site banner
Advanced search parameters (with examples): "author:quadnarca", "domain:reddit.com", "over18:true"

Showing 25 of 111375 results for

domain:youtube.com

However in those cases when he is described as lame, such as in the Illiad, he is depicted as limping, dragging his foot, and/or using a stick to walk, not a wheelchair. I strongly suspect the reason why they put him in a wheelchair is similar to why WOTC printed a Wheelchair Accessible Dungeon for D&D, because wheelchairs specifically are treated as an icon of "disabled representation".

I was wondering where the Wikipedia article you quote got this:

In some myths, Hephaestus built himself a "wheeled chair" or chariot with which to move around, thus helping support his mobility while demonstrating his skill to the other gods.

So I followed the citation and it's an essay in Rhetoric Review using "theory from the field of disability studies", and it doesn't use the term "wheeled chair" even once. Rather it describes him as riding a "proto-wheelchair" on the basis of a single cup showing him on a winged chariot. Nothing indicates this winged chariot is serving as a substitute for walking rather than as a chariot, nor is there anything about it "helping support his mobility while demonstrating his skill to the other gods". (Is it even specific to him or does there exist art of other gods in winged chariots as well?) And then the Wikipedia article makes it even worse by creating the term "wheeled chair" and putting it in quotes, so that people who don't follow the citation and get past the paywall will interpret "wheeled chair" as a literal translation of some Greek source.

In the Iliad 18.371, it is stated that Hephaestus built twenty bronze-wheeled tripods to assist him in moving around.[96]

And then this is just an egregiously false reading, it says nothing about helping him move around. They're tripods (a pot/cauldron with 3 legs to straddle a fire) that move themselves around. The same passage says "he moved to and fro about his bellows in eager haste".

Ahh I remember joining one of those back in the day it was fun. Maybe I’ll hop on with you sometime.

Reporting on things is always deceptive. "High School Graduate Gunned Down While on Stroll" was essentially the initial Michael Brown reporting. If you read the OP's news article, they frame all these allegations as allegations made by ICE, which is a far less credulous stance than federal law enforcement would be given by NBC news if this guy was being arrested on lynching charges.

I haven't retro gamed in a while, and an earnest revisit of Mechwarrior 3 has been on my todo list forever. So I installed it on my K6-2+ with a CH Flightstick.

The good! If you pine for the days of mech construction following tabletop rules, rejoice! Every mech is a virtual blank slate, limited only by it's max weight. This is a feature modded into virtually every Mechwarrior game without it, although it does tend to render mechs a purely aesthetic choice. This is probably the most simulation oriented Mechwarrior also, developed by Microprose in their heyday.

The different. Heat and ammo are brutal. Painfully accurate to the tabletop, one ton of AC10 is literally 10 shots. 10 shots easily missed with the slow speed of the projectile and poor feedback IMHO of how you need to lead. The shot just isn't terribly visible to see where it's gone, whether you hit or miss. I also find myself overheating virtually 99% of the time. Firing medium lasers. I'm not sure that's possible in MW5, but maybe my expectations are set with all the end game goodies I've grown accustomed to in that game. But still, all tabletop accurate. Pulse lasers are weird, and you need to hold a beam on the target for them to do anything. I think I prefer just regular old lasers at this point as they are the most reliable virtually hitscan weapon.

The ugly. MW3 has issues. On systems that are too fast the physics are horribly bugged. The slightest jostle and the physics over react and send objects into orbit at light speed. This isn't noticeable on my K6-2, and I think it's a good fit for the game, but I notice the keyboard randomly stops working, or I get stuck a lot. No clue what that's about, but it's caused me to have to alt-f4 the game and restart it. Joystick never stops working though. And once shutting down my mech and restarting it got me unstuck on whatever had hung me up.

Anyways, wish me luck.

I think it's complicated -- although in some cases having a hunting license makes it pretty OK. (Assuming he had one?)

Canadians deal with this all the time -- other than a hunting license in some state, if you have something like a letter of invitation to a pistol competition or something, maybe it's OK? I think there's some ITAR form that you might need to fill out for whatever guns you are bringing with you, but that wouldn't apply if he bought his hunting rifle in the US.

Periodic reminder that state and regional conservation corps exist all over the American West and possibly elsewhere (see e.g. http://ccc.ca.gov/, https://sccorps.org/, https://thegreatbasininstitute.org/nevada-conservation-corps/, https://www.rockymountainyouthcorps.org/cc-field-life) and are sometimes cool but generally a bad deal relative to entry-level land management jobs.

It's Left but not in like standard Idpol way.

It is a strange situation. U.S. employers are usually required to confirm US citizenship or legal residency and work authorization before hiring someone, and while some employers are notoriously lax about this, school districts and other state institutions usually are not. If you don't produce a birth certificate and social security card at some point before your first paycheck, you won't be able to keep your job.

If the domain of a prince is a principality, does that make the domain of a principal a principalipality?

In a just world we would have passed legislation allowing prosocial and well behaved people the chance to make their decades-long participation in the country’s social and economic fabric official. Maybe tax them higher for a while as a sort of restitution or something.

But there is no such system that would allow a guy like this to remain. He's not productive, he's an active participant in the public schools system. Not just at the teacher level, which IMO is bad enough in most scenarios, but at the administrative level. The argument that this isn't a parasite class is incredibly weak. At best he's just following the incentives laid out before someone who wants money and prestige and has a passion for progressivism. 99% of the other scenarios he's cynical and knows he's part of a parasite class.

There was a story about someone working in a crèche here who had all the relevant clearance for working with kids and still got caught on CCTV being physically abusive.

This seems apples and oranges. There is no background check which can 100% assure you that someone is not abusive, or not a North Korean spy.

By contrast, if someone has a work visa is something which can be determined on a prima farcie basis. Sure, it is possible that he forged his visa, or stole an identity, or obtained his visa based on false statements, or blackmailed an official into improperly granting his visa, and I would not expect a school district to do the kind of digging to find these. But from what we know so far, it sounds more like they did not even check.

Is employing someone without checking their visa status (or nationality) an offense, criminal or regulatory?

In a just world we would have passed legislation allowing prosocial and well behaved people the chance to make their decades-long participation in the country’s social and economic fabric official

Isn't this just 'complying with the immigration law of the country you're trying to enter'? It's not like the guy entered originally through a Coyote over the Southern border. He had multiple hearings regarding his immigration status and then chose to ignore the final result.

Much more important to the district's union, the district is best off when someone comes in and burns everything down.

Funny, from where I stand, Trump is actually getting the executive to accomplish his goals. The national guard did occupy the cities he ordered occupied, and his ICE is busy deporting foreigners, just as his constituents wanted. His military is very willing to bomb Iran on his orders or blow up suspected drug smuggling ships.

Any bureaucracy created by a presidential edict can be destroyed by another. Any created by an act of congress can likewise be destroyed through an act of congress. Last time I checked, MAGA controlled both chambers of congress. He also has a supreme court which decided that he gets away with anything. If congress wanted to pass an act tomorrow which said that the EPA was shut down, all their guidelines void and all their employees fired, they could do that.

I mean, Trump is probably hampered by his lack of qualified personnel, with RFK just being an especially shocking case. But that is a skill issue.

I am not saying that the game is not rigged on some level. Most congress critter are likely beholden to some rich donors, and constrained with regard to what they can vote for without pissing them off. Likewise, the two-party system and party control over who gets the nomination make it hard for outsiders to win. And vast parts of the media landscape are in the hands of a few very rich people who use it to push views which are in their interests.

But the game is always going to be a bit rigged in favor of the status quo. This is why I said you might need 60% instead of merely 51%. Also, to the degree that liberal deep-state DC elites are a thing, they certainly did not prevent Trump getting elected, twice. And the media landscape is actually a lot more diverse than it ever was before the internet.

Our democracy is a sham. It's as fake as pro wrestling.

This is certainly a minority view. Now, you can of course claim that most people have been brainwashed, and if they saw reality as clearly as you do they would support the destruction of the system. In some countries, e.g. Russia, I think you would be right. But US citizens have all sorts of news sources at their fingertip, if they listen to ${EVIL_PROPAGANDA_MEDIUM}, that is by choice and not by coercion.

Iowa isn't a swing state, democrats haven't won a statewide election there in over a decade- and that was mostly Obama's personal magic.

You need to excuse the olds.

The head of a school is a principal. A principle is an underlying idea.

I’d say civil indoctrination isn’t wildly effective but it does provide a decent “anchoring” effect, where kids assume it as a baseline truth and adjust from there, rather than a first exposure be TikTok.

Also the point about mandatory service seems strange since many countries do it, and it doesn’t seem to have the same claimed impact. If anything, it often permanently disillusions young men who are experience a lot of the “sitting around bored” aspect, and witness corruption firsthand, at least in cases like Taiwan and South Korea. I assume you could figure out a better donated labor system - the Inca would have people build roads or otherwise build stuff in addition to military service and it worked well - but that would be a pretty broad change and difficult to implement well.

Outside of a major economic collapse, that is.

I absolutely am saying that it contradicts the original theory. And it is strange if you think about it. Intuitively. it makes sense that easier access to sex through dating apps should make it more widespread.

It’s a relevant fact. Not to ICE, you’re right that they like police often toss prejudicial technically-facts in press releases all the time. But to the district, because it’s against policy to carry guns onto school properties there, so if those are regularly in his car they are regularly showing up at schools. (Now do I care actually, and is that a good policy? Not actually sure.)

In theory yes, in practice nearly every superintendent wants to make their “impact” and so tosses any program affiliated with a predecessor and replaces it with their own shiny new toy that they obligate teachers to drop everything and follow. And yes, it’s horribly inefficient.

In a just world we would have passed legislation allowing prosocial and well behaved people the chance to make their decades-long participation in the country’s social and economic fabric official. Maybe tax them higher for a while as a sort of restitution or something.

We do not have such laws as far as I can tell. So in the absence of such, I see no fundamental issue with deporting him, even if it’s morally mean and probably counterproductive. I also don’t begrudge people mad about it, you know, unjust laws exist and objecting to those is normal political discourse, though this concept is on a sliding scale. Does the lack of a just law “fixing” an unjust situation have equal impact as a literal on the books unjust law? Can we allow characterization of an otherwise just law as unjust by virtue of ‘external’ flaws alone? Those questions aside, in that light some conservatives rub me the wrong way when they insist that it’s a clinical issue with correct and incorrect answers, and ‘why could liberals possibly be so mad’ is a dumb thing to wonder.

I do often wonder about what it must be like to live for decades presumably looking over your shoulder. I once drove with expired plates for nearly a year (insurance was current though) and I was constantly a little bit on edge every time I saw a cop car, and then some. Not fun, a little tiring. To do the same for decades? I guess if enforcement is spotty maybe you just forget - perhaps it was only a year or so of this (since the deportation order).

Possibly unrelated: I have no issue working for even big defense contractors, generally speaking, although a few friends and two siblings might disapprove some. But ICE? Personally I find the idea of working for them right now morally repugnant. That’s not to say ICE shouldn’t exist or anything, but my conscience simply would not allow it.

Are there not large continents of mainstream democrats calling for a conversation and a step back?

If you are expecting some sort of capitulation, i think you have a far worse model of human political behavior than is reality.

Also hot take, but i’d say that politicians have a pretty rocky relationship with what the average person wants. The squeaky wheel gets the grease. And activists are nothing if not squeaky with an incentive to play up how large of a congregation they purport to speak for.

I forgot where it states this forum was an explicitly political forum.

Or where screaming, insane people on twitter constitute the “mainstream”.

Putting lots of mental energy into politics is blatantly unhealthy behavior and a sign of an overly neurotic personality. Especially when you do it predominantly online.

Politics is the mind killer

My point is to illustrate how deceptive reporting is on these things. My choice of “coinbase app on my phone” was a deliberate choice for the exact reason you are stating.

you go online and discover that there is a huge community dedicated specifically to inflicting pain as part of their sexual expression

Oh man, this reminds me of way back in the day, an infamous court case about a bunch of (I want to say gay but I'm not entirely sure) guys who got put up on charges for nailing their dicks to planks of wood, and the judge thought this was evidence of craziness, and there was some condemnation afterwards of him for being so judgemental towards adults doing consensual stuff in the privacy of their bedrooms. Because thinking that nailing your dick to a plank is not normal behaviour is so small-minded and homophobic, yes?

Yep, here's the case. Operation Spanner is even funnier when you know what spanner means in British/Irish slang:

R v Brown [1993] UKHL 19, [1994] 1 AC 212 is a House of Lords judgment which re-affirmed the conviction of five men for their involvement in consensual unusually severe sadomasochistic sexual acts over a 10-year period. They were convicted of a count of unlawful and malicious wounding and a count of assault occasioning actual bodily harm (contrary to sections 20 and 47 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861). The key issue facing the Court was whether consent was a valid defence to assault in these circumstances, to which the Court answered in the negative. The acts involved included the nailing of a part of the body to a board, but not so as to necessitate, strictly, medical treatment.

The court found no direct precedent for sadomasochism among the senior courts (those of binding precedent) so applied the reasoning of three indirectly analogous binding cases and others.

The case is colloquially known as the Spanner case, named after Operation Spanner, the investigation which led to it.

EDIT: Oh my gosh, Keir Starmer was even involved back then, as one of the critics!

There was immediate criticism of the investigation and trial in 1990, with the Gay London Policing Group describing the sentences as "outrageous" and Andrew Puddephat, general secretary of Liberty, calling for a "right to privacy enshrined in law". Keir Starmer said the judiciary had "effectively imposed its morality on others" and argued the "unrepresentative make-up of the judiciary makes it ill-equipped to do this". The Pink Paper branded the case a homophobic "show trial" designed to "get a clear ruling on the illegality of S&M sex, especially amongst gay men".

If he was running for election in the USA, I imagine the attack ads would write themselves: "So, Keir, you still in favour of guys nailing their dicks to planks of wood?" 'Unrepresentative makeup of the judiciary' - "Starmer wants more judges who are out-and-out perverts on the bench". It would make Kamala's "government-funded sex change ops for illegal immigrants" seem like small potatoes 🤣