Joined the Mayqueeze.

  • 2 Posts
  • 1.44K Comments
Joined 3 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 12th, 2023

help-circle




  • You’re formulating arguments why I’m wrong. With the greatest of respect, that’s defeatism speaking. Difficult? Yes. Checkmate? No. It may take a crisis to get this going; the New Deal didn’t come from nowhere either.

    You cannot fix all of these issues at once. You probably cannot fix a lot of these issues without first improving education levels within the population. A journey of 1000 miles begins with the first step.

    Term limits for SC judges to some odd number of years for any new appointees is something both sides will be able to agree on. If nobody tries though, of course it won’t happen.



  • The US has been checkmated …

    I’m going to take issue with this statement. Nobody has checkmated the US. If we have to stay in this metaphor, the US checkmated itself.

    One of the biggest mistakes was to allot the same number of votes to Rhode Island as to California in the senate. A more proportionate voting system would do wonders for half the issues you listed. Appointing judges for life is another one. Financing election campaigns like that is also mad. Nobody forced Americans to do business like that.

    This isn’t a game of chess where checkmate is irreversible. The sooner folks stop formulating arguments why I’m wrong or why these are insurmountable hurdles, the better for all of us.

    While I do agree that with the cult clown car people in charge of the executive right now, there is an added difficulty to passing legislation. The Epstein Act part 1 has shown though there are ways. So regulation on so-called AI is still possible and not late like the article seems to suggest.


  • What’s the point of this article? To highlight that the sausage maker that is a parliamentary democracy is slow? Or to show how narrow majority margins cause long delays in passing legislation? I can’t imagine it’s only the lack of knowledge about so-called AI. I imagine many members don’t know that much about tax law, the intricacies of the military, or drugs in general. Yet we don’t question their qualifications when they pass legislation on those subjects. We elect people to these bodies not on the basis that they are experts at everything but for their ability to look into issues and form an opinion that hopefully most resembles ours. They cannot know everything, no matter how much they pretend. If that is the standard we hold them to, you’ll only get braggadocios assholes who will stand for elections.

    When has a legislature ever been on top of the latest developments, especially in tech? It’s pretty much always reactive. The seatbelt and crumple zone came after the introduction of the automobile. OSHA didn’t predate the industrial revolution. Section 230 came after the WWW. Not by much in the grand scheme of things but still. We are what now? 4-5 years into this madness? It’s not unusual not to have great regulations set in stone.



  • Don’t travel to places where it’s illegal. And if you do, don’t try to acquire anything while in places where the legislation has real teeth. Chances are if weed is illegal, any fun substitute will be as well. Depending on where you are going a positive blood test, should you get in trouble with the law for whatever reason, may still get you in trouble even if all of the weed in your bloodstream was consumed where it was legal to do so. That’s also something to consider two months ahead of your trip abroad.

    If you are so worried that you cannot break your habitual use you may want to investigate your use pattern even while you are where it is legal. Marijuana addiction is not a huge societal problem overall but it can be for the individual.






  • I suspect the makers don’t check what’s going on here much. You’ll probably have more luck contacting people directly via their website https://librewolf.net/

    There is a subreddit for artwork, which is also linked on the website. If you can’t get ahold of anyone, that could be your next step. You could try to get permission from the community creators directly.

    I don’t know what the tenor of your review will be. I suspect if you didn’t shittalk them like you were the president of the USA you’d probably be alright to use their logo with proper attribution underneath it. But that’s just my opinion and I don’t work there.


  • The devil is in the details. You have to define homelessness first. Would a ban on that even be legal? And what is the state doing to prevent it and/or what are the penalties for violators? There is certainly a chance that this inches painfully close to keeping people concentrated, in a camp, which should, in a sane world, weigh heavily against such a ban. But if a ban meant anybody on the street gets put in an apartment, given medical care including therapy, and then given a chance to become a productive member of society within their means, then it wouldn’t be imprisonment. That’s the Finnish solution to the problem, which benefits from having a smaller population in the country overall and a smaller percentage of homeless people than, say, Los Angeles.