two things are certain: the Chinese people will suffer, and there will be many scapegoats found within the government - people suspected of collaborating with Western spies, for example - to make examples of so that Xi is not at fault..
That’s an interesting business to be in, it sounds like they just have power plants on boats they can dock where needed to provide power. So if they didn’t get paid they could literally sail away with the power plant 🤣
Probably makes sense for infrastructure in some parts of Africa.
So it's a good from Karpowership's parent company's POV but if its customers could afford their own power plants that would be a better solution for them.
Ty for the info. The ZA deal probably makes sense.
Tbh I’m disappointed at how small it’s recorded engine power is. Imagining it being able to apply it’s city sized power generation to its propeller and hydroplaning away 😂
The enemy of my enemy....isn't like my best friend or anything, but I sure am cheering them on...
But in all honesty, as much as I love the idea of fediverse. I really do want a "town square" that's moderated by the community. I would love something like wt.social. or a wikipedia equivalent to Twitter.
I find it hard to decide who to hate less because both are so ambiguous about their future. Currently threads doesn't allow access to any of their content without signup and using their damn mobile app, while twitter allows free access from any browser.
On the other hand, twitter is recently limiting access without an account, and threads could have a browser version and federation with the fediverse.
I think splitting the user base between them is probably good. Ideally TV/radio will stop defaulting to "tweet us with the hashtag..." They'll have use multiple channels and that might open the door for Mastodon and the fediverse too.
I'll keep saying it, but I'd like to see another big player (Microsoft, Google etc) embrace activitypub. That would bring balance and snub EEE for Meta.
Me neither, but I think the point here is that it is better for the fediverse if there’s competition between Meta and Microsoft as well as competition between each of them and the current fediverse.
Considering the stranglehold that huge platforms have on users, it makes a lot of sense for organizations to have their own fediverse servers, with communities and access they control.
For example, a lot of governments use Twitter as a way to communicate in disaster situations. But since Elon lets anyone with a credit card have a check mark and bans people on a whim you can't trust that the account is a real one or that it won't be cut off in time of need. A Mastodon server would solve both of these problems.
That’s true, but now you have to remember which server is legit. One benefit of a centralized service is that you have centralized verification, which at one time was a point in Twitter’s favor.
I’m not very well versed in cryptography, but if I understand the certification system for websites, different sites apply to a certificate provider, of which there are multiple. Maybe something like this is possible for the Fediverse? Where a user or community or instance can be “verified” by one or more trusted verification “agencies” or whatever.
Not only is this a great story on its own, but it proves that you don’t have to be young to find your true calling in life. So many people struggle with the thought of what they should be doing with their life that they don’t actually live their life because they are thinking about what they should do. Just do something you enjoy or are curious about trying, if you like it great! If you don’t, try the next thing.
So many people struggle with the thought of what they should be doing with their life that they don’t actually live their life because they are thinking about what they should do. struggling for survival working so hard at jobs that pay just enough money to survive and they’re so exhausted that they don’t have energy to pursue anything further because they need to work to survive.
Just do something you enjoy or are curious about trying, if you like it great! If you don’t, try the next thing.
things rich people with a lot of time on their hands say
things rich people with a lot of time on their hands say
Well I guess I’m rich even though I don’t feel rich
Sure I guess most people don’t think like this, but they should.
I came to this country with little less than a suitcase at the age of 19 to live in a rented room at first and now I am in my mid 40s paying for 2 kids through college, and here is a list of the jobs I’ve worked in.
Auto Mechanic
Gutter Cleanning
Construction
Factory Assembly line (twice)
Butcher
Music Sales Associate
New and Used Car Sailsmen
Electronics Store Associate
IT Help Desk tech
Police Officer
Gas Station Fuel Systems Service Tech
Back End Programmer
Front End Developer
Graphics Designer
Honestly, if given the opportunity, I would like to try Carpentry next, but I still have plenty of life in me to try other jobs.
I know some people might have a harder time finding or surviving with a job I totally blame the economy we have created for ourselves but I can say I’ve never let a job description or experience wanted deter me from applying for a job, the only thing that has stopped me was a diploma, and even then I just went and studied my ass off to get the certification or diploma I needed to do the job.
I hope that whatever barriers you have, that you find a way to overcome them and succeed.
Technically yes, they ran the machine off the car battery but most hemodialysis patients don’t drop dead if they miss a session for a day. Also they could have used any vehicle to drive the kid to a dialysis center or a hospital which are probably required to have generators in Australia as they are elsewhere.
Worked at the paper for 18 years, good. But it’s owned by Alibaba Holdings in China, bad. The paper claims they’re in the contact with family and have confirmed she’s safe and taking time for personal issues, good. But her friends, colleagues, and Hong Kong Journalists Association remain concerned for her safety, bad.
I don’t know anything about all the elements at play here but it certainly sounds suspicious.
Why are they in contact with the family and not with the reporter directly? It’s not like we are 1823 and communication has to be sent on precious missives traversing dangerous seas.
Theoretically, should an emergency occur, I may contact one close acquaintance, like a family member, and ask that they notify anyone else who needs to know, like work, so that I don’t have to provide updates through multiple channels all the time. Or I don’t feel like answering questions about something private to someone, like my boss, who has no business with the details.
That part doesn’t strike me as suspicious, but the persisting concern from friends and colleagues (as well as the potential unreliability of the paper’s representatives) does.
It says she previously worked at the Apple Daily… wasn’t that an “”“extremist”“” paper linked to the detention of that one lady for screaming at an apple in public?
Nobody here has mentioned that “no eye contact” is really common in Hollywood. To the point that various celebrities including Conan O’Brien had that rule for their staff but was totally unaware and as soon as they found out, they put a stop to it immediately.
I’m not saying Tom Cruise didn’t know but it’s definitely a possibility.
I wouldn’t be surprised, especially for A-listers, especially on-set. Eye-contact promotes conversations which, even when they are more stimulating than “Oh wow! You’re _____!! I loved you in that thing”, eat up time in a very busy production schedule. It’s even worse if the star is genuinely nice and personable, and sincerely appreciates their fans. It adds up to hours gone every day in 3-6 minute increments.
It still could be someone on his team telling people that and he is totally unaware. Idk why I’m trying to defend Tom Cruise I’m just not convinced this is what makes him a bad person
@CaptnNMorgan yeah I'm happy to be agnostic on it. Ironically though, him acting unaware of his cult's behaviour probably is a big part of what makes him a bad person.
I just liked this article because I thought Jill Goldston's life sounds super interesting.
Are we counting all the suicides due to the ex girlfriend’s actions, or the ones who die in situations instigated by women, like when she lies about something and the males in her family seek retribution? Those stats seem suspiciously absent from articles like these. Proxy violence is routinely ignored
If we’re going to advocate against domestic violence, we should include all its forms and not carefully gerrymander the definition
Me when I see a serious issue being brought up “BuT wHaT aBoUt ThAt OtHeR iSsUe”
Feel free to make a post about androcide, to start a conversation and get data, but only ever bringing it up when femicides are discussed is a tactic that only serves to stall conversations and make sure nothing gets done for anyone.
Or people could stop making not gendered issues into gendered issues, like the sexist fucks they are. There’s a very specific and insidious reason the narrative has switched from “domestic violence” to “violence against women” despite women being provably more safe than men in 99% of contexts, and only a minuscule fraction of deaths by violence. It’s a sexist intentional exclusion of an entire gender, for no good reason.
Ah yes, the famous sexism against dudes that every Italian man experiences in their daily life. In a country where famously women’s privilege has always trumped men and 99% of men are suffering from domestic abuse. I quite remember it too having grown up in Rome and Naples.
My man, Italy has always had a massive issue with femicides and violence against women. There’s an article right there above these comments with some numbers to start with, there are other sources as well. I’d be happy to see the numbers for 99% of cases where men are being abused by their partner more than women, and if the issue is indeed this massive than please make a post and let’s discuss it as well as how to fix it. I’m sure you’ve been discussing it and trying to do something about it every day, but bringing it up when the very gendered issue of femicides in Italy is brought up is just bad form, please link me to your post!
Just curious. Why do you think young men turn to violence when they feel like they’ve lost control of a situation? Do you think they do it because it’s just in their nature, or because many might have found themselves in situations where discussion gets ignored, pleading makes things worse, running inspires pursuit, and aggression made it all stop?
I’m not saying this to diminish the problem of domestic violence against women, or as an attempt to argue against any of the statistics. I just think angrily blaming men for violence rather than attempting to understand how such a problem manifests in the first place will not make anything safer for anyone.
(I hope I don’t regret jumping in on this discussion.)
Oh by all means there’s really no problem if you’re genuine in your question. And yes it’s 100% undeniable that all the issues are linked to one another just because society do be like that. But my issue with the other guy is that whataboutism is a real tactic that halts discussions and it really felt like they were in bad faith assessing that 99% of times men recieved more conjugal violence than women.
Anywya yeah to get back on point your question is absolutely valid! And actual movement for social change and feminism doesn’t just angrily blame men with no reason, toxic male socialization is a real problem for men as well as women, stunting their emotional growth/fostering anger as the only good emotion/not allowing them to express themselves while simultaneously putting a lot of pressure on being “a real man” that gets the girl, gets the job done without complaining and makes money while having time for family. It’s extremely harmful especially with the existence of “alpha male” gurus preying on those feelings. Italy has a double wammy of the religion with the church and the Vatican being right there and it’s influence is very strong. These men need help and the unfair hand they’re dealt to be addressed. However only ever bringing it up when women’s issues are brought up is a bad faith use of a legitimate issue only aimed at stunting progress and conversation. Maybe it’s not the most elegant example but the barbie movie of last summer is an interesting example of a piece of media that addresses the fact that certain types of male socialization is harmful to everyone if you can approach it with an open mind.
There’s also an argument to be made for the point that women issues are also a touch more sensitive because while men do overall die the more brutal deaths and the most often, it is also due to the man dominated world we have created.
Maybe it’s not the most elegant example but the barbie movie of last summer is an interesting example of a piece of media that addresses the fact that certain types of male socialization is harmful to everyone if you can approach it with an open mind.
Imagine the same points being made in a different movie, without all that Barbie Girl Power. In a movie not marketed towards gals. Just doesn’t happen. Pretty much all the male hero arcs in (non-kid) media are geared towards the female gaze and phantasies, not issues actual men face. And why not of course we live in capitalism and that’s what sells the most tickets. No, “guy saves the day” doesn’t really get men off, by and large “the roof for once doesn’t need fixing and I can kick back” is way more attractive.
while simultaneously putting a lot of pressure on being “a real man” that gets the girl,
Meanwhile, gals are asking “where are all the real men gone”. Everyone is willing to tell you versions of “this is how it works” without actually understanding the issue, from “just open up” (which gets you ignored at best, cast out at worst), to “just punch everything”, which of course also doesn’t work.
There is a distinct lack of solutions, or even a desire to build a new tradition of behaviour that does not require ideological buy-in, or only works for abusive couples (like Dworkin and her victim). Things that align with instinct. E.g. you can’t simply demand non-violence and then only look at physical violence: What’s a guy to do if a gal becomes psychologically abusive? That’s the point where “Real men don’t hit woman, we tickle” then suddenly makes a ton of sense. You don’t get to attack me at my weak spot and not get a proportional response.
My two cents? Difference feminism has been dismissed prematurely. Of course, get rid of all the ancient toxic normative shit the groups that brought it up brought with them, but fail to include difference on a fundamental level and well-meant but absolutely counterproductive advise such as “just open up” will never vanish due to a structural incapability to see the other side as you insist that it’s the same as you: Way worse than essentialising a banana as a banana is essentialising it as an apple. That’s also how you get shit like the new Mulan: Because apparently the only way a gal can ever achieve anything is to be born magical so that she can fight like a guy. I mean it kinda works as a transmasc egg fantasy but they should’ve just kept the old story, or, better yet, not make a re-make at all, as the old story did show how a gal can, indeed, save the day, with brains and guts instead of brawn or magic (and of course the new one’s a Mary Sue but I wanted to complain about theme, not just shoddy writing). Am I beginning to rant? Probably better stop.
Female suicide, or the jealous ex killing a new partner, are not included either.
Domestic violence is a complex issue that “should” include, and address, a lot of cases that it currently doesn’t, but for some there is not even an idea on how to start addressing them… so I think it makes sense to tackle the obvious ones first: homicides.
Once we get that sorted out, with no more people thinking that “their” mate is “theirs” to do what they please with, like they do with “their” kids or “their” dogs, including putting them down whenever they wish… we might be able to get to the next issue.
theguardian.com
Top