Can you repeat or clarify that second sentence? I’m pretty sure there was a typo or mistyped word somewhere, and usually I wouldn’t mention it, but in this case I actually can’t interpret the meaning.
Wearing masks other than theatrical or things like Halloween masks was prohibited in many places prior to covid.
Some places were explicitly anti protest from the 1900s (unions), others anti hate crime (KKK). Some just had it as a thing that can be tacked on to other crimes. My state has a law that makes it a misdemeanor to wear a mask to conceal your identity while commiting a crime.
These laws are not unique to the US.
When covid came along, most states that had restrictions passed laws adding exceptions for health related face coverings.
In response to people protesting Israeli actions in Palestine, North Carolina repealed their relaxation of the mask rules, and refused to add a health clause, arguing that even though it’s illegal, it was illegal before covid and just never enforced, so it’s fine.
They also included an exception that allows for secret societies to wear masks or hoods in a parade or demonstration if they have a permit. That’s the KKK in a nutshell.
It’s preposterous bullshit intended to work as an election year headline grabber, since it’s anti mask, anti protester, and pro Israel all at once.
I do like the joke that the moon landing was faked by Stanley Kubrick, but that he was such an auteur that he would only do it if he could film on location. :)
It’s not “some voice” talking “to you”, it really just feels like your thoughts are words, if they’re “word adjacent thoughts”.
Like, thinking about how to phrase that first part, it felt like I was reciting the words I was thinking of typing, not like someone else was saying them to me.
I kinda like a little thingy that has a USB plug on one end under a cap, and a salt shaker on the other. Or maybe like a little hot sauce shaker, if we’re moving away from salt.
That should find every file in your directory recursively, pass it to xargs, which will then spawn up to four processes which will each call chown on up to 500 files, and it’ll make additional processes as they finish.
In general though, if you regularly need to chown that many files, it’s better to find a way to make sure they have the right ownership from the start.
It’s not shareholders specifically, but management that doesn’t give a shit about the company long term.
The business has a fiduciary duty to benefit the shareholders, but it doesn’t have to be short term only, or at the cost of long term benefits.
Most publicly traded companies end up with leadership who are only interested in justifying their employment through the next earnings call or making sure the stock price has gone up between when they last got options and when they next vest.
Valve does good not because they don’t have shareholders, but because their leadership is not gonna get fired for thinking about next year instead of next quarter. So they don’t squeeze the consumers for every dime, so people stick with them, and developers stay even though their fee schedule is not the best because they have all the people.
I wasn’t actually trying to be contrarian, but okay.
I’m pretty sure I didn’t explain how it’s actually shareholders, because the board of directors isn’t “the shareholders”, but leadership of the company.
Valve isn’t publicly traded, but it’s still a corporation with shareholders, a board of directors, and the usual trappings of corporate leadership. They tend to operate in a not shitty way because their leadership isn’t interested in sacrificing greater long term profit for lesser short term profits.
A private, family owned partnership style business can operate with a focus on short term profits over long term profits.
The safest way to ensure that the leadership of both of those businesses out as much money in their pockets as possible is to continuously maximize short term profits. “The shareholders” aren’t the cause for that mindset.
I mean, even just saying a minors paternal rights are something that needs to be mediated by family court doesn’t sound particularly terrible to me.
If you’re a minor, we’ve already decided that you’re not able to make a lot of legal choices for yourself.
See, it’s that sort of partisan thinking that’s dividing this country. A policy like that specifically designed to disproportionately target and imprison Republicans is the sort of decisive culture war nonsense that’s the problem nowadays.
Marijuana is its own special category, but club drugs (which for some reason include date rape drugs), inhalants and steroids are all in a “miscellaneous” category together?...
What specifically stands out to you as a ridiculous bit of probaganda?
It’s certainly not the most accurate or clinical, and some of the categories are a bit “eh”, but nothing popped out to me that I would describe so strongly.
If nothing else, it’s a lot more objective and grounded in reality than what they gave me in that dumb dare program. Might be why my reaction is just “close enough”.
Yup, that’s a good one. Gateway drug notion is generally iffy at the absolute most generous.
This one wasn’t as “smoking the weed will make you do heroin and die” as others, just “some people do other things after doing this one”, but it’s still not super worth mentioning.
Wait, so you think dare wasn’t dumb, but you have specific negative memories associated with it mischarecterizing drug users due to your legitimate usage?
I would call a program that makes children feel bad for going to the doctor “dumb”.
Your dislike of people who use drugs because you went to the hospital a lot is quite strange. I’m not sure why those would be related.
Did they put you in the hospital, or make a police officer come to your school and tell you you were a bad person?
It was just difficult to hear the personal opinions that officers had of people who had been on particular drugs that are so often used in a hospital setting.
Try telling a third grade kid that she is a bad person because the hospital put her on intravenous pain medication
Forgive me for thinking these phrases imply discomfort. I can only go by my life experiences, which led me to think that calling experiences “difficult”, or being called a “bad person” by an authority figure would be aptly described as at least “uncomfortable”.
Dare was dumb because it was an abject failure. Presenting information in the most alarmist possible context while being dry to the point that kids tune out any significant information is a terrible way to treat health education.
You have some very confusing issues tying your hospital experience to a personal judgement of people who use drugs.
Do you think that other people haven’t been to the hospital? Do you think that I haven’t been to the hospital? It’s not that uncommon. Hell, you mentioned breaking your arm falling off some playground equipment. I had the same injury as a child, except I also had a greenstick fracture in my humorous that I had to be put under to have corrected. I was so ill coming out of anesthesia that I remember it less fondly than the actual injury.
Jumping from a bad experience with intravenous pain killers to “I hate people” is weird. Those people didn’t have anything to do with it. Why do you hate them? Not understand? Sure, that would make sense. Find foolish? Totally get it. But hate? Why hate?
And why all drug users? What does a pothead have to do with it at all?
Yeah, that’s the thought. That or ecstacy or something.
In reality, it’s mostly that it’s so common that everyone who might do “hard drugs” would have been exposed to pot as just background noise, like alcohol or chocolate ice cream.
It only gets a shade of credence because there have been studies indicating that some people start with pill based drugs and then just leave it at that with a “hard drug” incidence rate lower than someone who smoked pot.
The sample sizes are so small that the only real conclusion someone can draw is that it’s not definitely false and it needs more study. But it’s not that important, so funding is slow and unlikely.
It looks like there’s at least a degree of clinical validation to it being a combo of PTSD and “sometimes colors stay funny for a while”.
Are you sure you’re not thinking of “the entire war on drugs, but particularly pot and heroin”?
That’s what I thought was an invention by the Nixon administration.
I’d give it to alcohol, not caffeine personally. I wouldn’t say most people “abuse” caffeine, they just drink it.
Abuse to me implies having a negative impact, and I can think of more people who have been negatively impacted by weed than by caffeine, but way more from alcohol than either, and with a significantly more negative impact.
I know people who smoke too much and it’s definitely made them stagnate in life and gain a lot of weight.
I know people who drink way too much caffeine and get insomnia, leading to a cycle of discomfort and heartburn from all the coffee.
I know people who drank too much alcohol and died, or developed terrible health complications.
Most people are totally fine with all of them, but alcohol is easily the worst and most common.
It is funny to picture the hypothetical person they need to find to interview for the data though.
This is Larry.
Larry once took a Valium he wasn’t prescribed at a friend’s house, but Larry respects his body too much to smoke weed.
Larry is addicted to intravenous heroin.
Yup, that tracks. As you mentioned, there are disagreements about the exact meaning and consequences of the prohibition already, so if you can find source material to back your argument, you can argue it.
They don’t view it as interpretation, but as closer to a legal argument. There’s the written law, and that’s what matters, the deity won’t judge you based on unwritten laws, because their goal was to write down the criteria that you’ll be judged by and the rules you need to follow, not to judge you based on your ability to infer the intent of the rules based on what they told you. Similar to how, when you go to court in the legal system, you’re judged by the law as written, not by the intent of the congressperson who proposed the law.
The belief that it’s the spirit that matters and not the letter of the law is itself a religious belief derived from early Christian rejection of the legalistic aspects of Judaism. It’s why so many people in this thread have such a “well of course you’re not supposed to debate the semantics of your religion, you’re supposed to know what God meant and do that instead”. Same for when someone “cheats” the legal system to “escape punishment” by “getting off on a technically”, since what they did was supposed to be punishable. Legally, that’s called “following the law”, or “making a valid legal argument”.
Some religions and people just don’t hold that belief, and so “what if an argued position clearly subverts the intent of the rule” just isn’t a compelling negative consequence, it’s just part of what happens with debate.
It’s got no bearing on either of our points, but I believe the Jewish interpretation isn’t that electricity is fire, generally, but that incandescent lightbulbs violate the prohibition on “igniting a fire”, and that many other applications violate prohibitions on things like “lifting”, “doing work”, or “cooking”.
So electricity isn’t the issue, but rather what you do with it, and even if you argue that it’s only fire if it’s Israeli wood, you’d also have to argue that BBQ wasn’t cooking.
I’ll admit that I’m not entirely sure what point you’re arguing anymore. If you think religious law is malleable through argument, then religious law changing after argument or discussion isn’t a problem, it’s just how it works.
Wouldn’t you know, there’s actual debate with citations about faucets and the circumstances In which they’re permitted or not. It’s not “all work” that’s prohibited, but specific categories in certain circumstances. I’m neither a Rabbi, a scholar of talmudic law nor even Jewish so my understanding of the specifics are only about as deep as curiosity has taken me over the years. I don’t think the specifics matter for this discussion.
Yes, there’s nothing actually tangible about any law, religious or otherwise that compells people to follow it beyond cultural momentum. Words lack inherent meaning and it’s only through shared convention that we agree on meaning or order in our society.
Indiana judge rules tacos and burritos are, in fact, sandwiches (www.nbcnews.com)
Archive/mirror: archive.ph/5dJlk
Australia’s richest woman seeks removal of her portrait from exhibition (www.cnn.com)
Is this a crime? Thoughts? (midwest.social)
Radical acceptance (lemmy.world)
bUt BoTh SiDeS dA sAmE (lemmy.world)
4 year anniversary + my poorly received first comic [OC] (feddit.nl)
cross-posted from: feddit.nl/post/15257613...
TIL that some people do not have an inner voice and think in different nonverbal ways. (humanities.ku.dk)
cross-posted from: lemmit.online/post/2916897...
Every time I search for a USB key, I end up finding the ones flashed with OS ISOs! I don't have a normal key anymore lol (sh.itjust.works)
Question on chown in parallel
Hello I am seeking a simple solution to running a list of “chown -R” " commands in script.sh...
Ghost of Tsushima buyers of blocked countries will be reimbursed (programming.dev)
Missouri bill to ban all child marriages runs into resistance from House Republicans (www.kansascity.com)
The way my daughter's middle school health class classifies drugs is insane. (lemmy.world)
Marijuana is its own special category, but club drugs (which for some reason include date rape drugs), inhalants and steroids are all in a “miscellaneous” category together?...
Don't tell him how Swabian Ravioli are called in the local dialect (lemmy.world)