Those look like 3 random people to me. I’m not seeing the caricature. For them to not be caricatures, what would you expect them to look like?

They tried protesting at oil infrastructure, they stopped multiple oil terminals in the UK being used for weeks and caused shortages in various parts of the UK. Hundreds went to prison and everyone forgot about it after a week.

They throw soup at glass, 2 people go to a police station for a few days and people are still talking about it months later.

Unfortunately, they have to exist within the constraints of modern news media, outrage cycles and social media, and that influences their decisions.

Except when they did protests targeted at oil infrastructure, that was still apparently wrong and got far less coverage than much safer stunts like these.

Presumably Valve’s lawyers can make this case, so I guess we’ll see if the judge is receptive to it.

Led by a man that truly understands logistics. All space lanes lead to Ultramar.

Thanks for the link, it was a very interesting read. While it is disappointing that it’s not actually a collective (assuming this blog post is accurate), having a platform run and owned by 6 creators is still better than YouTube’s governance structure, and still has the advantage in having both the capacity and desire to invest in creators.

An advantage of funding things via a collective like Nebula as opposed to each individual creator managing their own patrons is that new creators can start making bigger, more expensive projects quicker. Even established creators have this advantage, they can take bigger risks on bigger projects with the safety net of a share of the nebula pie.

I don’t think a project like The Prince would exist without Nebula, for example.

Yeah, absolutely, that’s a much more readable summation than what I wrote.

As an aside, I really like the social contract theory. It’s a pretty clean philosophical summation of how the majority of people in tolerant democracies see the world and provides the foundation for it, even if they don’t think about it in formal philosophical terms. That essentially we are implicitly bound by the rules established by previous generations, those that set the rules (both cultural and legal), until such time as we form a political or cultural movement to change those rules. Then, anyone who comes after us is bound by those rules we set until and unless they in turn change them.

EDIT: I guess I should add that in the context of this thread, “be tolerant” is a cultural rule that has developed over the recent past, and thus if you aren’t tolerant there are social repercussions (and in countries with hate speech laws, even legal repercussions) as that is the current rule.

There’s also the social contract resolution to the tolerance paradox. Essentially, the tolerance paradox is that tolerating intolerance erodes tolerance. This means eventually if you allow intolerance to fester, they will seize control and you lose that tolerance.

The social contract resolution is that by being intolerant, you lose your right to be tolerated. This avoids that paradox, but superficially can look like intolerance.

I hope this didn’t end up too much like word salad.

Works for floors!

Do I grab them by the bridge bit that sits on their nose

This is the way.

which was me moving my reusable bag to the other side at a low angle.

Seems like a system like that would be easily fooled by confidently moving an item across the scanner and into the baggage area without scanning it.

This sounds incredibly similar to Barcelona’s superblocks. Definitely do-able if you get city government on board, there is a proven roadmap to follow.

I don’t know how you could train people to get out of their cars. The whole situation is bus-ted. Perhaps there’s subway to do it, but I’m at a loss as to how.

We need some action from the bike-ameral legal system. Currently, supporters of public transit are underground, but they need to expose car-centric planning as the utter tram it is.

Vlad wasn’t even a ruler when he died. He died in battle fighting for Matthius Corvinus against the Ottomans.

You’re ok dude. It sounds like this guy/gal has had similar conversations and was frustrated by them. Understandable on both sides.

Military stuff is out of the picture since they established their trade with CCP and NK for rockets

Not all rockets are made equally. The NK rockets, artillery barrels and artillery shells are much worse than they could manufacture with western components. A degradation in quality leading to less accuracy which lessens the battlefield impact is still a positive step.

It also means that China can take advantage of Russia to get much more than it could usually get for their gear. China is not helping Russia out of the goodness of it’s heart or some ideological reason. They’re taking advantage.

I wonder if sanctions targeting non-consumer products critical to producing them can lead to long pauses

Interesting question. I have no idea. I’m pretty confident all sanctions so far are for gas, oil, and military/dual-use technology.

She was a big champion of Medicare for all in 2020. It is indeed a shame she isn’t talking about it now like she did last election. Judging from her 2020 rhetoric though, it is definitely something she would be open to doing if given a cooperative government, I think.

Well, there’s not much she can do atm as vice-president. It’s very well-known that Biden is very pro-Israeli.

Her rhetoric on the topic as a candidate has been very mixed. She’s been improving since she had that meeting with Uncommitted leaders. Hopefully she can have a better plan than “ask nicely for a ceasefire” to present to voters before the election.

Maybe. The point of the sanctions isn’t to cause unrest though, as I said, it’s to apply pressure to the state. If it happens to cause some unrest, that’s an unlikely side-benefit.