I don’t have a car but someone close to me does. Mostly for visiting family outside the city. I’ve said this often enough when we’re stuck in traffic that now she just looks at me and preemptively says "don’t say it!’

Yeah, this is one of the reasons why I only want to live in the NYC area of the US. Just take the train or bus, don’t worry about it.

Zero. I can use some of the 7 for holidays.

Well, sort of. The state gives you 56 hours of sick leave, which isn’t technically the same as vacation. Mental health, even without diagnosis, is a permitted use. My job didn’t give me any grief when I used some of my time to cover the holidays, but I didn’t have enough so some days I just didn’t get paid. (You acrue time off by working, and I started late in the year)

Oh, and this company also really dragged their feet on answering my questions about it, and told me one rule that’s just illegal here. I ended up looking it up myself, and thankfully they didn’t push back.

https://www.ny.gov/programs/new-york-paid-sick-leave if you’re morbidly curious.

Edit: they also had the nerve to send out “happy holidays!” Emails wishing me happy and healthy times. No pay, just thoughts and prayers.

I work for a shitty big ass company. I get the legal minimum of time off. In new York that’s seven days a year. One of my coworkers is in Texas, so she gets zero.

The us is an embarrassment

Edit: and technically that’s sick leave, not vacation time. I don’t think you need to prove you were sick, and mental health without a diagnosis seems like it’s covered, but if you said you wanted to go on a trip they might say that’s not allowed.

Highlights for the curious: https://ag.ny.gov/resources/individuals/workers-rights/benefits-and-leave

Allowing them on the platform doesn’t mean a full endorsement of the belief. It means that he (or whoever makes the decision) finds the belief acceptable enough to platform.

There is likely some line which is too far, and not allowed on the platform. Perhaps “eating live babies”? “Kicking puppies”? Something that is so unacceptable, it would not be allowed. This argument is that ICE and Nazi stuff belongs on the far side. That as a platform owner, you can say “that’s not allowed here”.

Allowing one person to say “I think the NY Yankees are the best” and another to say “I think the NY mets are the best” on your platform (eg: website, newspaper, bulletin board) doesn’t mean that you personally believe both. But if you let someone post “I think white people are best” and just leave that up, that’s saying that’s an acceptable message to say. Just harmless like talking about baseball.

This argument is some positions, like what ICE is doing, is outside the range of acceptable. The platform (a website in this case) should say they have to take that elsewhere.

It would mean that communism is acceptable to him. What’s tripping you up here?

Yes it does. It means they are okay enough with them to not ban them.

Surely there are some things that warrant a ban on bluesky. There’s some sort of line beyond which you are not welcome. We can infer from this verification that ice is on the safe side of the line.

The amount of times I see official guides saying just pipe curl into bash is too much. Sometimes even with sudo!

My parents tried this many years ago.

Since then my dad has gotten better- he runs Ubuntu and so far as I know keeps it up to date. My mother on the other hand gets upset if anything at all changes on her computer, and so never updates or anything

Eliminating speed cameras is tacit approval of speeding.

It’s a little insane to me how speeding is handled.

If it’s a serious law, it should be uniformly enforced. None of this “cops pull over some people” nonsense that opens the door to harassment and quotas.

Furthermore, fines need to scale with wealth.

Cars should be expensive to capture more of their true costs.

But if you really wanted to bring the cost down, probably removing the profit motive would go farther. Nationalize it.

One time I saw NK Jemisen , author of the broken earth trilogy give a talk. Someone asked about climate change and she said something like “there’s only a small number of people responsible for most of this problem, and we know where they live”

The audience cheered and clapped. The guy moderating the talk got real flustered.

Not the building super, nor my friend when she came by with a drain snake that one time.

Or, to use an example that’s not trying so hard to be a pun: you go down to the local rec center to find a pickup game of basketball or whatever. No one’s paying anyone. You go, find a game, have a good time, and leave. Maybe see each other again. Maybe not. Is that sociopathy?

There’s a wide range of options between utterly repulsive and loved. That’s a huge excluded middle. Do you think people don’t fuck on the first date?

You deleted your other reply I already replied to, so I’m pasting what I wrote here:

You’re shifting the topic. You said,

No, I’m pretty sure that people who use each other for solely selfish purposes is a primary symptom of sociopathy

Note this claim isn’t about sex. It’s a broad claim that any circumstances where one party uses another for selfish purpose is sociopathy.

Since getting someone to fix a clogged toilet is using someone for selfish purposes, your claim would make that sociopathy. I think that’s absurd, and thus your claim is false.

I hate to break it to you but people who like to have sex with each other on a regular basis without exchanging money or other favors, they probably love each other but they’re so scared of the word love because for some reason in recent decades the word love has been become taboo.

Citations needed. You just made this up and I see no reason to take your word for it that people are scared of the word love, nor that love has become taboo. Furthermore, many people have regular sex without feeling love.

You’re taking your world view and beliefs and claiming they’re far more universal than they are.

You’re shifting the topic. You said,

No, I’m pretty sure that people who use each other for solely selfish purposes is a primary symptom of sociopathy

Note this claim isn’t about sex. It’s a broad claim that any circumstances where one party uses another for selfish purpose is sociopathy.

Since getting someone to fix a clogged toilet is using someone for selfish purposes, your claim would make that sociopathy. I think that’s absurd, and thus your claim is false.

Edit: person I replied to deleted their message, so I reposted this where they reposted.

I tell people about lemmy and send them links. Mostly people don’t care about anything. Abstract or remote things like “should a platform be owned by one asshole?” just doesn’t even enter their brain.

I don’t let the problem get that bad in the first place.

On my computer, I close the browser end of day and all the tabs go away. On my phone, it auto archives tabs I haven’t looked at in a week. I close those periodically, but a few I use as off brand bookmarks (eg: a recipe I like)

Thus hiring someone to fix your plumbing or do your yard work is sociopathy?

Also two people can have mutually enjoyable sex without “love”.

You’ve got a weird take.

Api thing was the final straw. But also privately owned for private mega media is bad, so fuck them.