This is sort of off topic but the constraints credit card companies put on porn is ridiculous. Cannabis, sadly, is illegal federally. Porn is legal everywhere in the country.
I’d very much support legislation that required payment processors to not discriminate against any firm provided the business transaction is legal.
They might insofar as companies all become pro-regulation once they get big because it raises the barriers to entry for potential competition.
But absolutely, a lot of the problem are people who think “Oh that fetish is gross, therefore it should be restricted!” No. It’s gross to you so don’t watch videos of it.
Rename “blacklist” to “blocklist” in the spirit of inclusivity
Focus on reliability and accuracy rather than political bias
My guess is the purpose of rule #2 is to prevent opinion pieces and misinformation from being published as “news”. If the goal is to limit opinion articles presented as “news”, then perhaps the rule should instead clarify A) whether opinion pieces are allowed (and how that is defined) and B) if they are allowed whether they should be marked as such.
If the goal of rule #2 is to achieve some sort of “political neutrality”, I would challenge whether that should be a goal. This community has an inherent political bias that manifests in which articles people share and how they upvote or downvote. I don’t think that removing sources on the basis of political affiliation per se minimizes harm, and I strongly prefer a focus on removing posts that contain verifiable inaccuracies. Of course, it will ultimately be up to the moderation team to decide what actually constitutes misinformation (and there is bias there too), but I hope that shifting the focus toward that goal explicitly will mean that they will more carefully consider their own biases when exercising the moderation power.
Good idea, I’m not a linguistic expert or an expert on racism, but I feel like it’s not a big problem to change it, and if it makes anyone feel better, it’s worth it.
As main rule we focus on “reliability” and “Unbiasedness”. We then further explain that obvious biased posts, which are the most often “Bad thing” we see in this community, will be deleted. We don’t expect perfect articles, because they don’t exist, but we just want to make sure that posts which are only there to support a particular political movement, do not overtake this community.
Rule 5 states that opinion pieces are not allowed. We will have to judge posts that get reported because of rule 5 on a case-by-case basis, and we will make sure to communicate if there’s ever a post which is ambiguous.
Let me know if you have any other questions or concerns (:
Carlee Russell, the Alabama woman who told police she was kidnapped after she went missing for two days, was arrested on Friday and charged with two misdemeanors for making false statements to police, Hoover Police Department Chief Nicholas Derzis announced during a press conference on Friday.
I think it would be nice to have a rule that reminds people to post for a global audience. This community tends toward news that is only relevant to people in the United States. I believe that having active moderation effort to encourage more non-US-centric content would be good for the community.
I agree that this sub can be very US-centric at times, but I feel like that is a product of people’s interests. Wouldn’t it be a little bit misplaced to put a “rule” to restrict the amount of US content / encourage non-US-centric content? I’m not sure, so I’ll need some further input on that (:
Agreed. I mean, since lemmy.world/c/world already restricts itself to non-US news, /c/news seems to be the next largest logical community where both US and non-US news can be posted together. For a similar comparison, I appreciate r/news’ description: “The place for news articles about current events in the United States and the rest of the world.”
The Department of State warned in a statement of a high threat of violent crime and kidnapping throughout the city. It added that the US government’s capacity to provide emergency services to US citizens in Haiti is severely constrained.
Right, but that’s for your personal privacy, not your legal protection. If a weed company calls itself Cheshire Garden Supplies instead of Weed Weedersons Weed Emporium then that doesn’t stop the fact that you bought stuff from a weed dispensary from being a federal crime if push comes to shove. All I’m saying is that cash seems the naturally more sensible option either way.
I don’t live in the US… but if at a certain time the federal government decides to go backwards and wants to charge cannabis purchasers with federal crimes then you’re ready to be served up on a platter by your bank.
The context here is payment method, not your willingness to support legal cannabis dispensers.
That would be a pretty big list of people at this point. I don’t think it would even be possible to charge all of them. It’s just unrealistic especially since it’s legal in the state. Possible but unlikely.
You say that, but historically cannabis related charges in particular have been used to target specific parts of the population and individuals. It’s the sort of thing that could be exploited nefariously at a convenient moment. Perhaps I’m reading too much in to it.
I disagree. The federal government has shown every willingness to go after all of us. Imagine a 1000 dollar fine for every pot transaction. You can fight it if you want but that would risk criminal charges. So you take the plea deal.
Agree. Which is why if the federal government decides to put a clamp down on cannabis use, they’re not going to prosecute thousands of users. Prosecuting three or four card payment processing companies and the banks they do business with would have an icy cold chilling effect and bring the industry’s cash flows to a dead stop.
What if dozens/hundreds of individuals were prosecuted for possession of a controlled substance because the DEA a) subpoenas the suppliers to get a list of transactions and B) subpoenas the credit card processors to get info on customers?
Because that’s the fear
This is extremely unlikely under the current admin, but we may very well have a far more hostile admin in just under 18 months
I think running away as a child can be a very different situation than you imagine. “Running away” to the local park or your friend’s house after a disagreement with your parents, sure. But a lot of kids run away because their basic needs aren’t being met or they are being abused. Kids shouldn’t be expected to be able to weigh the consequences of leaving a home with resources to avoid abuse, but adults should absolutely be expected to weigh the consequences of leaving society.
I completely understand your point and will agree that many people take our day to day luxuries for granted, but society is just as capable of constantly beating you down and taking from you as much as it provides.
I can’t blame anyone for trying to “disappear”, but at least do some extensive planning.
Are you trying to “well, actually” me? There were a myriad of choices made here, all under the guise of “living off the grid.” I very specifically used a plural word, not a singular one. Choices. All of them stupid, including the one you protest as not stupid. It is made stupid by way of their sheer incompetence, unpreparedness, lack of education and training in the matter, and their sheer stubbornness to not call it quits when reality descended upon them.
Your reply is coming across as needlessly aggressive, but I’m not sure if I’m just projecting my years of Reddit interaction onto you. I had no ill intentions when I replied to your initial post, only wanted to offer my two cents on a public forum, which in this case was making a distinction as to what is considered stupid in this context. To further clarify, what I posted was not a protest and was an opinion meant to further the discussion.
“Living off the grid” can also be referred to as self-sustainable living and it seems to be growing in popularity as modern society becomes more exclusive, artificial, and unhealthy. Taking the knowledge you’ve gained and skills you’ve learned in order to live sustainably by yourself in nature, away from the bullshit of modern life is, personally, not stupid, which was the original point I was trying to make. But, as you mentioned, it is when people decide to just quit everything because they had a bad day, but have no tools or skills to survive that is very ill-informed to say the least.
Overall prices will increase slightly and at a slower ratewhich is fine. We do not want prices to decrease overall. That causes a whole host of issues. What we want is low, consistent inflation so that you know roughly what prices will be next year.
Some things will decrease in price, of course, but overall prices went up very slightly. One other thing to note is that this specific indicator does not take food and energy prices into account. There is another indicator for that.
It looks like the inflation rate for food is coming down but it is still higher than typical. The war in Ukraine and bad crop yields in China because of heat waves are likely responsible for that. Energy prices look like they have dropped pretty significantly though.
This might be unpopular, but I’m not sure how being the mother of a victim is a qualification to be mayor. I’m not saying changes in the police force aren’t needed but being a mayor isn’t a single issue position.
That’s not what qualifies her. She works at the local newspaper. She knows what is going on in the community. That is what qualifies her. That she also has an agenda to improve things because of the loss she went through is secondary, but still important.
Are you going to make us list all the politicians who have zero qualifications now? Like a certain Congress woman with barely a GED? It seems the only qualification Republicans require these days is to not give a shit about anyone else.
news
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.