It is like that already, but try, if you can, to imagine how bad it will get if the incentive isn't fake internet points, but actual money.

Only to add some clarification: reddark is only showing you the list of subs that announced they'd go dark versus the amount of those subs that have gone dark.

The exact number is hard to pin down, but reddit claims to have "100k+" active communities.

So 60% of the subs that said they'd go dark are still dark.

Right? I've been using public restrooms for a long time and I don't recall ever seeing anyone's naughty bits.

..and for me the most ridiculous part of this discussion is that bathrooms have never been a secure space. If some creep wanted to go into a bathroom to harass people, there is literally nothing stopping them. It's not like bathrooms have guarded entrances and now people have a sneaky way to get into a bathroom by pretending to be transgender or something insane like that.

It's literally a manufactured issue to get the GOP electorate terrified, as everything they do is designed to do.

I don’t see any detriment to giving trans people their own space where they can be comfortable and let everyone else be comfortable too

I am confident you don't realize the full implications of what you're saying, so please don't take this as an attack, but would you also support "black only" restrooms for this exact same reason? If not, why not?

I think many of us are using reverse proxies, and opening port 443 (https) and maybe port 80 (http).

Because people keep voting for them, or they simply run unopposed.

and it's worth mentioning that there is no genital check before entering a bathroom. An "anti-trans bathroom" law would likely also get wielded against masculine women and effeminate men who are not transgender.

None of it makes any sense when you take 30 seconds to consider it.

In places with large crowds, gender neutral bathrooms (assuming you also mean single-use) don't really work. It causes massive lines.

Not to mention, there's no need. It's a bathroom. Why does anyone care who they pee or poop next to? It seems so silly and arbitrary to me. Just get in, do your thing, wash your hands, and get out. haha

A demographic notoriously known for being well informed. /s

What could go wrong with giving a democratic government the power to strip voting rights from those people they deem unsuitable to vote on how they are governed? /s

I don't mind those so much-- for me it's more annoying when they assume their instance/platform is the only one; for example, "How do you cross post" or "should we implement so-and-so feature?" without mentioning the platform being discussed. It's simple enough to determine what instance/platform the user is from, but it's still a little annoying.

and honestly, businesses too. There is opportunity here in the business sector, I think.

Trademark infringement, as opposed to copyright infringement, is all about customer confusion. If my vacuum repair shop is called 𝕏, then it's not likely to cause customer confusion if a sandwich shop opens up and brands themselves as 𝕏.

This may be why there are so many different X trademarks, and why none of them "went after" each other.

If I remember correctly, Meta's does pertain to social media, but as far as I know they're not using it, so it might get messy there.

Also, in case it's not clear. The 𝕏 is just a normal unicode character. Dude couldn't even be bothered to pay someone to make a logo for him.

When you're discussing traits inherent to a person-- not things they do or believe, but things they are, it's almost certainly hate speech. A quick test would be to swap the inherent thing you're talking about with skin color, since that one seems obvious to most people. So, would you say that an opinion that you support people of color, you just don't support them playing sports with people that aren't POC, be nuanced opinion or hate speech?

As for your second hypothetical, that is a discussion for doctors and experts, and they've already had it, and that's why children can't get non-reversible procedures until they're 18. No one is transitioning children; they are blocking their development so they can have a choice on how to proceed when they're adults.

Steam released an entire Linux OS; I think it's safe to say that Steam is on-board with Linux gaming in general. Everything has bugs. If you're just looking for a reason to justify piracy, then fine, but this seems a little out there. What will you do if Lutris releases with a bug that crashes your system? Switch to Windows? haha

Which god? Zeus?

This line of attack against LLMs seems just foolish. The data was put into the public for public consumption. There is no right to control whether the data is used to train something; that's just something people are making up.

But in an ongoing federal suit over the ordinance, the city said the ticketing was part of “Houston’s governmental obligations to ensure food safety.”

This reminds me of the now-infamous Lee Atwater quote. (warning: racial slurs) It's abstracting bigotry.

I think if someone is getting a judge to officiate a wedding, they're not doing it in a ceremony, but in a perfunctory way, at the courthouse. They literally just want to make the union legal. Which it is, even in Texas, so this judge has no standing to refuse.

I thought this already came up when that woman in Kentucky refused to sign marriage licenses for gay people, and it was ruled that while she didn't have to personally sign it, if she refused it was up to her to find someone to do it instead of her.

You can't reason a person out of a stance they didn't reason themselves into.

For instance: How would you even begin to reason with someone that believes in demons? Where could any discussion even go if one side can waive away anything they don't agree with by claiming it is a trick from a demon?

I'll just leave this here:

Canon 2A.

An appearance of impropriety occurs when reasonable minds, with knowledge of all the relevant circumstances disclosed by a reasonable inquiry, would conclude that the judge’s honesty, integrity, impartiality, temperament, or fitness to serve as a judge is impaired. Public confidence in the judiciary is eroded by irresponsible or improper conduct by judges, including harassment and other inappropriate workplace behavior. A judge must avoid all impropriety and appearance of impropriety. This prohibition applies to both professional and personal conduct. A judge must expect to be the subject of constant public scrutiny and accept freely and willingly restrictions that might be viewed as burdensome by the ordinary citizen. Because it is not practicable to list all prohibited acts, the prohibition is necessarily cast in general terms that extend to conduct by judges that is harmful although not specifically mentioned in the Code. Actual improprieties under this standard include violations of law, court rules, or other specific provisions of this Code.

I think the "appearance of impropriety" ship has long sailed. She should recuse herself. She won't. Because it's more than just the appearance of impropriety.

Every day, new people start actually paying attention to politics. Don't assume that because we know that Boebert is a terrible person, that everyone knows that she's a terrible person.

Not to mention, people halfheartedly paying attention to politics seem to require near-constant reminders, or they forget when it comes time to cast a vote.

Long story short, this woman has real power over some people's lives, by the fact that she is their representative. We should never stop shining a light on the actions of people with real power. In my opinion, anyway.

It is trivial to sign up for a service when you want to watch something, and then cancel it when you don't, until there's something else you want to watch on the service. That is the benefit over cable.

Most people still treat it like a cable subscription: always on, even if they're not watching it.

It's mostly true, but not entirely. The data "on the internet" has to live somewhere. For instance, when you DM someone on a social media network-- would you consider that private? I assure you the content of those messages can be read by the website's admin-users.

If you're hosting your own non-social web service (like, personal cloud storage or something), then that is arguably private for you, but if you let someone else also use it, then it is not private for them, because you can almost certainly see their file content, having access to the server directly.

Encryption can throw all of this off; a service like Signal is private-- the admin-users of Signal can't see your messages. Generally speaking any service that warns you that all your data will be lost if you forget your password is probably private. If they can recover your data, they have access to your data.

Edit: Better word choices.

Abolishing slavery, ending Jim Crow, giving women the vote, becoming one of the first dozen countries on the planet to legalize gay marriage, helping win WW2, helping support Ukraine, donating more to foreign aid than any other country on the planet, the Marshall Plan, everything about NASA, best national parks on the planet, entertainment capital of the world, first country to land a man on the moon, the whole "nation of immigrants" things making us one of the most diverse countries on the planet.

• Slavery isn't abolished; it can still, per the constitution, be used as punishment.
• Jim Crow may be ended, but the racism that enables it has always been alive and well
• Gave women the right to vote way later than it should have
• Same as above
• Only after being directly attacked
• Only because we spend so obscenely much on war. A billionaire that gives $1000 is not as generous as someone making min-wage that give $10.
• Self-serving imperialism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshall\_Plan#Modern\_criticism
• like defunding it to where we have to privatize space flight now? Elon Musk approves!
• I... guess? Arguably has nothing to do with being an American. Lots of countries were throwing money at this-- we just randomly got there first.
• We're openly and emphatically racist, as a country. We simultaneously reject immigration while requiring immigrants to be used as borderline slave labor to ensure our produce doesn't get too expensive.

We've never been the shining city on the hill, but we sure want to pretend we are.

It's conceivable that one would be proud of their country for the actions their country takes, both domestic and/or world stage. Like I'm sure the people living in those Scandinavian where a vast majority of their country is healthy, happy, and even their criminals are treated with dignity and respect can be proud of how their country has turned out.

I don't think it's a common interpretation to feel self-directed pride due to one's country. Unless, maybe, you're the president or someone who makes actual decisions for the country.

As others have pointed out, this is just a natural-- and arguably desirable-- consequence of federation with a reddit-style format. However, I think the problem it causes could be somewhat mitigated by each platform implementing a feature to allow users to group magazines/communities manually-- and share them between instances and (ideally) platforms. Kind of like how Twitter did with "lists". (I think that's what they called them.)

It's to be expected for Christians (et al); a vast majority have been taught at a young age that the perfect society is one where a benevolent god makes all the decisions and you just shut up and do as you're told. It was never The People's Republic of Heaven; it's the Kingdom of Heaven.

I know it's something of an unpopular opinion around these parts, but I could see this being much more likely if Threads does federate, which I think would be an overal boon to ActivityPub-based instances as a whole.

I was very young, 4 or 5, and I was taking a nap in the afternoon. In my dream my mom told me she would only ever make spaghetti and meatballs for dinner for the rest of my life. I liked spaghetti and meatballs, but I didn't want to eat only that forever. My grandmother woke me up because I was crying in my sleep.

This is my earliest memory.

Starving them out doesn't magically get them shelter.

We can't tell if you're wrong because you didn't do anything but assert a stance. That's what he meant my "low effort". Show your work.

They did complain a bit when google started pulling the answers to queries out of the sources and displaying them directly in the search results, which is probably what they're concerned with now-- google (et al) is no longer driving traffic to the sites, so the benefit to the sites is no longer there.

However, this still does not magically make it illegal. Intellectual Property laws have, imo, always been of dubious value to society-- especially in the last 100 years or so-- and we shouldn't just roll over when rightsholders make up a new "right" they think they should have.

The scuttlebutt is that it's a inside joke by the far-left dev of lemmy to stand for marxist-leninist, but it's just as likely, if not more, that it was chosen because it's free.

Keep in mind that most (all?) two-letter TLDs are associated with a country. This includes stuff like .io, .tv, and .me

As I understand it (and I may not!) deleting your account leaves all your comments in place, but without your username.

The Alt-Right Playbook: The Cost of Doing Business

Upvotes mean "people should see this". Downvotes mean "there is no reason for anyone to see this".

I didn't suggest you were being impolite. I said you didn't back up your stance so we can't judge whether it's incorrect or not. It's literally just an assertion you made without any attempt to back it up.

The obvious potential error in your stance-- again, which you have not even attempted to support-- is that this was to prevent "disagreements". Can you support that? Do you make a distinction between a disagreement and trolling and harassment, or are all of those lumped together for you?

C'mon man; you cared enough to make the assertion, support it.

Reportedly, Jack Smith has more charges he can bring against Trump in New Jersey if Cannon decides she's a puppet for Trump.

What if your god told you to?