data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/bf737/bf737d9eb1495bd2b1c08cb176336a9123e8ae37" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/ac599/ac599274408e9a02ff3a537d7fbb24e8d5d3ad9f" alt=""
Is there a reason conservatives dislike congestion pricing other than spite?
Gods, they’re just the worst fucking people.
Is there a reason conservatives dislike congestion pricing other than spite?
Gods, they’re just the worst fucking people.
This is a good point. Seeing other people get onto the street can motivate people who weren’t feeling enthusiastic.
But I do worry that protests will fizzle out and be, as you say, an ending point. Maybe they won’t be.
“a peaceful movement”. Ok. Unilaterally disarming seems like a dubious move to me.
I don’t think protests where you just stand around and chant are especially effective. Maybe in 1950 when seeing people get firehosed was shocking, but the world is different today. Media is captured by the wealthy and most people don’t care.
I’m glad you liked the comic.
I read the tweet as saying “Actually learning about history, the good and the bad, is better than avoiding it to whitewash (pun intended) slavers and spare their feelings”
How did you read it?
This also reminds me of a separate post I saw about how social media, and tweets especially, is a really bad format for communicating. The length constraints and incentivizing being clever don’t make for fertile ground for ideas. Most people aren’t going to read an essay, sadly.
I also can’t imagine someone getting offended about people mentioning the Tulsa Race Massacre or the fact that the founding fathers held slaves.
Actual racists aren’t going to be offended by those historical facts, they just might argue that they were justifiable in some way. Which is obviously super fucked up, but it’s not like racist people are going to deny the fact that slavery happened or that black people got massacred by white people in history. They literally get off on that shit.
Many racists definitely do get offended by those facts. It’s because they’re coming at it from an emotional place, and the historical facts make them feel bad. Instead of dealing with that, they lash out. Not all racists are intentional about their racism.
I link this a lot, but it’s worth a read https://theoatmeal.com/comics/believe
Which is why the tweet seems so strange to me. Black people getting enslaved and massacred and persecuted? That slaps? I fucking hope not.
That wasn’t the intent of the tweet and that is a bizarre misreading of it.
Then you’re a fool, but I hope if it came down to it you wouldn’t go peacefully to a death camp. Maybe it’s too much to hope that you’d step up for your neighbors.
I’m reminded of the abyssal words in Elden Ring’s expansion. There are signs that tell you “Don’t let them see you!” and “You have to hide and run!”. You find an area with some tall grass and some creepy eye-monsters. And sure enough, if they see you they come running at you. They’ll knock you over, grab you, and explode your head.
Clearly you’re supposed to sneak by them.
But…
You can also parry their attack, and then just kill them.
Or just fucking book it and run past them, but that’s way harder.
It was a hypothetical scenario to demonstrate cases where violence is appropriate.
You wrote:
Advocating for violence, regardless of reason, is sick.
In other words, there is no reason whatsoever, in your mind, where violence is appropriate. I gave an argument where violence would be appropriate. Do you disagree? Stay on topic.
Clearly false.
A man is threatening to shoot everyone inside a school. Are you not going to advocate force be used to stop him?
A far right group has risen to power in a nation. They are moving people into extermination camps. Are you not okay with fighting back?
Ten people are stranded on an island. One man has all the food and water, enough so everyone can survive until help arrives. He won’t share. Should the other 9 die of starvation, or take the supplies by force to share them more equally?
Defending the violent is also advocating for violence. It’s just against many powerless people, and more indirect.
There are people who are responsible for rendering our only world uninhabitable. By refusing to even entertain the idea that they could be stopped by force, you are advocating for continued, global violence. It’s less personal than a CEO being shot in the street, but it is violence nonetheless.
If we know where this “CEI” is headquartered and we know who their leadership is…
That seems fine to me.
There will be a lot of pearl clutching. Some people will literally walk themselves into the gas chamber while saying “we have to be tolerant” and “well they won the election”
But also organizing is hard.
Among other problems, people knowingly spread falsehoods because they feel truthy.
The problem is people. We’re all emotional but some people are just full on fact free gut feel almost all of the time.
Match should be broken up. But apparently some people learned nothing from history and some people don’t care as long as they make money
Many things. I mean, you could hack a lot of stuff into Excel but generally
SQL has foreign keys and integrity checks. You can make it so like if you delete a user it automatically cascades to delete other rows like their addresses.
You can prevent someone from entering the wrong type of data in particular columns. This one’s an integer and that one’s text.
It’s designed to work on larger scales. Excel stops at 1 million rows per spreadsheet, unless my search just gave me AI slop.
You can do queries, for selecting as well as updating and deleting. You can join tables.
It’s much easier for other applications (such as a website) to talk to a SQL database
You can do transactions.
There’s a lot. That’s just off the top of my head.
Ehh. They haven’t really abused their position. They’re popular.
It would be something else if they were buying up competitors like Facebook and Google do. Part of how they maintain their dominance is buying out anyone that competes. Notice how Google kind of sucks nowadays? They’re not really competing on merit anymore.
But at the same time, steam could turn around tomorrow and be like “mandatory $39.99/mo subscription fee” and it would have an outsized impact on the sector.
Some bootlicker mod removed my comment :(
I’m reminded of a post from elsewhere: “You hate all the parts of capitalism separately, without realizing they’re all the same thing”