causesothere

AO3 is wonderful. I strongly believe that humans have tens of thousands of years of telling and retelling stories. The Odyssey isn't one book, it's something that was composed and collected and retold.

The idea that a company could "own" a story and the characters within is recent. Very recent.

IMO, AO3 continues the human tradition of retelling stories, and we should celebrate that.

Voluntary hierarchy is different from autocracy. If the community really felt Linux was better worthy Linus, they could make that happen. Linus isn't operating secret police that scare the shit out of people.

Are you looking at the USSR and countries that followed its model?

I don't think you can look at any authoritarian regime and make assumptions about how an economic system performs. The autocratic features tend to cause society to break down.

For an actual anarchist production model, look no further than Open Source. It's built by people who self organize, to solve problems that are real (and often to make silly, inefficient things). It's often (but not always) motivated by something other than profit. It's people who believe in a credo organizing themselves around that credo and building the tools to sustain that credo.

But imagine if open source was behind an autocrat, there's no way it'd be nearly as rich or flourishing.

Relying on emotions is human. I appeal to love, empathy, kindness, caring, and sadness when I discuss politics all the time. To experience the world is to have emotional connection with it and with others.

Pretending only rational discourse is valid ways to plan or engage in politics omits a lot of what's important.

It has been so, or the inverse (govt interfering for corporations) for a long time. Hawai'i is a state because the US occupied it for Dole.

I'm pleased to see the Atlantic recognize that Mamdani's politics are, in fact, pretty centrist. A social democrat in practice (though he ran as a democratic socialist, which is different).

He's left of modern American Democrats (who as a party are center right typically).

People who have only experienced politics as the American team sport with Republicans on the right and Democrats on the left really don't have much understanding of what left, center, and right are. I'm frankly glad to see more candidates entering the field to broaden perspectives and challenge the notion of "what could win".

Frankly, Democrats could learn a lot from him. And Republicans probably could too, to be honest.

Yes, they absolutely do. Since 1954's pests act.

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/rabbits-how-to-control-numbers

Powerful.

Why do horses need a space in Manhattan?

I own hundreds of acres of forest land with watershed stream habitat. I work on conservation efforts for it, including working with governmental orgs. I know all about the processes involved. Don't lecture me on it or assume I'm talking out of my ass.

Farmers in England and Wales have a legal obligation to remove rabbits. You are doing them a favor by volunteering to do so.

One, you are obviously incorrect per the other reply. Two, theres a lot more DuPonts "dying the river blue" than there are good samaritans building fish ladders.

Is the text of the trailer. More or less.

"Cyber". I think.

This is exactly what it is for. Fascism deploys hypocrisy very deliberately for exactly this reason. If you conform, it's a signal you will continue to conform to the admins policies. Push it until it's silly. People willing to look the fool, but remain loyal, are valuable to the admin.

They do this (at least at first) to pull people out of their staff who would slow them down or fight them. Then they expand the scope, where they hope to reach the entire population.

They have constructed an amazing shibboleth. You can immediately determine if someone is poisoned by partisanship if they use "SI". If they use "AI", who knows. But "SI" use is a strong indicator someone has left reason behind in favor of "my team can do no wrong."

Holy false equivalency, Batman. We're discussing an attraction. One that residents believe is cruel. The people are trying to end cruelty.

Yes, sometimes democracy produces bad outcomes in the name of preventing cruelty. But I don't think you can compare it to instances where humans are the target. We cannot ask the horses, "what would you prefer?"

It's also a death trap for its passengers!

F1 has taught me: yes, and it will destroy your car.

It's not even that awesome, tbh.

I bet this goes so hard if you are ten years old.

The last remaining horse space? There are so many horse spaces, what are you on about. Being amused in Central Park is not the last space for horses.

Was it the racism or the sexism that appealed most to you?

Sure, but the things you describe losing aren't overwhelmingly unpopular. But the people who live in New York want this. Overwhelmingly.

Do you live in New York? If not, why should you have any say -- especially in keeping a performative tourist amusement around? "Dance for me, New Yorkers!"

If you are from New York, your neighbors overwhelmingly want this. Are you against losing this because it's genuinely good? Or some more abstract philosophical reason? If it's the latter, do you apply that evenly?

Tesla has been in the business of ugly cars for some time.

Committing a genocide does typically reduce one's cachet.

Or maybe fortune 500 companies have different vulnerabilities, financial power, and concerns than individual humans.

I heard it described once that leftist thinking typically focuses on the justice of the outcome of systems, whereas rightward thinking often focuses on justice of the system itself.

A right leaning person might say, it is just to prevent people with means from receiving welfare. A left leaning person might say, means testing can leave gaps where some people are unserved.

The right leaning person says, "it is unjust to censor", the left leaning person says, "that system has a side effect -- if you are tolerant of hate speech, others will leave".

I don't know if this holds always, but now that it's pointed out, I see it in a lot of places.

I voted third party. I know all about voting with intent. Apathy, however, is caustic. It encourages people to not think they could improve things. To check out, stop listening.

"Listen to that guy" gets people listening and encourages at least the chance of someone going, "wait, actually I don't like what this guy is saying, what are other guys saying?"

Cis didn't originate from gender. Cislunar, cisalpine, etc.

And it's ok for you to not identify as cis. You get to have whatever identity you want.

We are discussing a platform that censors discussion when that discussion includes trans and not trans people. Unless you are X, the platform, I don't think your identity is germane. (And once again, you are valid.)