Show newer

"This page looks better in our app."
It's funny how some sites try to present their failures as a good thing.

Talked to a lady who works for the tax authority yesterday. Based on her job experience, her take on the welfare state is something like this:
"Of course there will always be freeloaders. So what?! This is about dignity. Everyone has a right to a good life and to be supported when they're struggling. If you want that, you've got to live with the freeloaders. Leave them be. That's the price you pay for a society where everyone is taken care of. It's not like they're doing any damage in the big picture - I've run those numbers more than once. You'll always get more out of it for society at large when you're incentivising good performance than when you're punishing people."

I'm looking for examples of written institutional commitments to an LGBTI+ inclusive workplace, ideally in the research or higher education sectors.

Also ideally some that go beyond "we promise we'll obey the law".

Do you know of such examples? Boosts ok

kink 

Also maybe I should create a lewd account at some point

Show thread

kink 

Some reasons:
- Much safer against chipped teeth
- Doesn't put pressure against palate
- Adjustable instead of fixed-size
- You actually get the full opening diameter, because your teeth rest *on* it, instead of *in front of* it like with a ring gag
- Which also means no unintentional teeth scraping on any inserted uhhhh objects :p

(Specifically I got a Jennings-style one, 'brand' is Kiotos Bizarre)

Show thread

kink 

Got my (rubberized) mouth spreader, and am now 100% convinced that people should be using these instead of ring gags, the design just makes so much more sense, also from a safety perspective

@evelyn@misskey.bubbletea.dev ah okay, so not by the cohost folks themselves then at least

@evelyn@misskey.bubbletea.dev is this about the thing I think it is

Kijk, dit dus. Die ellende waait over uit Amerika. We waren er hier toch grotendeels uit, maar blijkbaar beleeft agressief demonstreren en geladen lulkoek verkopen voor de deuren van een medische instelling een opleving. Hoe kan ik het duidelijker zeggen dan dat iedereen die niet de zwangere vrouw in kwestie of haar arts is zich er niet mee moet bemoeien?

nos.nl/l/2434929

@evelyn@misskey.bubbletea.dev was this toot written by an ebook

pol 

@sofia@chaos.social @schratze I mean, that looks basically like how I already approach a lot of discussions anyway, but via text chat, and that's always worked fine. I have auditory processing issues, so voice calls are just straight-up not an option for me :)

musicbrainz should just have a field for if a band is nazis or not

@rysiek@mastodon.technology @evelyn@misskey.bubbletea.dev "Enforcement could be better" is grossly understating the problem, and frankly an incredibly privileged take. You are assuming equitable access to legal recourse where there is none *and there won't be in the future either*.

This is not something you can fix by throwing a bit more effort at it or hotpatching it, it is *fundamentally broken* for anybody who isn't a wealthy white guy, by design. It will never work. It *cannot* work. It does not work today. It flat-out does not actually do the thing you are claiming copyleft is useful for.

And that's not even considering that you don't seem to have spent a second considering what the broader implications of "abolishing copyright" are, or how that relates to the public commons and what can fall under it.

Guess what? If there's no copyright, there's also nothing preventing you from just using what corporations built. By which point, what's the point of FOSS licensing again? Why is "legal recourse" needed again, if the concept of "proprietary software" ceases to exist entirely?

Again: it is an incredibly privileged take to assume that "legal recourse" is the be-all-end-all of conflict resolution, *especially* where it concerns the public interest. If this is something that you cannot accept or understand, then any further discussion of the topic is pointless, and I have no interest in continuing it.

@rysiek@mastodon.technology @evelyn@misskey.bubbletea.dev You're completely dismissing the fundamentally problematic mechanics I've already pointed out (namely no equitable access to legal recourse), and instead throwing some cherry-picked examples at me as if those somehow have more weight.

Why, exactly, would you expect me to put any more effort into "proving my case" if you can't even be bothered to genuinely engage with the points I already raised?

@rysiek@mastodon.technology @evelyn@misskey.bubbletea.dev Yeah no, I don't see this discussion going anywhere productive. This is about a systemic problem - cherry-picking cases and expecting others to "prove you wrong" while ignoring the underlying incentives and mechanisms being described is not how you discuss that sort of issue.

Show older
Pixietown

Small server part of the pixie.town infrastructure. Registration is closed.