Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KtQ9nt2ZeGM

Agreed. A more telling graph would incorporate socialized losses, including subsidies, life-and-limb for related industries, quality of life, and life expectancy. I sincerely doubt these costs for the construction, manufacture, and installation of solar panels comes anywhere close to that of petroleum products.

POSSUM used Play Dead.

It's not very effective...

Counterargument: the rear of your car is far more resilient to impact than the front. You can cope with backing out, but maybe your wallet/schedule won't cope with a fender-bender to your headlights or front bumper.

Whoa, TIL.

The part that frustrates me the most about all of this is how it's a chess move towards a massive power-grab by the few and monied. What's more frustrating is how many people completely miss this, instead focusing on this first move.

We can argue the validity and the expense required in complying with such laws, especially the egregious "on every device" language. But that's not the point.

Up front, only the most powerful and well-connected will be able to comply and lobby for exceptions to this law. And the only feasible way to pull this off is with 100% cloud-connected devices that are already prepared to gather biometrics and basically stick a camera in your face. That means that Apple, Microsoft, every cellphone vendor, every cell network provider, are pre-selected as winners in this race. Anything else can't possibly come up to this level, and/or won't due to the obvious ethical conflicts it causes.

Looking at an even bigger picture, the problem sets up widespread de-facto censorship. It's surveillance and a cudgel for sites that don't participate in said surveillance, all in one.

We've already seen major social media consolidated and owned by the obscenely wealthy and powerful, who are nakedly well-connected with government. Requiring ID to use these sites effectively pushes anyone with a brain OUT of that space. Algorithms were already punching-down on our ability to coordinate and find common ground across the (largely artificially generated) political divide. Now, we're self-segregating and retreating to spaces like Lemmy. The proposed laws would make it much harder to start and maintain alternate media, and hosting an environment full of dissenting opinions would be well-documented and served to law enforcement on a silver platter if ID laws are adhered to. But if you don't comply? Be prepared to lose that whole site since it'll be illegal to do so.

I've seen this in person. That rock was beautiful without it (still is, just less so). But this photo captures not only how it's a toy-scale Mt. Rushmore knock-off^1^, but it's just fucking ugly. Not good art, not a good monument, not a good memorial, not good execution, and not even the best material choice for such a thing. And that's besides the fact that it's a giant middle-finger to social progress, Civil Rights, and everything that prompted it's creation. Plus, the only way to get rid of it is to use dynamite to make an even bigger fucking hole in the middle of the tallest natural thing in the area. What a waste.

That said, it's a nice day hike up to the top, but do check the weather report. When I went, Atlanta smog obscured the view.

^1^ - Said mountain is also a travesty when you get into the history of it.

:: clears throat ::

Leave. Your. Phone. At. Home.

Now there's a comment with teeth.

Also, in the words of Dee Snider and Twisted Sister: "We're not gonna take it, anymore."

Early Gen-X went from seeing the horrors of the Vietnam war on TV, straight into Reganism, Iran Contra, and more. All while under the looming shadow of global thermonuclear war, which was pushed heavily into the zeitgeist by cold-war politics at the time. Sure, there's a lot good stuff from that era too, but there was also plenty to rage about.

If we're talking about stuff like Hieronymus Bosch, then that's the least bizarre and thought-provoking stuff he's done. But you don't need a doctor to puzzle it out. Discovering that people that lived over 700 years ago had the same sense of humor as you and your friends is always fun.

To answer the question: I think it's both. You might painstakingly render life-like butt-trumpets to take a jab at the church, but you'd absolutely do it for a fart joke after doing portraits all the time. At the same time, such works were the domain of well-off people - both the artists and their patrons - so I find it hard to believe that a pithy subtext isn't on offer too.