That's what the campaign to quash the bill did. That, and tried to convince people that they might have a single multi-million-dollar transaction in their life (like selling a large successful business) and have to pay an extra 4% on it.

Always a push to get the "temporarily embarassed millionaire" to support the reach. "Yeah, yanno. My little lawmowing operation that makes me $20,000 coild sell for over a million and then I'm fucked"

Herbalife, fucking herbalife.

This weekend, I went into what looked like an indie smoothie shop and dropped an ungodly amount of money on a delicious sounding shake... only to watch the lady drop a scoops of powder and ONE freeze-dried strawberry into a cup with ice. Tasted like ass.

Yet they do have regulars to that shit, and nobody is taking them out of business. I want my fucking $11 back. So anyone reading this doing a class action against Herbalife, I want in...

But I doubt it, since it's a scam that's so normalized we don't realize it's a scam anymore.

It seems odd putting meat in the same category as bread.

In terms of pure health, there's not much out there better than most meats. Yes, beef is a bit lower than pork and chicken, but properly portioned (looking at most of us Americans) it has very few downsides.

Bread on the other hand can be one of the worst foods we can eat. Of course, it is still all about moderation.

EDIT: Why the reddit-like downvotes folks? There's really no cohesive argument that puts meat below bread healthwise in most situations. If you want to avoid meat, avoid meat. If you want to be morally opposed to anyone eating meat, so be it. Facts are still facts and misinformation isn't the right way to fight that battle.

For me, it's board games. I figured a few good board games could last a while. I'm sure you are (incorrectly) guessing the next step, that I just bought too many.

No, I bought Kingdom Death: Monster. And now I want the expansion packs, which combine to nearly $3000.

Trans folk still identify as Trans indefinitely in about 94% of cases. Evidence suggests many of the other 6% are bullied, harassed, or threatened as a factor in their changing the way they identify.

Or was that a rhetorical question?

No, he's right. If people just "fuck off" instead of protesting, shit doesn't get done.

Some people don't just want to "move on" when they're pissed at yet another example of capitalism ruining a platform that got itself a monopoly because of capitalism. If reddit hadn't been there when Digg died, somebody else would have. That somebody else might have done things differently than reddit, and now we wouldn't have this issue where reddit is almost "too big to fail".

So I may be too lazy to actively protest reddit, but saying my decision to "just fuck off" is the braver one because the protestors are "addicted"... I just disagree.

Capitalism says we're not supposed to have expectations of the giants who cannibalize their market. I disagree strongly.

You are actually a little bit incorrect.

In the vein of words like homophobia, these words' definitions are not strictly in line with their etymology. Per every dictionary (but quoting Webster), transphobia is defined as:

irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against transgender people

And this might create some linguistic ambiguity, but I cannot seem to find actual documentation on a medical or psychological fear of transgender people at all. It seems this behavior is entirely (or almost entirely) a learned bigotry.

The other word, "transmisia", has not really been officially adopted in any circle I can find. The only place I could find it with any prominance is a site called the "Trans Language Primer", and I know nothing about it (except that it looks like geocities) so I won't be linking it directly. Suffice to say, they speak negatively of the term (despite defending it as having a good intention) and favor "transphobia" for reasons of clarity.

In fairness, I've got too many emergency workers in my family not to draw the line at fully blocking thoroughfares. Can you look an EMT in the eye who has had a patient die while their ambulence couldn't get through protestors to the hospital and insist you're in the right? Happens more than you'd want to know. Can't find statistics, but googling it shows just page upon page of different incidents, and unfortunately most of the time shit like that happens it isn't published since it's all HIPAA-complicated to discuss that stuff.

You want to inconvenience someone walking into a Macdonalds? Go ahead. But keep the artery roads clear. It's not about convenience, it's about shutting down life-saving infrastructure. Those assholes that cemented themselves to 93N in Boston 5 years back didn't earn any sympathy from anyone, even their own cause.

To simplify, the only way to get me not to stand beside you in defending your human rights is if you're recklessly taking away someone else's.

I'm pretty far left and in my entire life I've never experienced "only girls can have issues" as more than an extreme fringe statement.

What I tend to see regarding men is how they, too, are victims of toxic masculinity, taught to internalize their emotions until they have literal breakdowns. The Left gives a fuck about that, and it's one of the cited reasons they have problems with toxic masculinity.

I mostly miss my niche subreddits. If the subreddit only has 20-30 active users, that means 1-2 people hopped to Lemmy who might be interested in it.

Exactly. When I supported this, there was that wince of "this won't get the people it really needs to hit"... but it does enough.

And tbh, I know some wealthy fucking people who legitimately don't cross the line. $1M/yr is a lot of bloody money. That means if I found a way to "only" make $900,000/yr, I'm immune to this tax.

Also, anyone hiring for $900,000/yr?

I miss IRC. I wish I could have my mIRC days back.

Check out the instances that have defederated with the radicalized ones? I hang out in 2 Lemmy instances, still working to finish migrating from here to the other.

As others pointed out, to build that many nuclear power plants that quickly would require 10x-ing the world's construction capacity.

My counterpoint is that if we had "just got on with it" for solar, wind, and battery, we would have the capacity by now and the cost per kwh of that capacity would be approximately half as much as the same in nuclear. And we would have amortized the costs.

Sorta.

From the article, they're such a "good ol boy" community that the people in power just kinda picked the mayor, who served until he was ready to retire and pick another. He was the first person in town, basically ever, to properly fill out electoral paperwork. So they had a mayor picked out (not him) and they basically just pretended he didn't do it the right way because it isn't THERE way.

Until I say the next thing and just looking at that, you could kinda see the back-and-forth about how the town's so messed up his situation was like a loophole, and no doubt if it were a white person winning the mayorship on those terms people might have taken issue and justified a repeat election....

But his reason for running for mayor puts the whole thing into much clearer contrast. When he was a volunteer firefighter, they'd take away the keys when he tried to respond to fires at black folk's houses, and when he made it he'd be the ONLY firefighter there. They wanted to let those residences burn because of the color of the residents' skin. As one of the town's medics, he was specifically locked out of the station for racist reasons and it led to a patient dying.

It's THAT good-ol-boy a community, and it's such an overwhelmingly black-majority town (like 80%) that going all democratic just won't work for them. So fuck em. If they win their defense on claims of qualified immunity of an office they don't actually hold, immo go down there and declare myself governor.

EDIT: Yet on reading more carefully, it's complicated. The "lame duck" city council voted on a re-election where he did not get the paperwork, and elected themselves back into office, all before he and the new council were sworn in. They may have managed to push the whole thing into a legal grey area in their favor depending on what the local and state laws are. But the problem is that quite literally everyone is telling him "you're not the mayor" when he tries to execute ANY mayoral duties. The bank is refusing him financial access. The staff at public buildings is refusing him physical access.

It's interesting because he's tried to bring in several lawfirms, and they have mostly just taken his money and failed him. This is, at local scale, to too unlike the federal Constitutional crisis we almost had on 1/6/21. What do you do when a town says you're not its mayor and the laws are unclear?

In fairness, I think it's because the tech barrier of entry went down, WAYYY down. "Free Data" is an easy sell to people who were dialing into usenet in the 90's, and us stupid ameteur hackers who would break into systems like they were puzzles because we thought it was cool and the maximum penalty was a fine and community service (the good old days, we all did it at least once and thought we were Zero Cool... unless we thought Zero Cool was lame, whatever). A lot of the people who think IP jives well with the internet were the ones who looked at me weird when I said I had online friends circa 2000, and who couldn't understand how I couldn't make some party because I "had to spend Saturday hanging out on IRC for my D&D campaign"

Even more technical folks now, they just never lived what made the internet beautiful when it was smaller. Back when "FOSS" was "Free as in Beer" and fuck that Richard Stallman with his "free as in speech" bullshit. They don't remember how this dark storm of people's hobbies turning into other people's IP, people like Bill Gates stealing the foundations of technology to build his empire (for all the good he does now, he was truly evil to his core).

Ok, old-fart rant over.

Oh god you're making me feel old. I can't see the "at that time" context because lemmy.ml is screwing up backlinks for me right now, but I'm assuming it's either when I got into the net (early 90's) or when I was all-in on IRC (late 90's). This wil be a bit of a cluster of answers to both :)

Back when I got into IRC, there was quite a bit. It's hard to keep track of exactly what I started using when. Back in the early 90's, those of us online ended up on IRC or places like Delphi Forums. I lived on Delphi and it reminded me back then of Lemmy now. Arguably, the biggest problem with back then is that either a group had some technical following, or you just didn't see much about it. Interested in some fringe philosophy? If you just looked at numbers I swear you'd think Discordianism or the Church of Subgenious were the world' majority religion back then.

Otherwise, there were lots of Bulletin Boards forums. Google may be advanced, but it also spiders orders of magnitude more pages than existed back then. Yahoo was surprisingly good for the smaller web. Otherwise, honestly, things felt very similar to me.

Everything was simple, though. Had to be. 56k modems were real, really did make that crazy noise, and downloading a movie was genuinely an investment of time and effort. Everyone knew somebody who would sell them something like "Everything Metallica" on CD for $5, usually to pay for pot money or whatever. Why? Because even if you had access to everything metallica online, it would take you days to download it and clean that shit up.

Ironically, I think messengers were more used/useful back then. Perhaps because there were fewer, so you could talk to all your messenger-using friends by just running 2 or 3 on your computer? I STILL remember my old IQC number, and was always proud it was only 6 digits! I never got into AOL, but I had AIM for one or two friends, Y! for one or two friends, and IQC for 20-30 friends. Most of them were people I never met or would meet (super nerd). But it was great because you'd get to KNOW the people you got to know. I had a buddy in Norway who had so little in common with me, but we hit it off so good he ended up getting me into Melodic Death Metal and one of my still-favorite bands Theatre of Tragedy. Early side of that window, about 20% of IRC rooms were something between piracy, sex chats, or RPGs. The rest was a random mishmash. Later on, I swear there were more RPG chats.

I could probably talk for weeks on it. There's a few products that came and went that I swear should have been the "next big thing" but failed due to bad business. There was a community game engine I worked on a game for called BYOND that still runs with a couple thousand players. It would've ended up on a front page if the founders either had more business savvy or just open-sourced it. Then there's Digg. Talk about a mirror image of the reddit bullshit, but Digg was smaller AND fucked up bigger than redit did. None of us were happy to go to reddit, but digg turned to shit. We knew reddit was crap (nobody ever thought their leadership was ok) when we went there, but there were no other options anyone took seriously.

That about gets us to the end of "the good old days".

Hold My Beer.

Silent Hill sits at 32%. I've watched it tons of times. I understand why it's not popular, in terms of its mediocre raw quality. But I love it unironically and not in an Evil Dead 2 kind of way.

Half the issue with finding movies <50% that I liked is how hard it is to just get a list of movies by year... and yeah, the year range. The Toy is only 3% and I LOVED it growing up, but yeah it breaks the post-2000 rule.

Actually, hell. I apparently only have to jump into superhero movies. I thought Black Adam was the best DC movie we've had... sub-50. I liked Quantumania...sub-50. I enjoyed Shazam 2... sub-50. I REALLY liked Eternals... sub-50. Venom is sub-50 and has an honorary place in my family's marvel marathons... Boy, this is easier than I thought! I must have a terrible sense of taste!

Still going just on recent "rotten". I liked Gray Man... Sub-50. Suicide Squad...they gave it 26%???

Yeah, I'm out :)... And I think ya'll drank my beer.

And my axe... whoops, wrong line.

Yeah, I had RIF on the last 4+ phones as my primary drivers for reddit. So now, I'm on Lemmy. I miss some of the niche subs I was on that simply aren't showing up here yet, but it's a good opportunity to reduce my "reddit obsession".

Except that nuclear isn't the only, or even the cheapest, alternative to fossil fuels.

I'll throw my support behind cops who are standing up to the bullshit.

But they are usually fired (or worse), which means the people I'm supporting... aren't cops anymore

Yes, bread can be healthy. The right one in moderation. The same as red meat (per your reference), actually :).

But 80/20 extra-fattened with liver for a delicious burger? Definitely not healthy (but like a candy bar, it's ok to have one every months or two)

A lot of board game geeks hate Catan. I also hate Catan, but my reasons probably aren't their reasons. So there's that.

But I don't entirely disagree. It's complicated. I bought multiple games to find ones I'd love more. I find most people with board game obsession still have a favorite.

Like me, I've spent more time playing KD:M and Spirit Island than the next 5 combined.

Fun Fact. I'm fucking old. Every time someone says something like this, it's like "aw shit. I was on IRC when this person was in diapers"

It's incredible, and a blast. A full campaign (assuming you don't lose halfway through) runs about 60 hours. So I get it :)

The digital version might be more accessible. I really wish they'd sell it without the minis. I just don't have the time to paint minis, which means I don't get the value worth in minis.

That's why I replied. You seemed like you'd be receptive to that side of things.

Protest is complicated. The less you inconvenience people, the less effective it is. The more you inconvenience people, the more harm you can do and the more fence-sitters might find a good reason to challenge you. We shouldn't NEED protests, but we do.

I think most of the time BLM is a great modern example of doing it right. It shows how much to take the "protesting is wrong" attitude with a grain of salt because so many good peaceful BLM rallies get painted as riots anyway. Yet through all the horseshit, progress.

Just progress with as few deaths as possible, if we can :)

Considering studies show dollar-for-dollar we can effectively do what good police do by putting their budget money in other services (mental health, welfare, etc), I'm ok with having a LOT fewer cops with a lot more limited mandate.

An alt-right neonazi forum/organization/etc. Putting it to reddit context is for two reasons. First, because we're all pissed at reddit's recent behavior. But second because Spez has been accused (with evidence) of being sorta Elon-like in his courting of the alt-right, and possibly having extreme right leanings himself.

The left side of politics has always struggled to bring people along for the journey, they can advocate for people but building a coherent argument and inspiring people to come along for the ride will always be their downfall

You're right. Nothing that's truly valuable in legislation is simple. It's hard to turn something complicated into a sound byte without making shit up, and the Left in most countries have to be careful alienating the intellectuals if they start making shit up. We don't vote for bullshit.

The Right has no problem making shit up and those who vote for them are not really affected by it. When the Notch Baby bullshit was going on (a US thing... there was basically a big hoax about a generation being owed money, and a lot of politicians ran with it), I didn't know a single right-leaning voter who would give the least bit of a shit that they were voting for people who were willfully taking advantage of the elderly. I guarantee a left-party candidate who pulled that shit would lose by a landslide.

So the Right can bad-faith point out a concern that "toxic masculinity" is just "masculinity" and a good thing. They know the Left can't soundbyte their way out of it because it's not a one-liner to say "it's not about masculinity or feminity, it's about not being a dick and all of us helping the underdog". It's VERY easy to sell people who aren't the underdog on victim complexes.

This, here. Reddit is going the way of Digg, but trying to be more savvy about it. THey don't care that the specific group that's leaving are the content creators because they intend to charge content creators (paid API) who expect to profit from the traffic. They don't care that it's lower quality content creators. They want the money both ways, and don't care what percent of their "high quality" traffic disappears for it.

Since they're bigger than digg, they still have some high quality traffic. There's never a 100% protest with something as big as reddit. It's win/win/win for them.

While I agree, I've been saying that about NMS for years. Not that we want to be comparing Starfield to NMS, of course.

Fwiw, most features they release with dlc are free. The paid dlc is mostly just extra skins and ornaments. Much better than a lot of other games imo

But as a game it's still hard to get into and stay on top. Klang killing hours of work because i forgot to save gets old

I feel there’s still a difference between hosting it directly vs the federated nature of the platform meaning that the content is copied so it can be served to an end user

Unfortunately, I'm pretty sure that's not the case. If you "federate" a server with CP for example, you are hosting CP. If it's not brought to your attention, maybe you have a safe harbor exception (and maybe not), but if it IS brought to your attention, you are required to act on it to not be liable. And I airquote "federate" because as I learned Lemmy's architecture, I'm not sure "federated" is the best word to describe it. When I think of federated, I think of something like an orchistrator. A tool where you are directed to the authoritative cluster for content, but not required to join in on it. In such a world, there would be three states - (1) I have a copy of this data, (2) I don't have a copy of this data but link/index it, (3) I refuse to index this data

Lacking #2, I believe, really creates a lot of liability.

No way. Batteries are expensive as hell

Batteries+solar runs $77/MWH with current technology. Nuclear runs $175/MWH with current technology (both of these numbers are TCO, not just running costs) 1 and 2. Months back I did a fairly exhaustive analysis on reddit. Wish I'd kept a link of that, but I cut and ran. More importantly, a nuclear plant is usually "locked in" to current efficiency for 50 years or more, where solar farms and battery farms can be traded up. By end-of-life, that nuclear plant will still be a $175/MWH-TCO plant, but could be competing against solar+battery in the order of $50/MWH TCO as large scale battery tech is skyrocketing of late.

I ended up anti-nuclear from a position of knowledge and research, not a position of "omg it's nuclear". I started pro-nuclear until I did the math a LOT.

You’re in the green after about 10-15 years with nuclear. So I’m not sure why you bring this point up repeatedly

Per Nuclear Power Economics and Project Structuring, the capital cost accounts as 60% of the total cost of ownership. Yes it's in the green (capital-wise), by year 10-15. But 60% of Every penny that needs to be spent on a nuclear plant is spent before you hit the "on" button. Solar plants go green in 5 years, but more importantly, you amortize the cost (and continue to do so) over the life of the plant. The latter is always more feasible for a large scale project.

There’s plenty of decommissioned coal/gas/oil plants that are perfect sites for nuclear. Ironically it costs more to clean up the radioactivity left behind by these plants than the nuclear plant will release in it’s whole lifetime.

Compare that to solar roofs, solar parking shades, windmills that can often be installed in "spare lots", etc.

EDIT: And to be clear, I'm not even saying there may never be an appropriate use for a nuclear plant in going green. There's just very few of them. Going solar in a big city is a custom gig, but dropping a nuclear plant in its outskirts, not so much. Luckily for me in the US, there's a whole hell of a lot of unused or unusable land just begging for solar plants.

There's been a lot of back-and-forth. B12, like iron and Protein, are digested differently by the gut (with different efficiency) based on how they are consumed.

If absolutely all you care about is nutrition and nothing else, you should be eating a small amount of non-processed red and white meat (and/or seafood) on a regular basis because it is the best and healthiest source of those three things. Key term "small amount"

Holy shit. Me, too. Yes, nothing quite so sad as Bowling For Diplomas.

Huh? Humans evolved in a hunter/gatherer lifestyle. Before the advent of farming, it was impossible to get sufficient calories for a tribe or village without hunting and bringing down big animals on a regular basis. Meat was quite literally the "meat" of human diet for most of history.

After the advent of farming, you could pack a lot of calories with things like breads, for when you didn't have meat (or in early civilization) when the rich folks got the meat.

As for cheese, it really doesn't take that long to produce unless you're talking about aged cheese... But that's a different topic (and both aged/fresh have different health benefits)

That's sorta half the story. The official statement is that consistently eating more than 1.5lbs (500g) of red meat per week "probably" (their word) increases your cancer risk. The real story is that eating more than 50g of processed meat per week dramatically increases your cancer risk. To the extent that processed meat is ranked as a "Group 1" carcinogen.

Flip-side, grains and legumes have been tied to cancer as well. I can't find exactly what category, but they seem fairly convinced they are carcinogenic.

It is, sadly, like the California Cancer joke, where almost everything causes cancer if taken to excess.

I couldn't agree more.

KD:M may have its imperfections, but I don't think I've ever played another game quite so beautiful (if you're into that existential dread type of beauty).

That’s why there are lots of regulations for things impacting life safety

Regulations that a lot of pro-nuclear people try to get relaxed because they "artificially inflate the price to more than solar so that we'll use solar". I'm not saying all pro-nuclear folks are tin-foilers, but the only argument that puts nuclear cheaper than solar+battery anymore is an argument that uses deregulated facilities.

If solar+wind+battery is cheaper per MWH, faster to build, with less front-loaded costs, then it's a no-brainer. It only stops being a no-brainer when you stop regulating the nuclear plant. Therein lies the paradox of the argument.