Not a map, but things I’ve seen on the roads in Boston:

• Left turn only from left lane, straight or left from 2nd lane, straight or left from 3rd lane
• Green light and perpendicular traffic coming to me on the cross street, also going, because they also have a green light
• Two lanes, surprise! Lane markers go away it’s one lane, not defined who yields, you guys can work it out

I don’t even know about that, because instead of the article I got my App Store opened up demanding that I install Phantom Surfer Browser to protect me from viruses.

Not since late last year they’re not. They spent early 2023 winning back the north of the country, then had a summer counteroffensive which captured essentially 0 of the East, then over winter they got nothing in terms of the ammunition and weapons aid they’d need to have to fight against an opponent which can outproduce them 20:1. They’re now desperately trying to hold the front line even though after 3 months of nothing they’re basically out of ammunition.

The big aid packages out of the US and EU are stalled apparently indefinitely. There’s that little package from the UK which hopefully will help a little, but unless the GOP stops being compromised by Russia sometime soon, it seems like they might be in real trouble.

Removed by mod

Surely all the people who wanted Nazis off Substack will also celebrate the ban on the Hamas flag

Oh wait, the Israeli government is very clearly promoting a violent ideology as well… we need to… outlaw the Israeli flag?

Oh wait

Hang on

If someone learns something bad about you, and your first reaction is not “this is why it’s not true” but “how did you find that out, we must punish the person who told you,” you might be a violent POS.

That’s just the UI that shows you other communities where the same link has been posted.

If you want to create a cross-post like that for an existing post that has a URL, just make a new one with the same URL. If you want to create one for a text-only post, I think that’s not possible though.

You’re going to get a lot of hate for posting this, because it’s disinformative crap and Putin is a war criminal.

If you want to see a talk that does actually bring this perspective – more or less, that Putin does have valid reasons for seeing his security threatened by the expansion of NATO – without the propaganda crap and without somehow trying to say that that justifies Russia invading a sovereign nation to rape and murder its civilian citizens, then watch this talk by John Mearsheimer. Inflammatory title aside, it’s excellent.

There is nothing in any state or US constitution that says that only responsible people are allowed to vote, or that extra requirements in order to be able to vote are a good thing.

Everyone gets to vote. That’s the rule. There’s absolutely a place for good-faith restrictions to be enacted to make voter fraud a difficult thing, but as the plaintiffs in this lawsuit point out, there’s no indication that voter fraud is happening on any scale in New Hampshire, or that this requirement will make it more difficult. Which makes it hard to avoid the conclusion that the real reason is to make it just slightly more difficult for certain types of people to vote. Which is a hell of a lot more of a problem than someone voting who, for reasons other than fraud, can’t prove on the spot where they live.

I am not “arguing.” I’m saying I think the kind of performative anti racism described in the OP article is silly, especially when it involves so badly stretching the definition of “racism.” Maybe, though, it’s overall not the worst thing in the world and I actually tried to partially retract some of my criticism of it as being overly harsh. But I still think it’s silly and can actually be counterproductive.

If you think different, that’s fine. I think I’ve explained myself at this point. I am in no way shape or form interested in having an exchange with you where we try to determine which of our viewpoints “wins”.

All we need to do is to add to this comic another guy over on the riverbank who says anyone who doesn’t agree with his new river chart is racist.

Quoting myself from elsewhere in the thread: “Maybe I was too harsh. I’m not trying to be critical of someone who’s at least trying to make the world a better place.”

Not sure what argument you’re looking for with me, but a lot of what you’re ascribing to me here isn’t accurate. I’m just going on an internet forum and saying how I see it, same as you.

Haha oh yeah, I wasn’t talking about you. Just I’ve noticed that certain viewpoints tend to attract a lot of downvotes here. I suspect that a lot of people like to do performative antiracism more than they do genuine antiracism, because it’s a lot less work, and that extends to giving out vigorous downvotes to the “wrong” point of view.

But yeah, I can see the argument too. Everyone’s going to draw the line of what’s okay and not okay to say in different places, and at the end of the day I do think there’s something to be said for trying to make the world a better place even in some kind of trivial way.

Hold on, lemme put on my downvote boots.

To me the defense is, if people are going around and saying that calling it an “Inca Dove” is racist or misogynistic and we all have to spend time and money and effort changing it around to something else, then it’s going to hinder genuine efforts to resolve racism or misogyny because some people are going to start putting it alongside the “Inca Dove” thing into a category of “stupid stuff that doesn’t matter.” Changing “Oldsquaw” sounds great because that’s actually racist. Changing the confederate name thing, eh, it seems weird to me but I can see it. “Inca Dove,” alright now you’re just making up stuff to get upset about and asking everyone else to play along with it and if they don’t want to, they’re some kind of bad person.

Just my opinion.

I mean, broadly I do agree with this. It’s whatever. Maybe I was too harsh. I’m not trying to be critical of someone who’s at least trying to make the world a better place, even if I think the way they’re going about it is a little artificial and silly. I do think it’s artificial and silly though.

I believe they’re trying to change any bird that’s named after a person, and any European-centric name that replaced an existing indigenous name.

To me it sounds like it used to be that way, but at this point this is just someone questing around for a “problem” to solve so they can prove to the world that they’re a really good person.

This has some explanation. TL;DR get ready to be underwhelmed. This was based on some earlier efforts e.g. one in Sweden that changed bird names containing “neger” (negro), “kaffer” (a racial slur), or “zigenarfågel” (gypsy bird), but the stuff they’ve been able to find in North America is, well:

• Oldsquaw (a slur)
• Inca Dove (historically inaccurate, no overlap with Incas)
• McCown’s Longspur (McCown was a confederate)

Maybe there were more they didn’t mention but my guess is that there’s a reason they’re writing the story while dancing around what names are actually being changed.

Almost as if the whole endeavor is a ridiculous counterproductive waste of time.

It would be possible to implement a “slur filter” on the reader’s side, that automatically redacted a configurable list of bad words from any comment on any instance… but I suspect that the percentage of people who would enable it, and the general community feedback on it, wouldn’t be what the person who made the decision wants to hear. Doing it on the sender side provides a convenient pretense of “I’m doing a good thing here” because it prevents that feedback.

Mans is slippin and losing his confidence

There was a time ten years ago when Prigozhin would have ingested some wild isotope that basically nobody knows how to make, and died slowly in a hospital in horrible disfiguring fashion. Putin would have said nothing, Russian state TV would have made a couple of snide comments, and everyone would have understood and not done a goddamned thing.

Now he’s feeling like he needs to emphasize it. Yes, we know you killed him, and we’ve moved on. It’s not that we just didn’t figure it out.