Just want to clarify I was referring to the comments and not your post. I will be right there with you.

Everyone here missing the point…

In all fairness that was probably necessary to make it to the presidency with her head still firmly attached to her body.

Why are you so intent on keeping the conversation about the election? I’m trying to tell you your time and energy is better spent on other things. It’s unproductive to respond to people complaining about how all our candidates support genocide by basically telling them to shut up and choose.

Electoral politics are not the only way to change things. In fact, it’s a very poor way, as evidenced by the fact that genocide is now the only option. Every bit of progress that’s been made has been achieved through mass movements; protesting, coalition building, engaging in direct action or civil disobedience… until the politicians are forced to appease them in order to keep hold of their power. Would electoral politics have ended segregation, were it not for the civil rights movement? Would women have been granted the right to vote, were it not for the suffragette movement?

You would not recognize the reality we’d be living in today if everyone from back then thought like you that all they can do about injustice is vote for the “lesser evil.”

My take? Vote your conscience, or not at all if that’s where your conscience leads you. I can’t bring myself to fault anyone for refusing to vote for a “lesser evil”. At the end of the day, electoral politics just isn’t worth the amount of time and energy people give to it. That time and energy is better spent engaging in direct action, community building, and just general activism. I have long been disillusioned that electoral politics can bring about meaningful progress.

Would you prefer more or less genocide.

That this is the choice our “elected representatives” are asking us to make is sick beyond measure. I actually want to just thank you for cutting the bullshit and just asking the question directly so I can respond to it in the way any sane person should, by rejecting the premise that these are our only options. The answer is no, not more or less, none. I acknowledge that the third option of no genocide is not achievable through electoral means, which is why I support the protests, encampments, and uncommitted delegates.

I don’t think this comic explains it well. I don’t like the “it is a paradox but we just have to make an exception” approach. A better solution to the paradox of tolerance is to explain that it isn’t a paradox at all, that tolerance is a contract, not an absolute rule. A tolerant society agrees to tolerate you so long as you tolerate others, and if you violate the contract you lose its’ protection.

All the smart cable companies make most of their revenue from cable internet now; what remains of cable TV is propped up by a minority of older people who refuse to get with the times or relatively well-off folks who just don’t care.

I’m speedrunning this shit.

I’m not mixing average with lowest rate, the average dipped that low in 2021, meaning lots of people were getting even lower rates than that. And yes, of course people with middle class incomes buy points. That doesn’t counter my point.

Buying points involves paying more money up front to reduce interest rates. Given that someone struggling financially wouldn’t be able to do that I don’t think it’s fair to include them in conversations about the affordability of homes. It’s also not a great idea to buy points if you’re uncertain about whether you’re going to continue living there. It can take years for the savings on interest to recoup the up front cost of points, so you could easily lose money if something happens and you end up having to move or sell the home.

The “boots” theory of economic unfairness is pretty relevant here.

Edit: also the numbers the above commenter used are not far off, in the US average interest rates in 2021 went as low as 2.65%, and average interest rates in 2024 have been oscillating around 7%.

Went to check sources but you have to register to read the whole article, do you happen to know the source or another article that has them?

Reddit was doomed the moment Aaron Swartz left in 2007.

Luckily the writers were able to finish it the way they wanted with a second season, and it’s fantastic. AMC almost did axe it before the second season released but after it was already finished but fans were able to get them to release it.

If anyone’s interested in a hard sci-fi show about uploading consciousness they should watch the animated series Pantheon. Not only does the technology feel realistic, but the way it’s created and used by big tech companies is uncomfortably real.

The show got kinda screwed over on advertising and fell to obscurity because of streaming service fuck ups and region locking, and I can’t help but wonder if it’s at least partially because of its harsh criticisms of the tech industry.

The tv show Pantheon figures it will work, but it will be very disturbing.

Wikipedia - While the Wikimedia Foundation itself is hierarchical, it manages Wikipedia through a process of community-led governance. Every article is maintained by a community of volunteers who engage in open debate to decide on content moderation policies. Wikipedia remains one of the few popular websites to avoid the recent internet enshittification.

Food Not Bombs - An activist organization that serves free food. FNB has no central organizing body, instead operating as a loose-knit group of independent collectives who voluntarily cooperate and exchange information and resources with one another. One specific collective, “A Food Not Bombs Menu,” has taken to coordinating the global activities of FNB collectives and helping people start new ones, but has no power over any others.

IWW - The Industrial Workers of the World, while hierarchical, ensures a hierarchy that is accountable to its’ rank and file members by means of a robust democratic process, as well as the right of any member union or individual member to leave at anytime and go it alone.

There are many more, but it’s late and it took me a while to pick out what I think are good representative examples of different ways an organization can be run well.

They’re not dumpster fires because they’re run by humans, but because they’re run by unaccountable hierarchies. Humans are perfectly capable of running a sustainable and efficient operation if we only stopped to consider how better to make decisions collectively.

I would suspect this is an intentional dark pattern. They’re probably hoping most people will get tired of waiting and click cancel, which sets it back to the default of allowing all cookies.