Thanks for the in-depth response! These fair-share fees sound great, an anti-scab fee haha
MisterFrog
Right to work? Is this some euphemism for some awful employment laws, in the mould of the Australian Liberal Party's (the Conservatives) "Work Choices" legislation?
I can't wait for the budget framework to come out, 1 because current lineup is expensive (well, more than I'd like to spend on a laptop. I'll run my shitty 2018 Microsoft Surface Pro 6 into the ground), but 2 because the product will be even more polished by that time.
Can't wait to have a laptop and then just have it for like 10 years. Especially if it's Linux out of the box 👍👍
To me this is the right answer. Both always exist. I think people's propensity to believe the oppressed will definitely pick up arms in the face of oppression are kidding themselves.
(this is only directed at the people who seem to have wanted Trump to win to "accelerate" the ushering in of a socialist society):
Deluding themselves about how often there isn't a glorious revolution, and ongoing, armed resistance by the oppressed isn't guaranteed.
Accelerationists have a weird hard-on for revolution, as if it's easy-peasy to dismantle and replace all institutions all at once.
This socialist thinks we ought to fight tooth and nail via disruption/extra legal actions, implied threats of the power of the masses (in the same mould that workers won rights by threat), AND ideally within the system itself.
Because revolution is a roll of the dice.
I'll be honest, I'm not super familiar on the timeline.
I'm not looking forward to the future though, even less so than before :/
Oh well, we persevere
I wonder when we're gonna get the Reichstag fire
Can confirm, while Hunan stinky tofu is stinky, it doesn't taste "stinky".
Nearly every medication changes your cognition—even OTC antihistamines.
I don't know what it's like in your country, but in mine depending on the level of impact it will say on the packet, and is illegal to drive while under the influence of any medication that impacts your ability to drive safely or operate heavy machinery.
I didn’t intend to imply it is the case for everyone
People should make the decisions that are best for them—know thyself.
One last time, I don’t endorse this style of living for everyone, but it works for me
Nah, this is not okay.
I do not accept this as a reasonable way to determine what we allow as societies in terms of vehicular safety. Someone's freedom to decide for themselves what they consider to be safe, stops at everyone else's freedom to not be run over. I very much assert what's safe should be determined with science and enforced with regulation/laws. Not by everyone personally deciding for themselves.
You might be surprised at the sheer number of people who operate vehicles while stoned safely.
Dosing aside (I'm not making claims on what level is safe). We have a very important saying in my industry: just because a safety event hasn't happened yet, isn't evidence that a practice is acceptably safe. (Paraphrased). This is literally what habitual drunk drivers who aren't that drunk when they drive tell themselves "it's fine", because they haven't had a crash and are very careful. Sure, but they're increasing the likelihood of a crash nonetheless.
There may well be people out there who have driven high without incident, my response would be 1. Let's quantify that first before allowing it, and 2. They do this without incident, so far.
I'm sure you're very careful, and don't drive too high. You may never have a serious accident. But on a societal level, that's just not an acceptable way to determine what is acceptably safe. Who are you to say that you aren't increasing the likelihood of harm to someone else?
Wanna decide everything for yourself? Go live in the middle of nowhere, away from everyone else, where your decisions won't impact others.
Don't drive high unless you can back up your claims with more than "trust me bro".
Amen to that
While it wouldn't solve climate change, it would certainly make it easier to play Minecraft without OP players.