• 1 Post
  • 185 Comments
Joined 11 months ago
cake
Cake day: January 25th, 2024

help-circle
  • This is the danger of elite projection. What his life is like must be how other people’s lives are like.

    He was successful. If he wanted to get a job, he could. If he did work, he got paid.

    If these people aren’t doing that, it must be their fault, and they need “treatment” (via institutionalization) in his mind. It couldn’t possibly be because to get a job, you often need existing housing, but to get housing, you need money from a job. Or the fact that people like him don’t pay enough.

    It’s always their fault. Individual responsibility, meritocracy and all that jazz.




  • Something along the lines of “Murder is wrong but also this man’s policies at his company led to a third of people’s claims being denied and 22 billion dollars just last year being taken as profit off people actively having their healthcare denied and maybe, just maybe, we should do something about that.”


  • Just as someone already mentioned in this thread, I can vouch for Immich as well. I self host it (currently via Umbrel on a Pi 5 purely for simplicity) and the duplicate detection feature is very handy.

    Oh, and the AI face detection feature is great for finding all the photos you have of a given person, but it sometimes screws up and thinks the same person is two different people, but it allows you to merge them anyways, so it’s fine.

    The interface is great, there’s no paywalled features (although they do have a “license,” which is purely a donation) and it generally feels pretty slick.

    I would warn to anyone considering trying it that it is still in heavy development, and that means it could break and lose all your photos. Keep backups, 3-2-1 rule, all that jazz.





  • A few things.

    1. Fear of the “other,” with the “other” being people who don’t look like they do (with them usually being insulated within their non ethnically diverse social groups) and the fact that they’ve repeatedly seen these “other” people associated with traits that are undesirable through media.
    2. False history, primarily a belief that stems from the prior point, with the assumption that white people are more “moral” or “civilized,” and that the nation was better before things like racial integration, something that they’ve repeatedly been made to believe through, again, heavily biased media, and inaccurate historical portrayals of different cultures.
    3. Misdirected blame for negative factors in our society, primarily by right wing media and talking heads like Trump, that casts blame for issues specifically on certain racial groups. (i.e. it’s not that we don’t fund our welfare programs enough, it’s that “they are taking welfare payments and being lazy!”)
    4. “Efficiency,” in the sense that they believe having less of these “freeloaders” will allow us to broadly spend more of our money/time/resources on what “matters” (white people) without understanding things like, y’know, the fact immigrants provide more in taxes than the average American overall since they don’t receive the same amount of benefits back from things like our welfare system.
    5. Race-based nationalism that leads them to believe that they are the only people that are “supposed” to live here in America, or the only ones that “deserve” it. If you look at how they often classify immigration, or even black people simply moving in to traditionally white areas as an “invasion,” you can see how they don’t exactly view these people as members of their own nation, but rather, some outside group.




  • This is an order to sell, not break up.

    Currently, it’s still recommended actions to the court. Nothing has actually been finalized in terms of what they’re going to actually end up trying to make Google do.

    Google must not remain in control of Chrome.

    While divestiture is likely, they could also spin-off, split-off, or carve-out, which carry completely different implications for Google, but are still an option if they are unable to convince the court to make Google do their original preferred choice.

    A split-off could prevent Google from retaining shares in the new company without sacrificing shares in Google itself, and a carve-out could still allow them to “sell” it, but via shares sold in an IPO instead of having to get any actual buyout from another corporation.