Who is Big Gretch?
Who is Big Gretch?
I mean… What else would that mean?
The US is one of only a few countries that have voted against the last two UN resolutions. You’re not wrong, but the US government is a special type of evil.
If I was american I’d obviously be voting for Biden, but ignoring or denying that he’s supporting the genocide currently being undertaken by the Israeli government doesn’t make him look better.
Of course, Trump would support it too, hence the obviously.
Yeah, I got it. Was just commenting on the poetry of the sentence.
That’s a hall mark of our civilisation/society, not our species. Humans have been around for hundreds of thousands of years, and the vast majority of cultures in that time have been relatively stable, with checks on excessive greed.
(see Graeber and Wengrow’s The Dawn Of Everything for some good examples.)
What problem would it solve?
What about choking them with plastic straws?
Anti correlated with search quality
Milloy has been spouting denial for decades, but this might be the dumbest thing I’ve seen him say yet.
Yes, but also on broader society. 100 years ago that would have been contained - people in you’re neighbourhood would know you and help out. It’s a lot harder in the internet age
I wonder when Dyson is going to bring out their arse-sized airblade?
This article is old, but a good read: https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/11/14/16640082/donna-brazile-warren-bernie-sanders-democratic-primary-rigged
The 2016 Democratic primary wasn’t rigged by the DNC, and it certainly wasn’t rigged against Sanders. But Democratic elites did try to make Clinton’s nomination as inevitable, as preordained, as possible. And the party is still managing the resentment that engendered in voters. “Once somebody doesn’t trust you,” sighs Buckley, the New Hampshire Democratic chair, “it’s very hard to get that trust back.”
The DNC did mess with the 2016 preselections, but the article argues that that probably benefited Sanders, by giving him much more of a platform than he would otherwise have had.
But it also seems like a footgun for the democrats as a whole, and probably contributed to the 2016 anti-establishment vibe that led to the Trump win
That’s kind of a myth though, isn’t it?
Like, OK, they probably have more mature security systems in place (but that’s definitely not guaranteed, especially with anything middle tier or smaller), and at least they have cash reserves so you might get something if you can figure out how to sue them.
But most businesses would be well happy to make a quick buck off selling whatever private data they managed to get their hands on.
I’d be surprised if someone hasn’t already tried to make a business out of redistributing background check information, now that I think about it…
That’s a good list. Certainly a public feature/bug tracker would be nice. But those are pretty rare for corporate software…
Which bits are not functional? I’m using their email and calendar… they aren’t completely polished, but they’re very usable.
Not trying to tell you what do do (I bet there’s heaps of people that would see it the same way as you)
But it seems kind of odd that people are happy to give a background check to a corporate employer who doesn’t give shit about them (and who they don’t care about or feel any responsibility towards), but wouldn’t do the same for a community org position that necessarily involves more responsibility to the broader community.
You do realise it’s possible to vote while also wanting and working towards a better system, right?