still the case (but the same fediverse); we move at the pace of development and unfortunately that has slowed a bit in the case of Sublinks
alyaza
joined 2 years ago
MODERATOR OF
you're being way too vitriolic here, dial it back by 10.
It’s not racist when they call him white boy, it’s racist he tells that story.
if you think calling people "white boy" is racist but the way he talks about indigenous people here isn't you are such a fragile little cracker it's not even funny
i forget the exact reason but i believe it has something to do with OCEF being in Europe, which means taxes, exchange rates, and other annoying variables like that come into play for us which weren't previously contributors on OCF
This is presented in a confusing way to me. But I see after reading it twice that monthly recurring contributions are $80.82 per month (I’m assuming this is after fees that OCEF charges).
yes--this is why all the contribution numbers are weird and non-round. i believe we also lose out something like 5-6% to fees vs. the previous 3-4% fees we had on Open Collective Foundation—smaller donations definitely get punished a bit more heavily now.
When South Korea started tackling this problem 20 years ago, it threw away 98 percent of its food waste. Today, 98 percent of food waste is turned into feed, compost or energy, according to the South Korean Ministry of Environment. It achieved this by banning food scraps from landfills and mandating that all residents separate their food waste from their trash and recycling — and to pay for the service through fees and fines.
South Korea is one of the few countries with a nationwide system for food-waste management. While France made composting food mandatory this year — and some cities like New York have imposed similar rules — few places match up with South Korea.
it's just unbelievable how dangerous it is to bike anywhere in America because of how reckless drivers tend to be. (and in this case it's particularly devastating because both were in town for their sister's wedding)
Since June 10, the campaign has organized multiple disruptive civil disobedience actions every single week. Convened by Climate Defenders, Planet Over Profit, Stop the Money Pipeline and New York Communities for Change (where I am the senior climate campaigner), and endorsed by over 115 partner groups, the protests have been attended by over 4,000 people, and more than 600 have been arrested. Actions have included sit-ins at the biggest banks and insurance companies backing fossil fuel projects, interruptions of Wall Street executives’ public appearances and visits to those executives’ homes. But most of all, they have consisted of numerous blockades of the entrances to the global headquarters of Citi, preventing employees from entering work multiple times a week.
Colorado officials are now proposing to go further. In 2023, the state adopted legislation to try something that’s never been done in this country: automatically register tribal members to vote in U.S. elections.
The program, if implemented, would enable tribes to share their membership lists with Colorado elections officials, who’d then use that information to register every eligible person to vote, while giving them a chance to opt out. Since Colorado already mails ballots to every registered voter, this would necessarily mean getting ballots into the hands of more Native people. “We’ve made real steps forward, and we’re going to continue,” Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold told me recently. “We always try to push the envelope.”
And yet, Cloud is also keenly concerned that the program could make her community more vulnerable. For U.S. election officials to automatically register tribal members to vote, the tribes would need to share certain vital information about their members, such as full name, address, and date of birth. Cloud is hesitant to hand this data over to a state that has, over a long history that she knows too well, been an agent of violence.
there are definitely better, more substantive articles that can make all of the points this one is; accordingly, this will be removed. you're free to find another article which makes this point though since it's likely a conversation people want to have on here
you may also enjoy Thomas Szasz on this subject and concur with some of his analyses about the validity of "mental illness" as a concept/what follows from accepting it as a concept (although i believe he was strongly right-libertarian and this informed some of his opposition to psychiatry as a practice--so you may wish to take or leave some of what he says consequentially)
i find this a very unpersuasive argument in any context because—if you actually believe it—it's essentially an argument for bringing back literacy/intelligence testing in voting. and i'm sure i don't need to tell you about the long history of that being used to disenfranchise the "wrong" people for the crime of having a certain skintone or believing in equal rights for everyone; to say nothing of other ethical issues with the notion.