The important piece of this to me is this: She made $1 mil on OnlyFans and $42k/year as a teacher. She wants to be a teacher despite making plenty of money from other sources. This tells me that unless you have other evidence of impropriety she’s someone we want in the classroom. It also reinforces my stance, along with plenty of other studies that have been performed, that a universal basic income won’t stop people from working.
Pay people better and we’ll just keep working because we like it. It’s part of being human, but we shouldn’t be suffering to survive at the same time.
I was fired at the beginning of the year. I had sufficient funds I coulda retired if I wanted to. I’m not quite 40.
It’s been 2 months and I am so fucking bored I got a job. I didn’t go get a part time job to fill my time, I got a job in my field continuing to work at “my level” because it fulfills me.
I’m now able to do what I want because I want to rather than because of some existential need. My work product is WAY better.
Add in that id you don’t blow it all, you get to count the interest income. A long term investment gets about 6-7% per year. That’s actually more than the teaching job pay.
To go the other way, her tax bracket is a lot higher than the base salary alone would be. And if it’s $1m in a year, almost all of that will be in the highest bracket.
If shes single, her combined effective federal and Missouri income tax is around 40%, so she took home roughly 600k. If she’s married, then her total effective tax is 25%, so she took home 750k.
For the 600k investment at a conservative 4%, which right now you can get in some savings accounts, her interest alone would be 24k/yr. For the 750k, it would be 30k/yr.
With a more realistic return of 7-8% in today’s high interest rate markets, both of those sums would net more than her old salary of 42k/yr.
While I’d trust this person to do a good job better than the teachers hired by Catholic schools, being an Only Fans performer doesn’t really qualify you for that.
My school had a sex ed class although I can’t honestly remember anything that we were told in it. But basically if students managed to get to the end of formal education without getting pregnant that was generally considered to be a success.
They seriously had no real interest in educating students at all.
yeah - we had a sex ed class in highschool too - it didnt take. small town but close to 35% of my graduating class dropped out due to teenage pregnancy (or died because of drunk driving).
Depends if the school’s in Texas or not. But more broadly In my experience the problem is that they go on and on about no sex outside of marriage which is an unrealistic expectation, and don’t actually ever explain things like preventatives.
You can’t pay for groceries with your net worth but given million bucks I’d retire immediately. That amount of money invested to the stock market pays around 50 - 70k interests every year and you get to keep the million.
Someone else calculated that $1 million is about 30 years of the teaching salary. So you cannot retire on a career either.
If I were forced to choose I’d take the $1 million up front over a low-paying career and let it grow in the market while I found other work to avoid using it. $1 million up front over $1.3 million across 40-some years is a very good investment. Consider the decreased value of future money.
yea but you can teach all life long, whereas on Onlyfans you… uh,… nevermind
y’all misunderstood my post, I think. I was trying to joke about the fact that even if you’re getting on in years, there will always be an audience for your OnlyFans. Anywayyyy
I have no idea why you’re being down voted. You’re absolutely right. You can’t live on back interest from $1M, so you have to invest it, and while some years you’ll make more than 10% average invested in the stock market, over 10 years you’ll average 8% because some years you’ll not only make no returns but you’ll lose some of your investment. Which means if you’re living off those returns, some years you’ll have to eat into those investments, slowly eating down the money you have making money for you. You’re paying taxes on those returns, and if you’re living off them, they’re considered short term investments and you pay a higher tax rate - because you pay taxes on returns on your investments.
Rich people get richer because they have other income and can leave the money and the returns untouched; they aren’t living on the returns until they have far more money invested than $1M.
I think they just mostly don’t understand economics, taxes, or have spent any time thinking about these things. Which isn’t surprising, because why waste time thinking about it when it’s increasingly unlikely to happen to you? Not understanding it is one thing, but thinking and then voting with your hormones is another.
Yep, people acting like it’s plausible for someone to retire and live the rest of their life renting a room, at the same income as they got fresh out of college.
Plus they’re citing studys aimed at 35-40 years life expectancy, for someone retiring in their 20s, maybe early 30s.
And in one breath will decry the inflation calculations being cited by the government to show we have a “healthy” economy. And in the next, try to pretend cost of living isn’t sky rocketing and someone can live the rest of their long life on 40k/yr.
That’s lemmy for you, though. No point fighting the tide.
Edit - also, I’m sure those studies probably included some amount of social security helping out, which you’re not getting if you retire in your 20s.
You’re paying taxes on those returns, and if you’re living off them, they’re considered short term investments and you pay a higher tax rate
(US tax info) Investments are taxed as long term (the lower tax rate) if you hold them for at least a year. Meaning, after the very first year, there is no reason to every pay the higher short term capital gain rates. A solid strategy is to invest in index funds and hold them for decades. If you aren’t retired, put the dividends back into more index funds. The long term trends earn you (conservatively) 8% per year average.
The capital gains which you are, supposedly, drawing off of to live on (this was the original premise) is short term capital gains. The amounts you draw in your loss years are, yes, long term, and taxed at a lower rate, but that’s the hole in the boat causing your revenue stream to sink - the bigger problem is that what you draw from ROI is taxed at the higher rate.
You don’t get taxed on losses, or on loss years, whatever that means tax-wise. You get taxed on gains, period, which is the increase over your basis. Less than a year held is short-term, more than a year is long.
Average investment returns are (conservatively) 8% per year, with a safe draw down being 4% per year. Which means she can safely withdraw $40,000/yr indefinitely without her investment decreasing in value over the long run.
Easily enough to retire in a decent cost of living area if she wishes, or work a small side job to boost her income to support a higher cost of living.
The safe withdraw for an extended early retirement is 3.5%
With 4%, while the chance is small, you could end up running out of money.
Someone did all the numbers for 35-40+ years looking back historically, and there were 4 or 5 years where if you started then and didn’t adjust your plan, you’d run out of cash.
Especially considering she was making $42k annually as a teacher (according to another comment, I didn’t actually read the article). So she was able to live on roughly that amount already.
Realistically, she could continue to create OnlyFans content for some time and make and invest more than the initial $1m.
Yeah, except she can go makeinimum wage working full time for benefits and call it a day. You can live on minimum wage if you also have a mil in the bank to start. One door closed but a bunch of others opened. She can do that job you want that you don’t do because it doesn’t pay much.
You also have a weird notion about benefits, and employers willingness to give full time hours so you even qualify. But that’s not even the slightest bit related to this discussion.
Most folks with the degree and certification required to teach can find another full-time job that offers benefits, e.g. health insurance (which even a million dollars will get burned up quickly if a serious medical issue arises and you have no insurance).
But I think the point you’re missing is that she can continue making shit loads of money on OF for as long as she can while also working another job, as OF isn’t exactly something you need to 8 hours a day to do (though, some models probably do when you factor in advertising and getting your name/rep established).
Ditto. Ive met countless older people now who kept up doing the work they were passionate about, even if it in time became a hobby that they did at a loss. People like to work. They like to see the fruits of their labor take shape before their eyes, and they like feeling like theyre doing something that benefits someone other than themselves.
As it stands, the rules we live by only reward the infinite pursuit of profit, but that doesnt align with the values people find themselves holding whether they like it or not.
People probably will choose to work on different things though. It’s harder to exploit a workforce that isn’t as desperate. That’s the real reason why UBI isn’t happening.
a universal basic income won’t stop people from working
A bit offtopic, but I came to the same conclusion during a somewhat philosophical discussion with a friend who expressed skepticism with the increased automation aspect of the world, and we extrapolated this into a hypothetical world where almost everything was automated.
His concern was that one day humanity could find themselves dependent on an automated system over which they had no control.
My response, being a bit of a techno-optimist, was that:
We kind of already do
Someone has to keep this system running
Even if I was paid an UBI, I would still like to be part of #2.
I’m the kind of guy who makes the little gears spin so that the cog can turn, and I derive entertainment from reviving broken complex systems, and I wouldn’t want it any other way
We ARE dependent on systems over which we have no control, since a LONG time, the hell are you on about? One cog in this machinery busts, and you die, and you won’t be able to do a thing about it.
Edit: jesus I was drunk when I wrote this shit, sorry
I completely agree. I tinker and change my PC to parts because it’s fun. Did it make a difference to performance? Kinda. Was the effort put forth because of performance alone? No. People like making Legos and just put them on a shelf. There are consumer products where the customer is paying to do the work themselves for little gain above the fun of the journey. Why wouldn’t it expand to many other areas? And if there’s not enough people willing to do something, make it worth their while to fix it, but that’s already a problem and UBI isn’t the big smoking gun people claim it to be.
Whatever. If people don’t like Taylor Swift it doesn’t bother me. To be honest, I’ve only ever heard one of her songs all the way through. She just has done plenty of good things. This is one of the few things I’ve heard about her that wasn’t her being a decent person.
I have also never knowingly heard her music. It’s not that I avoid her, I just have never listened to pop music in lieu of jazz, classical, or world. But she does seem to be an upstanding person for the most part.
Well, we got some overriding scenario blasting away all nuance.
It’s hard to be sympathetic toward a fundamental privacy limitation associated with flying in a plane exclusively owned by you. So in this context, it’s easy to equate “Leave Taylor alone!” with "it’s sad how she can’t fly in her private jet without being tracked, there’s nothing she can do!’
Now broadly speaking, I get that a lot of unreasonable piling on is coming with it, but the private jet is a symbol of excess and environmental harm and it’s inherently a risk to hop into that whole mess. Particularly when she could charter private flights to the same effect without the tracking (still excess and environmental harm, but at least obfuscated from public eye a bit).
I never said she should be left alone or that it’s sad that she can’t fly without being tracked.
I don’t care if she can be tracked when she flies. I said she was in the wrong here. All I said was that she generally comes across as a decent person.
She’s generally good at managing her public persona, except when it comes to her pollute more than a small city machine private jet addiction. When people show you who they really are, believe them.
She has a very good PR manager to keep her in such a good image. You know there are hundreds of people rooting for her downfall and are waiting for every slip up.
Anything Taylor goes straight to front-page, despite my efforts to block it.
She also showed who she really was during the SAG-AFTRA and WGA strikes: someone who agrees to union demands, which was why she was allowed to release the best-selling concert movie of all time during the middle of the strikes.
On top of that, she got thousands of her fans registered to vote.
Very much agree with this sentiment. I feel, too often, this gets lost in discussions. People will do stuff we agree with, and then they’ll turn around and do something we disagree with. It’s fine to praise and simultaneously lambast 'em.
It’s pretty healthy, IMO. Seeing the fuzzy set of actions that people take that you agree with and don’t agree with as part of a whole person is a sign of maturity mentally.
Having to cleave people into “the Madonna” and “the whore” or the “good object” and the “bad object” is in the mix for a variety of mental problems: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Splitting_(psychology)
Not to take away from one of the most powerful people on the planet*, but a decent number of companies did that. I want to say A24 almost immediately agreed and that is why they were able to keep making films during the strike.
*: Jesus christ. How did Taylor Swift become one of the most powerful people on the planet?
Yeah, I imagine she had someone crunch the numbers and figure out that it’s worth it to agree to the union’s demands to get a premiere in the middle of the strike AND the good PR. Sounds like a pretty safe bet.
Now mind you, I don’t really know anything about the situation beyond what I read in your comment. I don’t know what movie that was and I’m only somewhat aware there was a big strike in the entertainment industry in the USA. Just little pieces I caught here on Lemmy and maybe back on reddit too. I’m not claiming to have any particular insight into her motivations or anything, just that what you presented as her good side sounds very much like business acumen to me rather than philantropy.
Admittedly I don’t know much about her as a person, but how can someone who uses a private jet in 2024 be considered a decent person by any stretch?
Having such a ludicrously unsustainable lifestyle in a climate emergency that will kill millions and displace hundreds of millions in just a few decades is a crime against humanity, change my mind.
The same way a pediatric heart surgeon who also drives a Land Rover can be considered a decent person. People shouldn’t be judged on a single data point.
A land rover isn’t nearly as polluting and doesn’t drive nearly as far. More importantly, the heart surgeon isn’t a role model in terms of lifestyle aspirations for literally hundreds of millions of followers.
People shouldn’t be judged on a single data point.
It’s not like we’re talking about stealing some sweets from children or something. Climate change just gets worse and worse and worse until we reach net zero co2 emissions. As long as it’s culturally accepted to cause massive amounts of completely unnecessary emissions, we don’t have the slightest chance of fixing this.
The only way a decent person could be doing this is if they were completely uneducated about climate change and their impact as a role model.
Neither the doctor nor Taylor Swift would make the tiniest dent in climate change if they gave those things up and we need to stop blaming individuals when it isn’t individuals who are the problem unless those individuals are running one of those 100 companies. Which Taylor Swift is not.
There’s always a supplier and a consumer. The pollution of these 100 corporations is caused on behalf of their customers who fund them in exchange for fossil fuels, directly or indirectly. They are both responsible, it’s 2 sides of the same coin.
Of course, much of this pollution isn’t really avoidable at this point. We can’t have 100% renewable power and electric cars tomorrow. Some really polluting industries will take decades to decarbonize, like steel and cement production. But this makes it even more urgent to adress the low hanging fruit asap, i.e. big sources of pollution that can easily be cut. Private jets are a prime example.
You could say just a few private jet flights or chopping down one single forest won’t make a dent in global carbon emissions, but that doesn’t mean that thousands around the world can keep on doing it indefinitely without consequences for all of us. Especially if they are idols for millions of people, normalizing harm to society that we can’t afford.
Traffic cameras are usually publicly accessible. You are also, generally, allowed to take pictures of people when they are in public spaces where there is not an expectation of privacy.
So at what point of this is the line crossed?
Seb in space’s car was spotted driving down Main Street at 4:13 pm on Tuesday
Seb in space was next seen on 1st street at 4:15 pm
…
Seb in space was next seen turning off into the Hairy Palms apartment complex at 9:12 pm on Tuesday
Seb in space was seen leaving the Hairy Palms apartment complex at 06:00 on Wednesday
That is where this gets pretty murky. Because we all more or less acknowledge that parparazzi taking pictures of everyone leaving an airport are assholes (unless it is about figuring out if The Rock is going to come do PR to distract people from the WWE sexual slavery scandal…). But we have no issue with knowing that without even needing to send someone over to see who got off the 1235 LAX->DFW flight.
And while my initial stance is “fuck the super-rich”: I am allegedly part of a private chat for “people in tech” to give each other a heads up if we see a CEO getting off a flight. Because if your boss is pretty regularly visiting Facebook HQ and not telling anyone? That is the sign that you need to refresh your CV because you might get layed off after an acquisition/merger. There are definitely business reasons for not making it trivial to track individuals.
So yeah. I am going to side on the stance of “if you need to travel secretly, wear sunglasses like the rest of us”. Or, if you are too famous to even risk that, at least use one of the private jet companies rather than owning your own. But I also think this is something that we need to actually consider from a legal and privacy standpoint and it is a lot more complex than that.
I feel like your example is way more granular than what is going on here. It’s more like ‘so and so has arrived at this city airport now’ and within an hour or two they could be anywhere in a fairly large radius without anyone reporting their location. Also there is the fact that this is ‘punching up’ which is often seen as ok.
I don’t pretend to have an answer here, but it’s hard to feel sorry for celebrities.
I am suspicious as to whether that is a “legit” site at all…
But yeah. Even mentioned below. It is REALLY not an insurmountable problem. But apparently people don’t understand why people might not want to give step by step instructions for how to do something that, in my opinion, is fundamentally “bad”. Can’t imagine what would happen if Mythbusters talked about “adding blah” or Burn Notice did the “and other stuff” short hand for “Yo dog, this shit is not something we should explain the details of”
How do you get that identifier for Taylor Swift’s plane? That part I don’t know and maybe that part is where her case lies, but I have a feeling she has no case or Musk would have tried the same thing.
Anyone can write a trivially simple program to analyze license plates (or even car profiles) and feed it traffic cam footage. I’ve done that for poops and giggles (never pushed since it was sketchy). Have broadband and a few medium sized computers and you can process the entirety of a state’s traffic cameras. At which point, it is trivial to track 455M4N’s '92 buick.
That’s still not the same thing because the FAA is a federal organization and you’re talking about something you can only do in certain municipalities. Traffic camera footage is not available universally and a city may not even use them.
But I also think this is something that we need to actually consider from a legal and privacy standpoint and it is a lot more complex than that.
Just because you can do something or it is even legal to do something doesn’t mean you “should”. That is why it is important to reassess laws and the like from time to time.
Where can I find live traffic cameras with high enough resolution to read license plates? I’ve only seen traffic cameras with something like 320x240 max.
You know how back in the day, Mythbusters would joke about “adding blah”? Or how a lot of chemistry and engineering youtubers won’t provide the exact specifics once they start working with a gun or something meth adjacent?
Its one of those things where if you have the basic understanding of how these systems work, you can find it pretty trivially (or work around things). And if you don’t? Then you really don’t need to know.
That’s fair, but that’s a discussion about how accessible the info should be. If it’s public, it’s public, and the public has equal access to it. If it shouldn’t be that easy to access, we fix the system, not punish the users. And suing is punishment/aggression, regardless of the outcome. Self defense isn’t free.
Unfortunately, the way the legal system adapts is through precedent.
“Optimally”? That kid drops it before any legal action is actually followed up on (no harm, no foul). Then they and Swift work with the various lobbyist/activist groups to push this farther on their side.
Or the kid is an idiot and it goes to court and we begin the appeals escalation right then and there.
I'm going to want a citation on that. I learn just fine on my own, and I'm sure many others do too. If you're really concerned about giving people "the best chance at success" rather than just forcing them into boxes then you'd be presenting options.
it probably has to do with the quality of "remote training" materials. my company (contract security), I train new hires in a variety of things including CPR/AED/First Aid.... you can definitely tell the difference between people who were given the stupid web-cartoon training vs actual in person training.
hell, the remote training shit had terrible localization issues. (as in, would get our people arrested and charged with felonies... ooops....)
Is requiring all employees to spend multiple unpaid hours in a car during rush hour in order to put them in unattractive cubicals or desks akin to prison cells, where they are only allowed to shit x amounts a day, and where the manager keep looking over the shoulder to see if you are not wasting a minute thinking about anything other than work a punishment?
My company has a management mentorship program for remote employees. The boss actually travels to different employees homes and will stay with them and work with them at their house for the week. This keeps the execs happy enough to know that they’ve got middle management keeping an eye on the employees, while also allowing the remote work with no fuss. It’s an interesting approach for sure.
I work a physical labor job and the supervisors are supposed to help with that. What they do instead is idie away chatting and spending inordinate amounts of time “doing” it work.
Thankfully, in a backwards sort of way, after one of them tried dodging their work when the venue needed to be turned over for a city council meeting, our manager has throughly chewed them out.
Still, I don’t have much faith in them, but we’ll see where that goes.
This would be a massive waste of time if it were with the whole team every day. I don’t need to know what every other employee on the team is doing every single day, and I don’t need to spend time listening to them explain it. I’ve got shit to do.
It wouldn't be explaining it. It would be your teammates telling everyone where they are on the projects you all work on. If you aren't working the same projects, then you aren't on the same team. Or you need sub-teams. If your work is so independent you don't rely on anyone else's work and vice versa, then you probably don't need standups.
We used to have a rigorous schedule. Arrive at the office between 8-830. Make coffee and chat. At 9am we started the daily meeting. We all read what we were going to do today to each other. By then it was 1130 and so we broke for lunch. After lunch, at 1300 we would do the thing we said we would do. At 1530-1630 we would submit out updates to the project management system and produce tomorrow’s report for us to read to each other. 1700 we would go to the bar then head home around 1830.
When I started working for myself I would usually start around 9 to finish at noon, including travel time.
I agree with you. That’s why we make our teams small enough in size that standups are 10min max, usually more like 5.
That said, it can be really beneficial to hear that Joe is working on something similar to a thing I’m going to start today. He may be able to give me some lessons learned or point me to a library.
But I completely agree that big teams a make this an annoyance. I used to be on a 20 person team and standups were completely worthless.
Now, we have 3-5 devs per team and it’s usually really quick.
My husband holds his team meetings at 3/4pm ish on friday on zoom with beers. Afterwards he tells everyone to fuck off home.
THAT is how you do it. It turns into a pile of geeks talking geek and part post-mortem, part decompressing from the week and they’ve actually had some absolutely mint ideas rising out of deformalising the dev pileup.
there you go...forgetting service and manufacturing sectors... and everybody else who simply can't work remote because the nature of the job precludes it.
God, I hear that…plus I usually need to meet with my coworkers in India, so I’m often needing to start meetings at 6 AM. I am nooooot functional that early
I usually had to do that for Europe. Most Indian coworkers I have worked with work a later schedule so there has always been a bit of overlap. Generally the Europeans I have worked with have been German and they generally have a labor rep on the board so they can fight against messed up work schedules.
What I used to do was make notes at the end of the day. Just a couple short bullet points to say at standup and help me get back on track a little faster the next morning.
I'm the same way. If I could start work at 5:00 a.m. and be off by noon or 1:00 p.m. I'd be happy. It's just hard to find people who want to do therapy at 5:00 a.m. 😂
You know, actually I'm in Oregon, so I hadn't thought about the fact that if I did telehealth with people who lived across the country I might be able to start at 5:00.
I’d love it if therapy hours were before and after normal work hours. On Betterhelp they are, but I gave up on it after a couple tries when I couldn’t find a good fit.
I'm allowed to set my own hours, so if it was telehealth I could theoretically do late night or morning appointments if I want to. I just haven't really thought about that. When I eventually have my own practice. I really do want to have weekend hours and evening hours, before I worked with a lot of parents and that was one of the biggest issues was when do you have time for therapy when you're chasing a toddler. Or like I remember when I would have friends who worked as bartenders, they wished that they could do therapy after they got off work but sometimes that would be two or three in the morning.
Ha! Yes.
For the first time, we are trying out a full scrum team in our company, with an external “scrum master” who really seems to know what he’s doing. It’s bloody amazing. Small team, the daily meeting has yet to exceed 10 minutes and is usually <5 minutes, the planning and refinement meeting keeps everyone in the loop. The rest of the time I can just be a happy code monkey :)
My stand-ups are at 10 am (11 am for most of the team), last between 3 and 15 minutes depending on how many of the 7 of us show up and how much everyone has to say, then we all go back to what we’re doing. My project manager and boss both care about the work that gets done rather than monitoring us to make sure we’re working the entire time, and we actually get reasonable (even generous) timelines for most things unless it’s something super important.
eh. i think best practice is smallish teams get everyone together once a week for the stand up. but a supe or somebody makes the rounds daily. five minute check up 'do you need anything? get you some coffee?', kind of conversation before going to the next.
it doesn't impact the team if that one person wants to chat, but also gives people an opportunity to bring up concerns they wouldn't normally bring up in a group.
largish teams need to be broken into smallish teams.
I was doing daily technical meetups in the morning so that my team in India and the more local members could stay in sync and ask each other questions. Usually 10 minutes, but occasionally an hour or more when we had to go way out into the weeds.
Do you mean standups where you are actually standing up? Many places I’ve worked have called a daily meeting a “stand-up” but it has been an hour-long sit-down meeting.
Then there are the actual “stand-ups” where the tall guys tower over the group, and the shorter people (typically women) are either talking into the chests of those guys, or they’re craning their necks up at painful angles.
Thats the thing… boses are basically saying that they cant do that. They cant actually measure how productive people are so they fall back on watching them like a hawk
You’re overlooking that most managers don’t actually do anything, so they need desperately to justify their positions. I have a manager who has seven hours of meetings every day, five days a week. We make a fucking app. It barely changes month to month. What on earth are you spending 35 hours a week talking about?
The manager has so little to do they just micromanage everyone, and cause a massive backlog of work that doesn’t have to exist.
I always thought that Office Space was satire, but it really is like that in a lot of companies. I spent more time updating managers than doing actual work since I started this position.
15 years in prison for “endangering a fetus”? Then giving birth only for that child to not have a mommy during childhood, adolescence, and teenage years?
And this is considered good policy by those who create these laws?
conservatives dont create logical policies. there is absolutely nothing logical about their 'platform'... except maybe 'brainwash masses to accumulate wealth'
Excuse, more like sales pitch. You get together a bunch of old men who want to control women they will come up with the idea of being cruel to them when they disobey. Sounds pretty fucked up, how would you get people to agree? Don’t worry about that, they will sell the idea abortion is murder. You wouldn’t feel sorry for a murderer would you?
I think it was for previous charges after she violated probation. But yeah, if we’re going to talk about endangering a fetus, then everyone who had a hand in her jail conditions and who ignored her when she went in to labor should also be in prison because every one of them is guilty of endangerment.
No she was one of several women imprisoned under a new Alabama statute for “chemical endangerment of a fetus.” You know, a “crime” that already can’t be committed again by the time the imprisoned reach trial for it because of the way our “justice” system works.
Those women aren’t allowed to endanger a fetus, but the all-knowing authorities are, apparently. (Yes, let’s forcibly cold-turkey detox a pregnant person who was using. Great idea.)
Oh I read the article last week and misremembered what the 15 years was for. Either way, not one person was actually interested in protecting her fetus.
Caswell tested positive for Methamphetamines while being around 4 months pregnant. This is Ashley Caswell’s 4th charge of Chemical Endangerment with 2 other pregnancies.
Caswell was released from the Etowah County jail in April of this year and placed on Community Corrections for monitoring. When Caswell came to report on 08/01/2022 she was drug tested and failed for methamphetamine, she was then arrested for a Community Corrections Violation. Caswell stated that she was around 4 months pregnant.
Who conducted the tests? What is the false positive rate? Was retesting done to ensure accuracy? Does CPS get to choose the testing labs, maybe the ones that get the results that they want? Did the sample have identification on it that a manager at the testing center could trace to the person?
I will start believing the criminal justice system the day I don’t read weekly stories of missing body cam footage.
Lmao pretend you can’t even fathom what he meant, that the system is rigged and that they got the result they wanted because the US is seemingly inherently corrupt.
Nonetheless it’s no surprise, this woman would’ve needed help and care. There’s only speculation that could be done regarding circumstances, but I think it boils down to the “pro life” - laws being ironic
I know exactly what they meant. What I don’t know is how it’s related to what I said.
We can have a conversation about how our prison systems treat prisoners. Which we’ll likely agree on
Or we can have a conversation about police abuse of power, which we’ll probably also agree on.
Or we can have a conversation about our broken criminal justice system, which seems boring because again, we’d probably just agree.
Or we can have a conversation about whether pregnant mothers, in general, should be allowed to be imprisoned for attempting to kill their unborn children, but it seems like people just want to derail the conversation with irrelevant arguments.
No, your “red thread” was that it was just to take the baby away with cps(?) because she either did or does narcotics. And somehow you feel it is derailing to even take any question outside the narrow scope of it.
It is what people are discussing, it is a health issue. Both addiction and abortion are.
was that it was just to take the baby away with cps(?) because she either did or does narcotics
Yes that’s correct, good job.
And somehow you feel it is derailing to even take any question outside the narrow scope of it.
Except it’s not “outside the narrow scope”, it’s got nothing to do with my statement. And you know that you can’t argue with my statement so the only way you can “win” is to argue about something else entirely.
It is what people are discussing
It is not what I was discussing, nor was it what the person I replied to was discussing.
I highly encourage you to talk to some of them and educate yourself. Go read some threads about the abuse they experience.
I don’t know why I’m still engaging with someone that thinks 15 years for doing drugs while pregnant is even remotely acceptable. Especially since it’s clear they didn’t give a shit about the baby at the end of the day. I guess I just hope that some of you will still come around and realize that women are humans who fuck up and we don’t deserve to be held ransom every time some dipshit knocks us up.
If you do feel this strongly about babies then I hope we can at least agree that child support starts at conception and men that endanger babies by impregnating drug addicts should be in prison with them.
I don’t know why I’m still engaging with someone that thinks 15 years for doing drugs while pregnant is even remotely acceptable.
I don’t know why I’m engaging with someone who insists on misrepresenting my statements, so let me do a favor for the both of us and block you, goodbye 👋
I think the confusion arises from the secrecy part. A conspiracy is understood to be a secret unlawful activity, especially of subversive nature. When it’s not secret anymore is it still conspiracy? or is it just organised crime? I know it feels just pedantic, but this is why the media abuses words to steer collective opinion. Nowadays you can just say something is a conspiracy and people will believe it’s fake without recourse.
I was just being kind of funny. Language is weird and I’m pretty sure that the word conspiracy is headed through the change to mean “Crazy people think this thing is true”
This isn’t proof. That’s the crazy part. I hear ya. I’m with ya. I don’t see anything that is concrete physical evidence to tie it all together. As of now.
I agree, I just was making a joke. It’s a conspiracy until you realize it’s a fact. MK-ULTRA, Government spying on you (which time? ) , Big tobacco hiding that cigerettes cause cancer, Stacks of ET games are buried in New Mexico, even dark stories like the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiments were all conspiracy theories at one time. Sadly they all turned out to be true.
There’s also the conspiracy theory of conspiracy theories that the government actually likes and even spreads conspiracy theories so that the real ones get lost in the noise and written off by the general public as “just another loony conspiracy theory”
I like that one because I absolutely don’t like it, but it’s hard not to like and think that it’s worth being a likable conspiracy theory.
And that’s the problem with conspiracy theories, you like to like them and then you can’t be sure.
That’s the most annoying misunderstanding. A conspiracy is still a conspiracy when you prove it happened/it’s happening. Conspirators remain conspirators, which means they were working together to do something illegal in secret. Ok, so now it’s not secret anymore, but they still conspired.
The Gulf of Tonkin incident being created by the US was a conspiracy theory until it wasn’t.
Not every “conspiracy theory” is wrong. Sometimes people in charge are actually trying to cover something up. It’s not insane to be skeptical of an official line until it’s backed up with proof.
My comment was meant to be tongue in cheek but you pretty much nailed the message I’m after. Don’t jump to the conspiracy conclusion but you have to have something wrong with your brain if this doesn’t at least tickle your skeptic gland.
Not sure what to make of this chart except that a few items are misplaced imo and I agree conspiracy shit is an alt right pipeline in most cases. Maybe it wasn’t always but whatever.
Anyhow.
I haven’t followed up on the news. But there sure wasn’t much available yesterday. So as far as actual reliable evidence we the public have little.
The guy being dead with an apparent self inflicted wound (as BBC and others said) or gunshot (as Corp Crime Reporter said) during whistleblower court proceedings against a giant company is consistent with suicide from:
Stress of the case or from blackmail
Stress from something totally unrelated.
Some other cause (depression, terminal illness…)
It is also consistent with:
murder made to look like suicide to silence his further testimony and dissuade others
Any of these is certainly plausible at least. As is Epstein being murdered. Actually, that one is more plausible, given the few suspicious coincidences and the sheer number of people who wanted his secrets to stay that way. Whereas extra-terrestrial UFOs aren’t all that plausible based on our current body of scientific knowledge.
I agree with pretty much everything you’ve written. The only point I would like to make is that the section where the UFOs sits is the “We Have Questions” section, which is between the “Things That Actually Happened” and “Unequivocally False But Mostly Harmless” sections. I interpret this section as containing things that cannot (as of 2021) be conclusively shown to be true or false. Also note that they’re not even saying ET UFOs, but just UFOs. I think the flying saucer is just for visual flair. If I recall correctly, the person who designed this is/was an actual graphic designer.
Lol, they mustn’t be a great one, because their design seems to have led at least one of y’all to interpret the labels as denoting for the category below, rather than upper/lower bounds between two categories. i.e. things in the blue category above the “speculation line” label are speculative but not yet “leaving reality”
Epstein didn’t kill himself though. The circumstances where above the level of questioning, there were cameras turned off and he was supposedly on suicide watch.
As I much as I also believe that, there is no hard evidence (that we know of) that he didn’t kill himself. I think that’s why it’s in that section. The suspiciousness of it is through the roof, but we can’t prove it.
Right, the chart is far from perfect, but they just grouped them both under the “we have questions” section. We have lots of unresolved questions about Epstein’s death, we have lots of unresolved questions about UFO sightings.
I don’t feel bad for the guy, but I don’t celebrate this sort of vigilante justice, either. Prisoners should be safe from other prisoners. Prison is not meant to be torture, and recidivism is a massive problem in the United States. Chauvin will have 20 years to contemplate his crimes, and treating him and every other prisoner will only reinforce their criminal proclivities.
yup. And there is a reason why laws are written to disproportionately affect certain groups- like how crack cocaine gets more jail time than powder, or marijuana convictions…
FWIW the vast majority of prisons in the US are not corporate run (>90%), but those majority government-run prisons still provide a lot of free/cheap manufacturing labor to private companies.
The government itself is to blame, not just private prisons.
Loopholes are things intentionally built into structures with the purpose of allowing something through. I find it weird so many people think loopholes aren’t something intentional.
I’m having a lot of trouble finding a source that backs up this position. Everything I’m reading says that loopholes are typically oversights, not intentional inclusions.
That being said, the 13th amendment’s allowance for prisoner slavery is not a loophole at all, it’s an explicit allowance. Loopholes are not explicit, that’s kinda the whole point of them. It’s a bit like saying that the standard deduction on your taxes is a loophole. It’s just an explicitly defined feature.
While that, in fact, does happen, when a large portion of loopholes benefit corporations are written by people employed, or otherwise invested in, those corporations you would have to be lying to yourself, or ignorant of the situation, to believe loopholes are generally unintended.
The above is one example of how this is done. Bills are written to model what the industry wants to get out of legislation. Then they use LLMs to construct legislation after being trained on those models. They then collude to push these bills to as many places as possible, greasing palms the whole way. Sometimes these are just out-right legislation for the purposes of enriching the industry, more often though they are bills written with carefully designed language to allow for specific technicalities, or for stipulations of compliance to be so vague as to be unenforceable, or to use a bunch of jargon and complex linguistics to make a law read one way to the laymen, but another to the professionals that will actually be interacting with these laws.
i think you’re responding to a normative statement by making a descriptive statement.
for those unaware, here’s a quick explanation from wikipedia: a normative statement is “meant to talk about the world as it should be”, while a descriptive statement is “meant to describe the world as it is”.
Edit I’m fuckin stupid, leaving this comment up as a monument to my illiteracy
Making a comment like this about basic conversation and debate concepts is like driving and saying you can’t read the speed limit signs. Like, maybe you should avoid actively participating altogether until you’re actually able to
i wasn’t trying to talk about grammar at all, i was only trying to focus only on the meaning of what was said. but i probably could’ve made my point more clearly, so ill try to do that now.
here’s an “example”: one person says “things should be done this way” and the other person says “well things aren’t being done that way”. these two statements aren’t in opposition to each other. in fact, it’s perfectly possible both people agree with each other. maybe things aren’t being done a certain way, and they should be done differently.
the terms “normative” and “descriptive” might seem overly complicated to someone who hasn’t seen them before (they did the first time i saw them), but i thought i’d use them because they’re useful concepts to keep in mind. they’ve helped me communicate and resolve conflicts in my own life. i’ve been both people in the example above, and it’s helpful to be able to know when it’s happening.
Human creativity gets maxed out when you literally have nothing to do but sit in a cell all day for years. Just because someone is a criminal doesn’t mean they are completely stupid.
I have often wondered how many actual geniuses have been chewed up by the worlds prison systems. If only some of those people had gotten a fair chance in their life to have their skills developed in a healthy environment… It’s depressing to think about, actually.
Doesn’t that prove his fuckin point? Even in something as locked down and controlled as fucking prison can’t stop humans if they truly want to harm others
I was just making the joke initially, a contrasting oversimplification.
But just because they don’t stop all violence, it doesn’t mean they don’t stop any violence. Prisons literally do keep murderers locked up instead of out harming others in the public. Are they flawless systems? Fuck no. There’s all kinds of shit wrong with the systems. But they definitely beat the alternative of having no prisons.
to be fair, the united states doesnt care about the humans it pretends to 'rehabilitate'. we dont care about recidivism, because our system is for punishment not for rehab.
other countries do a better job at fixing their humans than we do. can we start there?
You think prisons are locked down and controlled? Prisons are for-profit labor generators where slaves are treated like, well, slaves. Society accepts this because we act like they deserve subhuman treatment. We should not accept this.
In theory, yes, but that should be the point of education and social programs tbh. Even then, restorative justice models don’t rely as heavily on jail/prison. Temporary and maybe permanent removal from a specific environment doesn’t have to require fully sequestering perpetrators from society. Caught early enough, extreme examples of violent individuals can be rehabilitated through house arrest and other programs like anger management, therapy, etc. Saves taxpayer money, reduces recidivism, and victims report much higher satisfaction as they can actually face their perpetrator and be more involved in the process seeking accountability.
In practice, prisons prop up class and racial segregation, perpetuating capitalist agendas.
Yes, our prisons should be safe for those who are confined within them. I agree with that, and that less people should be confined in the first place.
But there is a qualitative difference between "he was stabbed due to being a cop (or due to being THAT cop)" vs "He got into an altercation that resulted in him being stabbed, but which could have happened to anyone."
I think the kneejerk assumption is that he was targeted, which is worse IMO.
Not that I shed a single tear for the fate of Derek Chauvin, mind you.
Would you rather be in an unsafe environment where you are taking the same risks as anyone else by being there, or an unsafe environment where you are likely to be specifically and personally targeted for being you?
The idea of “not killing” and “I wish he was dead” can’t seem live in most people’s head. I think he’s human waste, he should be dead, and I wouldn’t have lamented his death. BUT!!! I don’t want him to die and I don’t want someone to kill him.
Unfortunately, tardigrades love the bass and cello and hate violins so the only way to get a photo of one playing the violin would be to fake it somehow
The bow is also on the wrong side of the bridge. Though now that I think of it, that might produce an even higher sound like you would expect of a microscopic violin?
Tesla spent years building a brand identity that is intimately woven together with Musk. It’s damaged goods now as far as I’m concerned. Every time I encounter one of its products I think about it. It wasn’t too long ago when I was eagerly following product updates in the hopes of eventually buying a car power wall or that solar roof system. I was enthusiastic about rationalizing away the poor build quality and terrible customer support. Now, I would never buy a thing from them and I’m happy to pass judgement on anyone who does. $tslaq
Someone point me in the direction of an EV that’s better in terms of price and performance. I hate Musk, but this anti-tesla shit is ridiculous to me. I’d buy another one because the CEO of a car company isn’t the reason for my car purchase. How people can’t separate that is so strange to me. Capitalism sucks, but what other car company is transitioning us away from fossil fuels better and quicker? Fuck Musk, but Tesla has the right mission statement. Without them, EVs would still be another few decades away
Lol so are the CEOs of all the other manufacturers people to look up to and admire? Would you buy a Volkswagen or did you own one when Martin Winterkorn was running it?
Elon is a man child, I don’t look to him for any insights or knowledge, would I buy a Tesla? Ya if the car itself is good, if it’s not good then I wouldn’t buy it. It wouldn’t have anything to do with Musk however
Who do you bank with? Do you hold those CEOs to the same standards and not use their products?
Good luck buying anything where there isn’t some ethical issues surrounding the people who are the the top of those corporations
In that case you must then remove yourself from society, since not only does at least 90% of the money you spend end up in the pockets of evil people, but evil people are also keeping much if not most of your hard earned money for themselves before you ever know it existed by paying you less than your labour is worth (what you earned them).
Nothing wrong with that but… again do you do that across the board all the time because if you do congrats it’s not an easy thing to accomplish
And I’m not dumb I know it doesn’t have to be an all or nothing, doing it when you can is great I just can’t stand people who pontificate about shitheads like Musk but buy all their shit from Amazon
Most other ceos shut their mouth and let the product speak. Tesla/Elon’s mo has been to have the product in the background with him at the forefront, that worked well until it didn’t
Most other ceos shut their mouth and let the product speak
I prefer my evil rulers behind the curtain, thank you very much!
*this is in no way a defence of Musk it's a pointing out how ridiculous it is to see a problem with him but not care about the other obscenely wealthy capitalists who not only exploit labour and hoard resources, but also basically own government via either corruption (aka "lobbying") or direct representation (ie all the rich fucks in government making rules for themsleves and their friends), just like Musk, simply because they're "polite" enough to do it behind closed doors.
That's not to say don't buy the things you need, it's to say don't be deluded in to thinking that it matters. As long as capitalism exists, governance by and for the rich isn't going anywhere, and your money will always be going to one of maybe a couple dozen people.
When someone tells you all companies are evil, that’s fine. When someone tells you all companies are equally evil, they’re showing themselves to be morally incompetent.
(Same goes for politicians: If someone tells you all politicians are corrupt, that’s fine; if they tell you all politicians are equally corrupt, you can bet that person votes for fascists.)
A big lesson from Trump and others like him is that when someone’s a piece of shit and brags about it in public, it looks innocuous and at best it may be revealing and may validate your views on power and the flaws of society, but on another level he’s likely to give voice to, rally and convince other assholes to feel entitled and protected to act like assholes and then you have an actual problem. So yes, polite amorality is better.
Not sure where we disagree here? You are right the jackass just can’t keep his mouth shut I don’t care what his beliefs are though, I don’t go to corporations for my ethics, I go to them because I want to buy a product
You can’t have a rational discussion about Tesla on lemmy. So many people are so sick of hearing about Musk that only those who REALLY hate him will click on an article about him. Those people can not separate the product from the vocal dirtbag that is its CEO.
I personally think Musk is a massive pile of garbage but that wouldn’t make me not buy a Tesla, I’ll buy it if it’s a decent car, if I had the money right now it would be between a Tesla and an Ionic
People trying to tie their purchases to the ethics of the people who run the companies are divorced from reality imo
Ah the ole “you’re a hypocrite because your life contains contradictions”… Elon musk shoved his way into my life but according to you my buying decisions are wrong if I don’t actively ignore that douche
It’s less about hypocrisy and more about what’s wrong with just buying something and not having it also have to be an existential moral crisis, don’t buy a Tesla because you think Musk is a genius but if you already own one and are gonna sell it because of Musk then that’s also ridiculous, if you are looking for an electric car and strictly won’t buy it even if it’s the best option based on the money then that just seems over the top to me is all
I have a bank account yet I’m no fan of banks, I’m typing on an iPhone, apple does shitty things, I buy shit from Amazon when I have to… I despise billionaires
Tesla spent years building a brand identity that is intimately woven together with Musk.
It worked well for a long time but it makes sense if people lose faith in Musk they lose faith in Tesla. Because he is synonymous with the brand.
Lol so are the CEOs of all the other manufacturers people to look up to and admire?
They haven’t built their brands around the reputation of their ceo.
Would I buy a Tesla? Ya if the car itself is good.
How can you evaluate if a car is good? It has recently been revealed that Tesla/Musk was exaggerating their range so severely that Tesla owners thought their cars were defective. Tesla has been trading on a reputation of ‘goodness’ that it didn’t deserve.
Tesla is seeing repercussions from risks they took tying their brand so tightly with Musk.
If anyone bought a Tesla because of Musk they were idiots, so same logic applies the other way
You could argue Apple built its brand around Jobs (who died because of his moronic beliefs about natural cures) and now Cook… pretty sure Apple kowtows to Chinese censorship and also does shitty things (I’m typing this on an iPhone right now) so I’m no fan of Jobs or Cook I just don’t give a fuck about them, I bought it because it’s the best phone for me
The range issues are pretty funny, people thinking they were defective is comical, I will however point out that is nothing new all auto manufacturers have done this for the decades with fuel economy numbers, I can’t tell you how many people we would have come through the dealership complaining about fuel economy after buying a new car
As far as evaluating if a car is good or not of course you can do that, do research on reliability issues, check recalls, ask friends and family who have actually owned them if they are any good, if you have a mechanic that you know ask them
Biggest issue is social. Buying a Tesla associates you positively with musk (by design), and from my experience most Tesla owners are incredibly annoying about it. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with wanting to avoid the stigma. Same reason people buy Harleys - the brand name and cultural associations on a vehicle matter a lot, sometimes even more than the car itself.
I can see what you are saying but that’s not a universal thing, like when it comes to Tesla I never associated that with Musk he’s just the shithead that owns it, to me it’s more about the most widely available semi affordable electric car you could buy since the legacy manufacturers dragged their asses wasting time with hydrogen and hybrids
I guess the difference I have here with people is exactly that, I don’t attach him as being Tesla
That was a good way of putting it describing it like a Harley, makes sense. I ride motorbikes and I dgaf about what brand I own, I’d ride anything including a Harley
Even beyond Musk the quality of Tesla’s for the price is absolute shit. His presence just makes it even worse. The main selling point for them was the higher range but seems like that may have been a lie the whole time.
A lot of cheap surface level stuff. For example, my dad has a model 3, and the back of the passenger chair just falls off. And by the back I mean the hard plastic shell that holds the seat pocket for the passengers in the second row to use.
There have also been reports of things like mismatched tail lights, cars leaking when it rains, and bumpers just falling off. But I haven’t seen those in person.
Search “Tesla panel gap issues”. Tons of people complaining and many say that trying to fix the issue causes other, bigger gaps, or just gets worse. I’ve heard rumor that if you try to fix them, you’ll void some kind of Tesla support.
Oh, and one of the most damning ones in my book. During a car fire, which Tesla has had PLENTY of, some genius decided that the door locks should default to LOCKED. Who the actual fuck thought this was acceptable? How did they ever make it into production.
There’s a video floating around of a guy kicking his windows out to escape his burning Tesla.
Dumb dumb musk decided he was smarter than everyone else, (spoiler he’s not) and overrode his own engineers. He decided there were no physical sensors required for auto driving, only cameras. Every other manufacturer knows that not possible yet, but musk knew better
Yes, a lot of car fires are difficult to extinguish, and yes, electric/hybrids more so, but teslas are exceptional. Can’t out out the many teslas that catch fire When the local fire dept came by to inspect our business we got to chatting and they said that they had a Tesla catch fire. They used everything in their arsenal, and a LOT of water. Like more than you could imagine. Then it got towed to a holding yard. Someone parked it up against a building, and next to quite a few other vehicles waiting for legal things/inspections. Tesla reignited in the tow yard and took out everything near it too. The yard is in BIG trouble for damaging a whole lot of evidence/vehicles being held for court cases, etc.
The claim isn’t that they have more fires than other EV or ICE cars. The claim is that if they do have a fire they will trap you and your family in it.
Burning lithium and other exotic metals are class D fires. They are extraordinarily difficult to extinguish. They burn hot enough to break down water into oxygen and hydrogen. Mainly you let them burn themselves out and try to prevent them from spreading to other more traditionally combustible materials.
There are also the people who got locked out of their cars because the battery died. Or even better the one that locked INSIDE their tesla when the 12v battery died. Getting locked inside a car, in AZ heat is deadly, VERY rapidly.
That’s like the door failing to locked when the car is on fire, or in an accident. Who the fuck let that pass QC?
I’m not a Musk fan at all but some of these are misleading or just downright wrong.
Tesla is only the most recalled brand if you categorize “recalls” to include software updates. If Tesla can fix an issue via an OTA update, it shouldn’t be considered a recall but it is in the source being used.
Teslas do have build issues but they’re not overwhelmingly more present than other cars. They’re only showing that way because Tesla only has 4 models of car and the build issues carry over from year to year. That’s not the case for other cars where, like with a Jetta, the body is redesigned but the name stays the same.
The door lock thing is also misleading because the case would be the same for any other car where the driver locked the doors. Either way, the fire department is breaking a window. They don’t have magic keys to open every car door out there. The fire department could pull on the handle all day long and it wouldn’t matter. The driver locked the doors and could have opened them but didn’t (and there’s even a special manual override for them along with a Fire Department quick access switch at the front of the car).
Edit: People are downvoting objectively true information.
That very much understates it. It is the kind of “would be criminal if human rights mattered in this country” stupidity that has been solved for decades. Because it is the kind of thing that makes abductions a lot easier AND can lead to unnecessary deaths in a collision on the off chance the… lithium batteries ignite.
I didn’t miss crap. The cars have a mechanical release on the inside. If the driver was conscious, he could pull the switch which doesn’t need power and would unlock the doors. The OP’s comment and link were referencing the outside of the doors since the Model S has retractable handles that are flush with the door when they’re locked so there’s no handle to grab.
The only exception is the Model X since it has the full-wing doors. Those have a release that is only accessible if you pull off the speaker grill so you’d need to know about that ahead of time.
First and foremost, when you have a vehicle with an electric door lock, you ALWAYS fail it to open. On a “normal” car (yeah there are some that are all electric now too), you have a physical switch that you flip, and it’s unlocked. The locking mechanism for the Tesla is electric, so in the case of the wires being damaged, or as witnessed, the car being on fire, you have no MECHANICAL mechanism to open the door. Supposedly, there is one INSIDE the door, lol what? but how many people will know that, and more importantly be able to access it in a panic?
I did a little more digging. SOME models are equipped with a mechanical release on the door (I assume it’s something you have to pay extra for), but not all of them. As I mentioned above, there is a mechanical option, but you would have to know exactly to remove the door card trim panel, and access the cable. People don’t even read enough of the owners manual to know how shit they really want works, let alone a safety issues.
Clearly you don’t understand what a recall is. Recalls are highly regulated, and things like a software update for the aircon do not fall under the recall term. In fact, manufacturers do everything in their power to avoid recalls. They will often issue a TSB, instead, when a recall isn’t being forced by the NHTSA. Good try though. As you can see from teslas own website (I don’t believe this is even close to all of them) they are ALL safety issues, which is what recalls are for, either voluntary, or forced by NHTSA.
No, they absolutely have more build quality issues than even the lowest trim shit econoboxes. I always say that a tesla is a corolla with a big computer in it, but even the corolla is built WAY better, and I’m old enough to remember 80s cars. Those were pretty damn bad.
First and foremost, how does a normal, non-Tesla car fail to an unlocked door? If the car caught fire and was locked, how does the car unlock the doors in your scenario? Teslas have a mechanical switch that’s no different from the situation you’ve described since the driver was passed out. The door needed to be opened from the outside so it’s literally no different for the Tesla.
Also, your digging was wrong. The Model 3, for example has a mechanical release right on the door that doesn’t need any digging or removal of anything. (teslamotorsclub.com/…/smartselect_20191224-132903…)
Clearly you don’t understand what a recall is
I know exactly what a recall is and you’re wrong again. In 2022 alone, Tesla came in 7th amongst auto manufacturers for recalls but 2nd in total cars affected because over-the-air fixes are still considered recalls. (autoblog.com/…/most-recalls-by-car-manufacturer-2…) Regardless of that, under no interpretation of it does Tesla have the most recalls of any car manufacturer, unless you include the OTA update recalls.
So it sounds like you don’t understand what a recall is.
Everything else you’ve said is subjective garbage. Unless you have some evidence to back up your claims, you’re just spreading more of the lies that are exactly what I’m complaining about. Tesla and Musk have enough real problems that you don’t need to make up their problems.
Musk’s taint on the brand is I think majorly based on this type of thing. His twitter purchase has revealed that he’s a serial liar, and now people are seeing all of the ways that it is happening with Tesla. People tolerate assholes all of the time. What they don’t want to tolerate is snake oil salesmen, and I’m not sure there has ever been a bigger one than Musk.
Fun fact: teslas are the most recalled car brand in the country.
I don’t discredit the work done by the engineers there, I’d argue they laid the groundwork to usher in the future of electric cars in this country. But of course all the credit goes to musk. Just another situation like Steve Jobs. See Bill Burrs bit on Jobs and replace him with Musk, same exact story.
How many of those are real serious recalls that they didn’t just fix with easy tweaks over the air? I hate Musk as much of the next guy but I follow a lot of EV YT channels and even the ones that don’t like Tesla acknowledge that the media overhyped the recalls given how many of them have been easy OTA fixes. Plus since they iterate very fast and don’t just update the car once every four years often it only affects a small subset. Like 1-4k cars in some cases rather than the typical 100k recall that Toyota would have.
Musk is a dipshit. But the brand was always doomed once other car manufacturers finally started pushing mainline EVs. Because why would you want an overpriced car with no steering wheel that leaks in the rain when you could just drive an electric Ford Focus?
But it is also worth noting that “crossover SUVs” are generally just another word for “hatchback”. I like Subaru and I forget if the Crosstrek is slightly larger, but it is essentially the hatchback imprezza on a lift kit (which is mostly a normal height since the impreza is a low rider for some unfathomable reason).
I am a wagon fan. I had long wondered why Europe had all these nice wagons and here in the US we had countless crappy SUV models and very few (if any) wagons. Back in the 70’s and 80’s emissions were the reason manufacturers moved from car-based larger capacity vehicles to truck-based. They simply did not have to meet nearly the same emissions requirements. Sucks for you consumer (and environment)!
Yeah, being anti-semitic and racist is kinda the default for white folks back then, source half my ancestry is rich white folks the other half is poor white folks.
No. I actually love Adaptive Cruise Control and use it every day in my subaru. To the point that I am genuinely a bit worried about renting a car and doing a lot of highway driving in a few weeks because I am rather rusty at fully maintaining my own speed and distance.
As for branding: I believe you are supposed to end every single nonsense non sequitor with “Interesting”. At least, that is what The Emerald Apartheid was doing last I checked. Or a poop emoticon.
When I rent cars I usually reserve a Toyota Corolla, they are usually the cheapest or second cheapest rental category and they come with adaptive cruise with 3 choices of follow distance and I’ve been really impressed with it, as Subaru driver.
On the other hand, maybe we should start a foundation to buy Teslas for trans people. Can you imagine how pissed Musk would get if it suddenly became cool to be trans in a Tesla?
In addition, almost all big car manufacturers now have far better EVs in terms of quality, features, and looks. Tesla no longer has the monopoly they enjoyed for almost a decade. If you’re selling me an EV with this shit stain on it, I’d just go the shop next door.
Let his fascist followers buy his EVs….oh wait, they hate them. Remember all the rage against EVs in Texas that led to “rolling coal” in Teslas, purposely parking F250s to take up all the Tesla charging stations, vandalism at charging stations, keying Teslas parked at malls? Yeah, those are the people he is fighting for.
I wanted a Tesla. I was ready to get a model 3. Then he went full blown ass clown and at first I thought it was a joke, like he was just messing around being funny. Then I realized how big of a dbag he really is and yeah, no thanks. I bought a CTS-V instead and although it’s the opposite of fuel efficient, it’s the most fun vehicle I’ve ever driven.
On another note if you are interested in the topic, I can’t recommend Growing Up in Scientology enough on YouTube.
Aaron is an amazing educator, commentator, and satirist on the subject of Scientology. Beyond that he has one of the most genuine, yet charismatic personalities of any person on the platform. I can’t say enough good things about him, his journey, and his work with both exposing as well as freeing people from Scientology’s grip.
Yeah A A Ron covers Scientology really well, cuts through the nonsence with a great deal of knowledge about the subject and does a lot to help victims of the cult. Well worth a watch.
This is why I don’t watch Tom Cruise, Elisabeth Moss, et al vehicles. You can’t separate the art from the artist when you’re literally financing their criminal organization.
Shelly Miscavige is still held unlawfully by Scientology.
Are you sure about that? I don’t mean that in the sense of doubting that Scientology kidnapped her, but in the sense that I’m unaware of any proof she’s even still alive.
Flo Barnett shot herself three times in the chest and once in the head with a long rifle.
Gary Webb, who exposed the crack cocaine conspiracy within the CIA shot himself twice in the head with a revolver. FWIW, Webb’s death Bay actually have been a suicide. The first shot went through his face.
Headline is kind of funny, but I wanted to know what he shot at
In body cam footage shared across social media, the officer was seen jumping to the ground and shouted “shots fired” after the acorn strikes the roof of his car. He then turned and emptied every bullet from his gun, each aimed squarely at his squad car.
Funny again…
While Hernandez fired on the car, Marquis Jackson, who was accused of stealing his girlfriend’s car, was in the back of the police cruiser. Officers had searched, handcuffed and loaded the accused into the back of the police car and, despite being cuffed, it was Jackson that the officer thought was shooting at him.
Nope, he was trying to kill someone handcuffed in the back of his squad car and had already been searched for weapons.
Cop should at least be facing reckless endangerment, if not attempted murder.
I deal with PTSD vets every day so I understand the snap buuuuut… No one else gets to get away with a slap on the wrist because of their mental illness so fuckem
Yeah. The "having PTSD" part isn't what should be punished, it's the "and yet still carrying a gun while putting yourself in a position to have your PTSD triggered like this" part that's egregious.
Well, Philip Brailsford, the murderer who murdered Daniel Shaver, claimed PTSD for murdering Daniel so he could draw on his pension and retire early. Because he murdered someone and it hurt his fee-fees.
See I’m like, I don’t even think you could qualify most of the things you would do to this guy as being punishment. Preventing this guy from being a cop forever (pretty unlikely, but could happen), isn’t really a punishment. If he’s discharging his firearm into his own car, he’s obviously just unfit to be an officer and that’s a pretty clear safety concern. If you sent him to prison, that might be more of a “punishment”, but that’s also, you know, what cops do basically their whole careers, is send people to prison, and we still have all the same problems with the prison system as we’ve always had, so, you know, I’m like. I dunno. That doesn’t seem like a clear “win”, to me, both in terms of improving society and in terms of helping him out if he’s mentally ill which, you know, seems to clearly be the case, here.
You could also maybe think, hey, this guy goes to an asylum or something for mental illness, but that kind of has the same problems as sending someone to prison, it’s not usually a helpful system.
I am not saying he definitely wasn’t trying to kill Mr. Jackson intentionally. I’m saying that the other possibility is that he’s a stupid coward that empties his clip at his own car because he’s terrified and doesn’t think about and/or care that there’s a person in his car.
Was he intending to kill Mr. Jackson? Maybe. That’s definitely not an unlikely possibility. But I think stupid cowardice where the motive wasn’t murder is also not unlikely because cops are stupid cowards.
I got ya. I'm agreeing that he's a coward and an idiot, but disagreeing that he might not have been trying to murder a guy. He might not have believed it was murder, because of the idiot part...but the video convinced me he was intentionally trying to kill the unarmed man in the back of his car.
I went and watched it and you're right, it's plain as day lmfao. He falls over all dramatically "I'M HIT!" and shoots his gun sideways. I mean what the hell is this dude thinking?
“It hit my vest” and “I feel weird”. Them be signs that his fat ass has coronary artery disease. Fucking Okaloosa County. Good riddance. Don’t miss it.
Same as when they think they’re doing on fentanyl…
After hearing the sound of the acorn, the deputy reported that he also felt a “tingliness” all along the side of his body. He then said his “legs just give out” and he fell to the ground, assuming that he had been seriously injured by something.
Because of this, the video also showed Hernandez complaining about feeling “weird” and shouting to his colleague that he’s been hit. It’s all very dramatic.
Cops are constantly terrified because of their training, so they panic and mistake a panic attack for something else.
Being a cop sucks so much (because of their own leadership and culture) that good qualified people do t want to be a cop. So we end up with these fragile snowflakes that shouldn’t be allowed to carry at all. Let alone be a cop
Yeah… I am sure there are some idiots who believe in the horrors of fentanyl.
The reality is it is a catch all to excuse all the other drugs in their systems. If someone notices a cop is clearly amped up on amphetamines then the reality is that someone in the tri-state area had a single particle of fentanyl on them and THAT is why the cop who just killed four people is alternating between growling and crying while looking even sweatier than alex jones.
That’s just because you don’t know how to make it, and they are selling it to you a few drops at a time. I believe the ingredients are actually pretty cheap. Chemistry students make it.
Yeah, right. I don't believe you. HOW would they do that? What steps could they possibly take!? What ingredients would they need and where would they even get them!?
I mean, step one: acquire the precursors. Step two: take organic chemistry 1; then organic chemistry 2; perhaps something strange like p chem, or environmental chem or chemical instrumentation; ask the professor between classes how to make it; take another class like drug discovery and design, or advanced organic chemistry…
I am not recommending that anyone do this but you don’t need anything more advanced than Orgo 2. The issue isn’t making the compound, at least once you have the precursors, it’s ensuring that it’s not contaminated with other products in a way that harms or kills you. It’s not enough to get any yield, you need a safe yield.
That was the joke. You technically don’t even need the ochems if you just ask the professor like I said. We’re trying to lead kids down the dark road of the chemistry cult.
More seriously, a friend of mine was a chem student, and he says pretty much every one of his classmates knows how to run off 2 liters of LSD. Which should be enough to send every horse on the planet straight to the moon.
Synthesizing the drug isn’t the issue, as long as you have the right equipment and knowledge. The difficult part is getting the correct precursor chemicals.
True, but fentanyl is generally not. They do make fentanyl patches, but casual exposure, like a cop touching a tiny bit of fentanyl, will not result in fentanyl being absorbed.
My goodness what a fucking snowflake. Maybe you shouldn’t be in the profession if you’re “scared shitless” 99% of the time. But we all know that’s a cover for them. They love killing people.
Cop should at least be facing reckless endangerment, if not attempted murder.
The review board found his conduct was not reasonable; so, it’ll be up to the prosecutor (which I’m sure in FL is an office eager to go after cops). The other officer, who began shooting after the officer wearing the bodycam in the OP began shooting, was found to have acted reasonably.
Essentially, you can’t think an acorn is a bullet and get away with shooting at a detained and secured civilian. But, if another officer on scene thinks, even unreasonably so, that an acorn is a bullet and starts shooting at a detained and secured civilian, you can too. If this doesn’t make a lot of sense to you, take that as reassurance that your critical thinking remains, at least partially, intact.
I can at least somewhat understand the other officer. If your partner is screaming “IM HIT” and shooting several rounds in broad daylight, why would you question if you’re in a real shootout? Just because you haven’t seen the alleged shooter yet doesn’t mean they aren’t there.
I’m not saying either should get away with anything. But officer 2 at least had a reason to believe he was in danger.
Essentially, you can’t think an acorn is a bullet and get away with shooting at a detained and secured civilian. But, if another officer on scene thinks, even unreasonably so, that an acorn is a bullet and starts shooting at a detained and secured civilian, you can too. If this doesn’t make a lot of sense to you, take that as reassurance that your critical thinking remains, at least partially, intact.
IIRC Sympathetic Fire seems to be insta-forgiveness (by other police and the courts) whenever it comes up.
As one example, I think it played a role in the Daniel Shaver case, but it’s been a long time since I read all those details and I really don’t want to dive into that pool of anger and sadness again to verify.
Remember, he’s not getting triggered by the acorn, he’s reacting to his coworker yelling that they’ve been shot and actual gunfire. That’s a justified reason to pull out your weapon IMO
Granted, he should’ve tried to take control of the situation and de-escalate so he could “save” his panicked coworker, but that kind of calmness “under fire” would take actual training
It does mean that the assisting officers aren’t required to actually confirm their target, though.
What if this was real. If a 3rd party shot at them. 1st officer fires, blindly assuming it’s the perp in cuffs in the car. 2nd cop shoots and kills perp in car because he saw that’s what his partner was shooting at. When, in this hypothetical scenario, it was really a 3rd party that wasn’t identified yet, which would be the only plausible source of a gun shot anyway since the perp was already searched and cuffed.
That doesn’t make sense to me, but that’s how they’re trained. Ride or die with their comrads. Once the first shot is fired, it’s shoot first and ask questions later for all additional officers.
That’s not good policy. That’s not good for civilians.
Really, the disqualification is probably better publicity than winning the award itself. If someone told me some vegan cheese won a “Good Food” award, I would assume it was related to eco- and social-consciousness. Learning that it was so delicious that the dairy industry schemed to take away the award tells me they’re afraid of the competition.
Indeed, and while they might have been initially furious at the snub, this is going to wind up being VERY good for business. Now they have an incredible story to tell, complete with mystery and intrigue that consumers love. Their marketing department must be salivating right now.
Yeah, well, you can’t. It’s only available to restaurants, and isn’t ready for retail. That’s one of the stupid reasons they can’t have their stupid award. Stupid sexy cheesish.
When Seiko beat the Swiss at their own mechanical watch accuracy competitions, they decided to cancel the long running prestigious competition entirely instead of make a better watch.
That’s partly because “Scotch” is a protected label. You can only call a Whisky Scotch if it was distilled with a certain technique, from certain grains, by certain companies, and matured in certain casks for a certain amount of time. All of it is regulated.
Japanese whisky doesn’t have these limitations. They can just do whatever makes it taste good.
Scotch whisky must be made in Scotland. Similar story with bourbon, bourbon must be made in the United States. In many places you can follow the same recipes and processes as those products, but you may not label them with those terms.
Yes, and being distilled and aged in Scotland are both rules in that rule book. Again, same for bourbon, not all American whiskies are eligible to be labeled as bourbon.
I’m an American, and we just don’t really buy into the whole “you must be from this region to be called this item”. All sparkling wine is champagne, all peaty whiskey is scotch, and all rice liqur is sake.
You can make whiskey, though. According to the EU, if you have a product distilled from grain mash and stored, at full undiluted strength, in wood casks for at least three years, you can call it whiskey. You can produce a Single Malt Whiskey, or a Rye Whiskey, anywhere you want and in fact some German Korn would qualify as whiskey as it’s aged long enough.
Side note: Whisky wasn’t always aged. Originally it pretty much resembled Korn (though German noses have some rather strict standards when it comes to fusel alcohols that Whisky and Vodka producers don’t tend to have), then the UK prohibition came along and distillers had no choice but to let the stuff age in its casks while they fought the legislation, then they were allowed to sell the aged stuff, aged much longer than was previously common, and the rest is history.
To be fair, a crystal clock is just going to be more accurate than a movement based watch. Even the biggest watch fanboys admit that a $30 Seiko Casio outperforms the majority of mechanicals on raw accuracy.
So… The existing market leader chose to flip the table instead of admitting that their position was weaker and lower value.
Yep, that sure sounds like the pursuit of capital instead of… innovation, quality, or any of the other attributes capitalism attempts to associate itself with.
The Neuchâtel Observatory is a publicly funded institution that certifies movements with high accuracy as chronometers. Not a private body, or a marketing tool used by a watchmaker. The same ‘competition’ is done by other observatories, all giving their own rating of a timepiece’s accuracy against a reference chronometer kept at the observatory.
A quick search could have brought you that information_ Quartz movements beat the pants off mechanical movements, and they’re far cheaper to make, allowing the non-rich to have a decent watch with good battery life and serious accuracy. Cheap and normal mechanical watches regularly drift and lose a few seconds time over days and weeks - quartz drifts between 1-110 seconds over a year.
So funnily enough, the very first movement they submitted to the contest in 1963 was a quartz, and it placed tenth overall. They went with mechanical movements for subsequent competitions, and didn’t actually start placing high again until 1966 when they placed ninth overall. In ‘67 they did even better, placing fourth, but then the contest was canceled for good the next year.
You’re right, but it’s understandable why the dairy industry shat themselves. They fucked up by allowing things to be named “oat milk” or “whatever milk”, so they damn sure aren’t going to let their “cheese” territory get encroached on.
The problem with restricting the use of the term “milk” is that people have been using the term “milk” to describe non-dairy liquids for longer than there have been trademarks. The word hasn’t ever been used exclusively to describe dairy.
There are days I wait for it, but I imagine one of these days the top is going to pop on South Africa and we are going to not like the skeletons we find there.
Wait do you mean any day now we could be confronted with the revelation that South African mining companies under apartheid weren’t exactly top of the class in business ethics? But how
He didn’t get rich from the emerald mine. Its a real thing, but he only made around 400k (in 2021 dollars) on his roughly 200k investment. He didn’t own it either.
Any actual riches were something else.
Not to say that 200k is nothing, but it’s not the source of any rich level money his father had.
They got rich the same way rich people everywhere get rich - by exploiting impoverished and disempowered labor to the max. The only difference with the Apartheid-regime (to whom Elon owes his riches) was that they were pretty overt when it came to who it was that got to be the impoverished and disempowered labor.
To be clear… that hasn’t really changed all that much in South Africa. But, then again, it hasn’t really changed in the US, either.
I feel like this is an example of the dangers of surrounding yourself with a monoculture. Maybe Elon was always exactly this way, but he was seemingly previously tempered by the notably distinct moderation policies at Twitter. Once he owned it and stripped that moderation, there’s nothing holding the pendulum anymore and he swings pretty far the other direction.
I can’t tell which is the bigger influence but he has certainly gone down the right wing rabbit hole and also insulated himself from all critique as a billionaire who has everyone he talks to regularly on his payroll or otherwise benefitting from him. A bad mix.
I've noticed that a lot of these people will lean left for a minute, because they hope that it will get them a get out of jail free card for being problematic in specific ways.
They find out quickly that the left doesn't do that. I can support your stance on XYZ while still disliking you and not wanting to do business with you because of ABC.
So then they switch to regressive stances, because those people will cheer you on for being awful.
Same thing happened to Reagan. He created the EPA as an executive agency to avoid Congress creating and empowering an independent entity that the executive wouldn't be able to control. He thought it would get him votes from the left. It did not, and he pretty much immediately stated that he regretted it because lefties didn't buy his bs.
Same thing happened to Reagan. He created the EPA as an executive agency to avoid Congress creating and empowering an independent entity that the executive wouldn’t be able to control. He thought it would get him votes from the left. It did not, and he pretty much immediately stated that he regretted it because lefties didn’t buy his bs.
Wait, what?
The EPA was created by Nixon in 1970, 10 years before Reagan was elected.
It’s an independent government agency, to this day. The administrator is appointed by the executive branch and approved by the Senate, but it’s not an official cabinet position nor part of the executive branch (but frequently involved in cabinet meetings).
Reagan tried to dismantle it by appointing Anne Gorsuch, who was very pro-business and anti-“big government”. She ended up slashing their budget by 22% and was held in comtempt of Congress for refusing to provide subpoenaed documents explaining why.
And Reagan won reelection in one of the largest landslides in US history in 1984.
And why democracy is important as a form of error correction. People can have their opinions, and inevitably we all get things wrong (magnitude of things we get wrong varies a lot). But when someone has a large concentration of power we all have to deal with the fallout from their malfunction. Companies the size and import of Twitter, Facebook, Reddit should be democratically controlled, some kind of cooperative.
Fully agreed. The authoritarian institution of shareholders and CEOs makes large companies prone to arrogance and short-term decision-making, democratic control of these large companies would make the economy much healthier.
Maybe he was always this way and not public about it, but things changed for the worse right around when his trans daughter came out.
Between that and covid I think he went down a rabbit hole further entrenching things and turned into a MAGA type as that rabbit hole does to those that go down it.
And now he won’t even listen when his brother and the chair of the board of Tesla tells him he’s hurting the brand.
Edit: just to clarify, “the woke mind virus” is what thinks took his daughter away, and now he is hellbent on destroying it, not realizing it’s him who’s been infected by hate and bigotry
You might always lean a certain way, but before, he maybe didn’t really care about trans people one way or another. As soon as his daughter came out as trans though he becomes faced with a choice.
Some people when they are faced with the choice, even if they might seem like they’d go against their child, don’t.
He doubled down unfortunately and made the wrong choice.
He doubled down unfortunately and made the wrong choice.
No, that’s not the choice he made. The status quo rewarded Phony Stark for being a right-wing douchebag - long before he even had a daughter . He chose to remain a right-wing douchebag because he was rewarded for it. He simply made the choice the vast majority of the rich either has made or will eventually make.
So once he wouldn’t get in trouble for openly being a bigot, he openly became a bigot?
He owes his entire life to apartheid and slavery in all senses that matter. And even when he was everyone’s hero and a real life Tony Stark, he threw a temper tantrum when divers chose to rescue children and not stroke his ego. To the point he accused one of the divers of pedophilia, ran an investigation, and used a team of lawyers to protect himself from any consequences.
The school (for some reason) gave UK Tabloid The Daily Mail an interview.
They said the father cheated on the mother and forced the daughter to move in with the mistress, that the victim was a drug dealer and was beaten for selling laced marijuana to her attackers, so the victim killed herself because of her unstable home life and drug addiction, not the beating the school ignored.
So they’re not just being sued for not doing anything after the beating, they’re being sued for slander as well.
Edit:
Since OPs link doesn’t go into all that, here’s the article I read the other day so you don’t have to take my word on it
I also forgot the school brought up the victims mom died of suicide as well… Implying it would have happened anyways.
“The mom killed herself two years ago. The girls that assaulted her were friends with her but thought she had laced the marijuana they had smoked together. The father is very upset and lost his only child so sometimes you just have to eat the s— sandwich,” an email from Parlapanides stated, according to the lawsuit.
Bad schools tend to burn teachers and administrators out. The only ones who don’t are either hyper dedicated , or sociopathic. This concentrates them into problematic schools. The sociopathic ones also tend to get the most headlines, so we hear about them a lot more.
I like how Abbott Elementary actually shows this aspect, but it handles the problem too lightly, but the principal is basically the villain of the show.
My friend was a teacher for a bit. He ended up leaving for multiple reasons, but one stand out story was when he stuck up for a student that needed to carry an epipen, but the school wouldn’t let them per their Zero Tolerance policy. The Gym Teacher turned Principle said he wasn’t worried about getting sued if the child was hurt, as he’s been sued before.
The superintendent at my high school admitted that I “Fell through the cracks”, but refused to do anything about it when I confronted him about my difficulties getting out of the remedial classes. This will be a bit of a brag, but most people assume that I’m some engineering graduate instead of a drop out. This includes state university professors.
There’s just too many bad administrators and teachers out there, just like in the private sector there’s too much bad management, we need to trim the fat and figure out what works and what doesn’t while also putting compassionate people in charge of students and people in general.
We’re really just going to lay a blanket statement down like this? Every single one, everywhere, run by sociopaths? No room for nuance here at all?
Reminder that schools are often run by former teachers. You know, those severally underpaid and overworked people that do one of the hardest and most important jobs there is.
Yes, sure why not? It’s not like what we say here has any effect on the situation. I’ve been trying to fix my issues since I left. I’m allowed to be bitter.
Reminder that schools are often run by former teachers.
From my experience, primarily gym and civics teachers. I’ve have so many little anecdotes about how my high school civics/history teachers pushed conservative ideology. Complaining about “welfare queens”, complaining about unions(even saying teacher’s unions were the only ones needed anymore). There’s a selection bias for the types of people that become administrators and it’s the same bias for why CEOs are mainly made up of sociopaths.
Got it, so you justify your ridiculous statement with even more ridiculous rhetoric, anecdote and not a shred of real evidence. Let’s say everything you said was true - you’re one person, how many schools could you have possibly experienced in ways that are meaningful to this conversation? You only mention one and that was as a student and that example is about fucking civics teachers not those who ran the school.
Honestly, the stuff that people say here to justify stupid statements is hilariously inept. Just take a moment and stop to read what you write and really think about how it reads - it’s childish lying and only likeminded fools agree with it.
All you have to do is look at the end results. Holistically, sociopathy is the norm and the school system is a corner stone in supporting that. It’s just hard to see because of normalized it is.
As far as proving it, I’m not going to dox myself and if I did, it wouldn’t be good enough for you. I’ve had enough experience with the education system at various levels and know enough of the good educators to know how it works.
Remember what ACAB, landlord hating, anybody that’s not communist or fixing every world problem with the snap of a finger platform you’re on.
Not only that, but there’s far fewer to literally no mod tools, bot detection, and vote manipulation detection either.
It makes things make a lot more sense when you realize half your politics and news threads are about as extreme as you can get short of being straight up 8chan.
Jesus, that's just pure malice on the school's part. Not even through incompetence, it seems downright deliberate. Absolute sociopaths, I hope the family takes them to the fuckin' cleaners.
What does that even mean in this context? I’m pretty sure that dad has been eating shit sandwiches for a couple of years now. Why does he have to eat more? Sounds like an insensitive halfwit wrote that email.
I can only interpret it as “fuck you, deal with it”. My sister committed suicide over 20 years ago and if anyone talked like this to me today I don’t know that I would handle it legally. It’s so fucked up.
When another poster asked, “Isn’t it possible that this was a deliberate terrorist attack rather than a tragic accident?,” Simon retorted, “It’s possible that you’re a useless shitheel rando on an internet hellsite speculating wildly and without regard to what is already known by authorities in Baltimore. Quick, have someone fund your podcast. You’ll go far.”
To a poster who called Baltimore a “mismanaged, failed state,” Simon offered a well-worded correction: “The port is a state-run entity and nothing whatsoever to do with Baltimore municipal government, you absolute submoron.”
To Anthony Sabatini, the former Florida congressman who wrote “DEI did this” – referring to diversity, equity and inclusion – Simon took no prisoners. “Your mother did you, but after a hard life of service on a truck-stop lot, can we really hold her loosened, battered womb responsible for dropping you head-first on the Winnebago floor and burdening our society with another empty, racist demagogue thereafter? We cannot.”
Idris Elba started out on it. As did Dominic West (Prince Charles in The Crown), and Aidan Gillen (Littlefinger in Game of Thrones). And Michael Kenneth Williams had some choice parts, he was always great.
Deadwood is the closest a TV show has gotten to reading a rich, classic work of literature, to me. I've watched the entire series three times in about as many years.
Deadwood is the best written, most humane and complex drama I’ve seen on TV. Watch with subtitles because Milch is a genius and you don’t want to miss anything.
And you might still miss some things the first time but it makes rewatches even better. I rarely feel the desire to rewatch shows, even good ones, Deadwood is the exception.
Hell even the set is amazing because the background extras took their roles so seriously, listening to the commentary tracks the lead actors noted that the background extras/actors developed their own routines and really made the camp come to life.
It had more of a living history museum or renaissance fair vibe than that of a stale set. Everyone invovled with the project had passion for their role no matter how small.
BSG is a very different show but there might be some crossover between the fanbases. Deadwood is legacy HBO, the quality and depth of cast is on another level compared to what the scifi channel had at the time.
It’s also endlessly quotable, that’s one thing I miss about reddit is the small /r/Deadwood sub. You’ll see some general “cocksucka” quotes in the wild but that sub has multiple rewatches under their belt and uses the full range. I have to revist some posts there everytime I rewatch it.
IMHO the shield pales in comparison to the Wire. The wire is up there as one of my favorite shows of all time and I couldn’t really get into The Shield.
I had a tough time as well, I think it was the slow burn intro and the shaky camera work (that is actually technique). Try it again and it is most definitely some of the best television of all time. Right up there with breaking bad as well.
The Shield is very different. LA and Baltimore are very different culturally and it shows in the final product. The Shield also focuses on the one squad while The Wire is about the city of Baltimore. Of the two, I personally think The Shield is a little more cartoonish, so The Wire wins out, but The Shield is still excellent.
Yes it is different but so is Breaking Bad, Bojack Horseman, Futurama, etc. Shows/movies can be different and still be equal in quality.
I’m still going to say that The Shield is up there with the others in quality, regardless of the differing topics and story. I don’t want to watch the same movie or TV show over and over with a different cast and slightly different story line.
I’m not sure how this in any way contradicts what I said. I’m not saying only watch The Wire, I’m saying between The Wire and The Shield, having seen both, I prefer The Wire, but they’re also very different so it’s not a good comparison.
Both shows are at the top but Deadwood’s dialogue has a deliberate rhythm to it that is unmatched. If you get on it’s wave length you’re in for a treat. I watch it at least once a year and never grow tired of it.
David Milch the creator details his thought process on the rhythm of the dialogue and the push back he got with use of obscenity here: youtu.be/F2qk7W8_KLE?si=LxeRNs2N_-kzKiGb&t=1196 (20:01) Once he’s done answering that question (around 29:00) i’d stop watching if you haven’t seen Deadwood as there are spoilers later in the talk.
Right, I think he had a lot more in the tank that we never got to see.
For years I was upset that Deadwood never had a fourth season. When I learned more about Milch and listened to his recent memoir that came out in 2022 I was just glad those first 3 seasons made it to air.
Many people don’t survive all the drugs, family problems and a gambling addiction that he had going for him.
It would be cool to see the alternative universe where the other frat member becomes president or the one where Deadwood doesn’t get cancelled but this one could be a lot worse really.
Dude! The Wire is the one of the best shows ever created! Watch on Max, rent DVDs from the library, or just do some normal piracy. You owe yourself a watch of The Wire.
Absolutely brilliant show. And yes, this is indicative of The Wire. 😅
I finally gave in and watched it after multiple independent recommendations from people who had strong educated opinions on quality nuanced literature and media. The last series sort of declined a bit, but overall I was in no way disappointed. It was exceptionally well done, and importantly for me, not too watered down with tired tropes, stereotyped single dimensional characters, painfully predictable plots and neatly tidied moral threads.
I mean, there were definitely some, but, it's TV. It holds up extremely well even with age.
news
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.