veganpizza69

joined 3 months ago
MODERATOR OF
[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 hours ago

Check if the can has milk powder.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 hours ago

Oh, now it's great, there are apps. Before the internet it was misery and before ATMs it was just spiteful. The whole point seemed to be to make sure that you never get to extract cash from your accounts.

 
[–] [email protected] 64 points 1 day ago (5 children)

Bank: Perfect.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barnum_effect

Servant: What's your zodiac?

Future Tyrant: giant meteor.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

As long time atheist and anti-theist, they love Trump because he's fulfilling a role of messiah (lowercase), an anointed one. You probably already know this, but it basically means that Trump is a king to them, that's what the anointed part is about. They're traditionalists (monarchists).

If you want to get how monarchism works in this context, try Wilhoit's Law: https://slate.com/business/2022/06/wilhoits-law-conservatives-frank-wilhoit.html

Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit:

There must be in-groups whom the law protectes but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.

There is nothing more or else to it, and there never has been, in any place or time.

For millenia, conservatism had no name, because no other model of polity had ever been proposed. “The king can do no wrong.” In practice, this immunity was always extended to the king’s friends, however fungible a group they might have been. Today, we still have the king’s friends even where there is no king (dictator, etc.). Another way to look at this is that the king is a faction, rather than an individual.

As the core proposition of conservatism is indefensible if stated baldly, it has always been surrounded by an elaborate backwash of pseudophilosophy, amounting over time to millions of pages. All such is axiomatically dishonest and undeserving of serious scrutiny. Today, the accelerating de-education of humanity has reached a point where the market for pseudophilosophy is vanishing; it is, as The Kids Say These Days, tl;dr . All that is left is the core proposition itself — backed up, no longer by misdirection and sophistry, but by violence.

So this tells us what anti-conservatism must be: the proposition that the law cannot protect anyone unless it binds everyone, and cannot bind anyone unless it protects everyone.

Then the appearance arises that the task is to map “liberalism”, or “progressivism”, or “socialism”, or whateverthefuckkindofstupidnoise-ism, onto the core proposition of anti-conservatism.

No, it a’n’t. The task is to throw all those things on the exact same burn pile as the collected works of all the apologists for conservatism, and start fresh. The core proposition of anti-conservatism requires no supplementation and no exegesis. It is as sufficient as it is necessary. What you see is what you get:

The law cannot protect anyone unless it binds everyone; and it cannot bind anyone unless it protects everyone.

https://crookedtimber.org/2018/03/21/liberals-against-progressives/#comment-729288

And the Catholics in the US are likely to get in on the action, as evidenced by the Supreme Court and the people who made that happen. There's also a bunch of drama going on between them and the Pope.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Get your hormone levels checked once in a while.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 children)

Keeping it closed also means that you don't have to breathe it in (and prevents dust from getting in).

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

So that the cables don't get covered in humid air and dust which sticks to them and forms a grime (with bonus added chemicals from the plastics).

[–] [email protected] 22 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Then remove the larger thing that creates the vacuum area. Don't have positions of power.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 day ago

This would be me, except I don't like to stand in the tick fields.

[–] [email protected] 64 points 2 days ago (21 children)

I refactor the box every year because there are usually some new cables.

Some simple empirical rules:

  • keep the shorter cables
  • maximum of 3 cables of the same type: for donating, for lending, for spare
  • USB cables that can transfer data > USB cables that don't transfer data
  • no damaged cables
  • store long cables as coils (tied up tight)
  • store short cables in bunches (tied up tight)
  • should be sorted and grouped into categories
  • box should be sealed, but aired out once in a while (outgassing)
 

Following the cancellation of its small modular reactor (SMR) project in Utah, NuScale Power announced it will take “strategic” actions to reduce costs, including laying off 28% of its full-time workforce.

Related article from the shareholder's investigation into the company:

NuScale Power (SMR) Admits to Ongoing, Active SEC Inquiry

On July 29, 2024, Hunterbrook Media reported that the SEC is conducting an “active and ongoing” investigation into NuScale and noted that after Hunterbrook's publication “a spokesperson wrote in a statement: ‘[w]e are unaware of any SEC investigation into NuScale or any reason for such an investigation.’”

But, on August 2, 2024, NuScale did an about face. The company admitted that, contrary to its July 29 denial, in December 2023 the SEC requested information relating to the company’s employment, severance, and confidentiality agreements. In addition, NuScale revealed that the SEC requested additional information from the company on July 31, 2024.

Each of these events drove the price of NuScale shares sharply lower.

“We’re investigating the propriety of NuScale’s financial disclosures and operations, including whether the company’s agreements with employees suppress whistleblowing,” said Reed Kathrein, the Hagens Berman partner leading the investigation.

 

Pro-foxhunting group says UK hunters should be protected ethnic minority

Chair of Hunting Kind says he has built legal case to obtain same protection as Roma and LGBTQ+ people

Photo: Members of a Boxing Day hunt. The group said it would try to mount legal challenges to prove that those who support hunting have suffered discrimination or been abused on social media. Photograph: Danny Lawson/PA

A pro-foxhunting group says it has prepared a legal case to try to prove that hunters are an ethnic minority whose hunts should be protected under equality laws.

Ed Swales, the chair of Hunting Kind, claims he has been advised by a leading human rights lawyer that hunters unequivocally qualify for legal protection under the UK Equality Act 2010.

Speaking to the FieldsportsChannel podcast, Swales said: “The qualifications of an ethnic group, there are five of them, and we hit everyone straight in the bullseye.”

He said he had spent three years preparing a legal challenge that had now been reviewed by a human rights KC “who sits on the council of the European court of human rights”.

Swales said: “The outcome of that from the human rights silk is that as a protected minority group under the Equality Act, we qualify, undoubtedly 10 out of 10.”

He said the group would try to mount legal challenges to prove that those who support hunting have suffered discrimination such as losing work or contracts, or been abused on social media. If successful, such action would give hunters the same protection as minority groups such as the Roma community or LGBTQ+ groups.

Swales accused “the animal rights extremist movement” of launching “a person-on-person conflict” against hunters under “the excuse of animal welfare”.

 
 

See: last panel

 
view more: next ›