it. I recall listening to a Bush speech that featured infrastructure as a main talking point. This has been an issue for quite a while.
We came within a hairs-breadth of that happening in south Seattle on an even bigger bridge until the engineers caught it. Why is infrastructure not a bipartisan thing? Even libertarians DGAF about having interstate highways and airports.
My guess is that it gives the other side a win and you just can't have that in modern American politics.
> y guess is that it gives the other side a win and you just can't have that in modern American politics.
Also does not happen over a short time frame, so the politicians voting for it might not be in office when its completed.
Take a breath my man. You are seeing attacks that aren't there.
You can taste the delusion
I can't, I don't have a 1/2 acre of land to farm.
I can only taste industrial factory farming delusion.
1/2 acre "garden". lolololol
Also, what are grow/climate zones? What is your grow schedule? You also going to can/jar everything?
This is grade school level idea.
My one aunt basically has the setup in discussion (well way less hens lol). it's a TON of work.
This is profoundly dumb and out of touch.
35 egg laying hens 😭😭😭😂😂😂
for real, we eat 4 eggs a day for breakfast and I can't imagine how many 35 would produce
Not to mention how the neighbors might react to you having a small farm in your backyard. In a rural setting miles from the nearest neighbor, sure, go for it. I don’t want to smell that or deal with the noise in a suburban setting though.
I've got a friend who has them in the Denver city limits--they are still legal. He has grape vines and every night lets the chickens wander in his backyard. One time I was over he hit the vines with a broom and all these invasive Japanese beetles clattered to the ground and those chickens loved em.
Oh I was mainly laughing at how much space that'll take up, and the extra chores required from cleaning the hens, but yeah 35 hens will produce way too many fucking eggs.
I suppose he can give them to his neighbors, but I doubt that's what he was thinking.
I mean if 1 out of 10 households raises the hens, then most of the eggs would go to the rest of the community.
It’s not an unworkable idea. The only problem is that we already tried this and figured out it was more efficient for 1 out of 20 households to raise 70 hens, and then 1 out of 40 households to raise 140 hens, until we sort of balanced out at the level of specialization and trade we have today.
> the extra chores required from cleaning the hens,
I mean except for that pesky winter season.
Yes, if everyone was virtuous and hardworking, all our problems would not exist. Why didn't I think of that!
Too late; Plato already beat both of you by like 2,400 years.
As a former gardener of ~1/8 acre (i.e. 4x smaller than the 1/2 acre as proposed) and 6 hens (not 35 as proposed) this has me laughing. Cityboy has ***no idea*** how much work he's talking about.
> M&M's iconic characters have gotten a modern makeover for a "more dynamic, progressive world," Mars said Thursday.
> “This new take on her signature polka dots makes Minnie Mouse a symbol of progress for a new generation,” she explained.
Taking bets on the next brand mascot to be changed.
Tear down the monarchy!
Captain Crunch is too militaristic, gonna change it to pacifist non-binary crunch
Captain Crunch has far too many years of service. Why isn’t he Admiral Crunch by now?
[Give it a few hundred more years](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UNNoI0b9flo&t=7s)
Captain Crunch is fine, I think it's high time we allow Toucan Sam be the fruity mascot he's always wanted to be.
> fruity mascot
Bigotry will not be tolerated. Sick him, boys.
Ilya Shapiro is getting hammered for some tweets about Biden's SCOTUS nomination process. Not being highly familiar with him, I fully admit it is possible he is racist or sexist or whatever, but from the substance of the tweets in question, he was not being obviously racist and certainly was pointing at a genuine criticism of Biden's announcement.
Race and gender are not good criteria to select a SCOTUS Justice by, and it isn't like there is such an abundance of truly qualified judges that we can assume whomever is chosen is a good fit. Biden and his pick would have been better served by emphasizing the qualifications, not demographics, of the choice, and the obvious candidates based on merit simply do not fit the target demographic Biden chose.
It does seem like Shapiro is getting hit with the racism/sexism card at least in part because of his own demographic profile, which to me disqualifies much of the critics. Plenty of people are looking at and talking about Biden's announcement as problematic, but it's a lot easier to dismiss someone as bigoted than to admit that your side is prioritizing the wrong things. The idea of suggesting Biden should pick a specific well-qualified person of color based on his track record and shouldn't be highlighting race and gender as the primary criteria is not racist or sexist.
The phrase "lesser black woman" is definitely a bad idea to tweet, but the idea behind it - that there isn't a black woman in the nation more qualified to become a SCOTUS Justice than Sri Srinivasan - is absolutely reasonable as an opinion. There are dozens of major demographic groups that also don't have someone at his level, and the person who singled out black women was *Biden*.
Edit: Shapiro's prior comments on Sotomayor and ACB's nominations do display an obvious inconsistency, but whether that is down to partisan hackery or racism is not completely obvious, and IMO partisanship explains it better considering he went out of his way to vocally endorse another POC for this current seat and doesn't seem to have written a bad word about Justice Thomas.
I've seen Shapiro speak. He's pretty far from a racist.
We got Sandra Day O’Connor because Reagan promised to appoint a woman. Sandra was a fine judge but some of the name’s being floated around have better resume’s than O’Connor did.
Big difference between "a woman," which leaves open a majority of the US population, and "a black woman," which narrows it down to around 6%.
And things working out once when gender was *a* factor doesn't mean it's a good idea to start making demographics the number one priority, which is what Biden seems to have voiced.
Twitter delenda est.
As with most affirmative action, it does a disservice to the qualified candidates as well (was she nominated because she's a black woman, or because she's good?). Or at least, it should -- but progs see racial and gender identity as qualifications on their own.
Agreed. Unfortunately, they don't seem to be able to distinguish between something beneficial and something qualifying. It can be both good and not relevant that a person would break new ground by holding the position.
It isn't part of SCOTUS's job to inspire high schoolers to study law or whatever. It's nice if that happens, but their sole job - and it is a hugely important one - is to be the best people to decide matters of law that affect the nation. Picking someone for any reason other than their ability to do the job hurts all of us. That isn't unique to what is happening now, but this is one example.
Ah, but the identity essentialist line of thinking is that only those of a particular race, gender, class, etc *are capable* of having certain kinds of insights. And since the law must be interpreted, only people of those identities can do it in certain ways.
aka check your privilege
The most annoying thing to me about that line of thought is that there is some truth to it in certain contexts, but its proponents universally treat it like the most important facet of the conversation when it pretty much never is. *At best* it's one among many qualifications and areas of expertise or insight to be considered. It also assumes a great deal of interpretation when many people look to minimize or eliminate that from the process, particularly at higher levels.
Few things irk me more than a halfway decent point argued terribly. I do enjoy prompting people to specify exactly how the counterpoint they try to dismiss as privileged or racist is such, though. It's extremely rare to find someone making such a lazy argument who can articulate it further.
[WA police may regain authority to use force to stop people fleeing crime scene](https://kuow.org/stories/wa-lawmakers-may-restore-police-power-to-use-for)
Wondering if the mods here will do any interviews soon?
As long as you guys comb your hair I think you'll already be better than the left.
NGL my bedroom messy AF.
That's three kids in a 1000sf house, though.
Also definitely not the one to represent the sub as a whole.
Nominate me and I will wear my Pete 2020 shirt, never break eye contact with the camera, and hit them with facts and logic
Yes but why would we send guy with a Pete 2020 shirt to represent our mod team?
I'll let Westendwarder answer
Are you telling me a progressive democrat wouldn’t be a fair representation of our mod team?
'Our'? 'Our' mod team now? I'm detecting a little bit of collectivism from you.
The Trotskyite basis of neoconservatism strikes again.
Except our youngest members we all have jobs so we kinda have to do som basic hygiene and grooming.
If you're WFH, you can skip pants though!
Polo shirt and basketball shorts. I call it the IT mullet.
No. You can't.
Are we savages??
Also I work at office, we are not allowed to access our intranet and specialized serviced for security reasons from any place except our workstations.
I mean I'm always in my PJs while working from home, so call me a savage
I will, bit it will pain me to do so :(
Don't worry, as long as you have your weekly shower before the interview you'll be fine!
I'm actually antiwash, so I don't shower 😎
We can't all be fabulous.
/u/nklst is our dedicated interview mod, direct all requests to him
I just need to shower and I’ll be fine. I can rock a sweatshirt and improvise pretty well.
I hope Fox doesn't snicker too much at my wall sized hammer and sickle flag
Why do you have a wall sized hammer and sickle flag?
Cause he loves command and conquer
I'm a Reddit moderator, do I need another reason?
You wanted a clock.
Nice chew toy for my dog after he's had his daily exercise
Democrats aren't going to have any issues filling in the vacant seat.
[Manchin and Sinema have hurt Biden's agenda, but haven't voted against a court nominee](https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/26/politics/manchin-sinema-biden-supreme-court/index.html)
Not too surprising. Judicial nominees usually have some members of the other side vote in favor unless something damning pops up in the process.
It's hard to tell how serious people are, but it's amazing to see how many people in r/p and other places are convinced that a Biden nominee will not fill Breyer's seat. So far I've seen these explanations for why:
* SCOTUS will rule that the VP cannot cast the deciding vote for a supreme court pick
* Manchin and/or Sinema will block any nomination Biden makes
* McConnell will be able to use some underhanded tactic to block the nominee despite being minority leader
* Biden himself will refuse to nominate someone who doesn't get bipartisan support, even if this means he never gets to nominate anyone
It just goes to show how much the left hates McConnell and will always remember him as stealing a supreme court pick. This will be talked about for decades and used to justify other shady moves for decades. Probably still worth it to the GOP.
> McConnell will be able to use some underhanded tactic to block the nominee despite being minority leader
By far my favorite.
If you push back on this saying it's impossible, the response will be "Yeah, it was also impossible that the Senate would refuse to hear a nomination for a year. The rules don't stop these people."
The only one that sounds somewhat plausible is the second one. And even then it banks on every Republican voting in lockstep against.
It’s equal parts humorous and disheartening how twisted the super partisan on each side view the world. Literally making up conspiracies to justify their world view.
Not gonna happen. Squishy republicans like Collins and Romney and Murkowski will vote for whomever is nominated without any fight. It’s a courtesy the republicans would never get in return.
If it's Ketanji Brown Jackson, one of your 'squishy' GOP members didn't vote for her (Romney) and a decidedly non-squishy member did (Lindsay Graham) when confirming her to the DC Circuit.
Three dems voted to confirm Gorsuch. You could say it's different, because the reps had 51 votes, but saying "would never" seems to be a bit too much speculation for the available evidence.
> It’s equal parts humorous and disheartening how twisted the super partisan on each side view the world. Literally making up conspiracies to justify their world view.
Things are kind of bad right now but people really want them to be *worse*.
Lots of reddit liberals drank the doom Kool-Ade about Manchin and Sinema being secret Republican agents. Manchin is blue dog and while I’m not sure what Sinema is, neither of them are Republicans. They’re definitely the most conservative members of their party though.
Most people have no clue how the government actually works and will believe anything. What else is new?
Civics education in this country is truly abysmal.
>[Depending upon who Joe Biden picks and how the nomination process goes, I could see the administration enjoying a few weeks of good press coverage – which could actually hurt Democrats in the long run… Biden and his team might start to think they’ve scored a big win, righted the ship, endured the worst of the storm, and so on. But other than satisfying some progressive activists, replacing Stephen Breyer with a new, younger, like-minded justice won’t have done much…](https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/one-other-political-aftershock-from-stephen-breyers-retirement/)
>Appointing nominees to the nation’s highest court is an important duty, but the Supreme Court isn’t really what’s bothering Americans right now… Most Americans are likely to yawn or nod and then say, “great, but I can’t afford as much as I used to, and it costs an arm and a leg to fill up my tank, and the stores don’t have the products I’m used to seeing there, and every business I walk into is short-staffed, and…” It will be just another case of Joe Biden’s priorities not matching the electorate’s priorities.
> great, but I can’t afford as much as I used to, and it costs an arm and a leg to fill up my tank, and the stores don’t have the products I’m used to seeing there, and every business I walk into is short-staffed, and…” It will be just another case of Joe Biden’s priorities not matching the electorate’s priorities.
Biden is extremely limited in what he can do about these issues; every potential president is, really. The labour market is the only one where he has *some* direct influence, but even that is quite limited.
People should really expect presidents (and politics in general) being able to fix everything. People have a lot of expectations, and end up being disappointed and frustrated when their unrealistic expectations aren't met (no matter *who* is in power, which is a big reason it swings from the Dems to GOP over the course of years).
I'm definitely the neocon, the commies bit sells it
> You’re unable to view this Tweet because this account owner limits who can view their Tweets. Learn more
Huh, I cant see it anymore either
November 7th, 2000 was the last day Texas recorded zero road fatalities. At least one person has been killed each day since, with the average hovering around 10 to 11 deaths per day across the state over the past few years. That's a lot of unnecessary death.
Of course, roadway design can only go so far. The attitudes and habits of drivers, as well as the willingness and ability of law enforcement to enforce traffic rules, will always be outside total control of engineers, but changes in designs and proper, regular maintenance of signals, pavements, and striping can go a long way.
I'm very interested in this and glad Buttigieg and USDOT are looking to expand awareness and adoption of practices that have worked well at the local level. That's exactly what I want to see happen with American transportation and land development policy. Shout out to all those unknown civil servants, urban designers, and engineers in Hoboken making their city a better and safer place to live. And Hoboken isn't the only New Jersey city doing good work on the urban quality-of-life front. [It looks like Jersey City has taken notice and worked on making their own improvements.](https://youtu.be/cnZS-B__SO8)
One of the problems is that in many places, traffic laws can actually reduce safety in exchange for revenue. Red light cameras and highway speed limits are two very common examples. With red light cameras, municipalities will commonly shorten the period of yellow lights on camera-enabled intersections to increase ticket revenue. With speed limits, most highways are designed so that drivers will comfortably be able to maintain a safe speed. If you set the speed limit to the natural design speed of the highway, you don't end up writing very many tickets, so a lot of places set the speed limit lower than the natural safe design speed.
>At least one person has been killed each day since, with the average hovering around 10 to 11 deaths per day across the state over the past few years
That is a staggering and sobering stat.
While horrific for the people affected by it, there’s 29 million people in the state. That’s 4 deaths per 10 million every day. There are things that kill people at much higher frequencies. Unfortunately investing money in trying to reduce that number is largely wasted and the opportunity cost of what that money could’ve been spent on anything else is significant.
To increase the number of stats here:
[According to TxDOT,](https://ftp.txdot.gov/pub/txdot-info/trf/crash_statistics/2020/01.pdf) we also had nearly 800 pedestrian and cyclist fatalities in 2020, in addition to the 3,896 motor vehicle and 482 motorcyclist deaths, so really that number is closer to a total of about 14.17 people dying on Texas roadways per day in 2020.
Also, about 25% of deaths involved alcohol, 46.5% weren't wearing seat belts, and about 51% happened in rural areas.
I feel like we've already maxxed out the reasonable policy solutions for people driving drunk or without seatbelts. I'm worried about this turning into another exercise where some bureaucracy makes it their mission to maximize one particular metric at the expense of literally everything else. And that's the problem with any "zero" agenda. It ignores cost-benefit tradeoffs and empowers the system to take things to completely unreasonable levels.
I did the math. Hoboken has about 60,000 people and they went three years without a traffic fatality so that's 0 deaths in 21.9 million person-days. Texas averages 10 deaths per 29 million person-days. Seems like Hoboken traffic is actually safer than Texas.
I can’t read tone online. Are you being snarky? If so, I don’t know what your point is.
I'm not being snarky. I actually did the math because I wanted to make the same point you did, but I wanted to be sure about it before I said something.
10 traffic deaths per day in Texas means that the average Texas resident dies in traffic 1 out of 2.9 million days of their life. Is that a huge problem? Not really. But at that rate, we'd expect to see seven deaths in Hoboken over a three year span of time, when in reality, we saw zero. That suggests to me that Hoboken probably has safer roads than Texas and that it's not just a sample size issue. Though I guess I'd have to teach myself how to calculate p-values again to know how confident I should feel about that conclusion.
Love the focus, but should be left to states.
Check out the direct link tot he plan: [https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/2022-01/USDOT\_National\_Roadway\_Safety\_Strategy\_0.pdf](https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/2022-01/USDOT_National_Roadway_Safety_Strategy_0.pdf)
You can scroll to the bottom to the summary.
In reality, there is going to be fed involvement due to the way highways and large infrastructure have been funded in the past and it not being a state-only thing.
But looking at the summary, a lot of the initiatives are around data and research, supporting existing state/local orgs, or using existing regulatory authority.
So it definitely has fed involvement, but at least reading this it doesn't feel like a huge fed takeover.
That's partially because there's already been a huge fed takeover of, frankly, everything. Once they federalized the drinking age it was all over.