That’s nothing, I’ve been transplanting pig tissue into my organs for years and I’m doing fine. Some of the biggest risks come from the cooking stage but it’s otherwise pleasant.
Because of her intent and crimes- she had genuine murderous intent as the judgement said. She seemed very cruel and unhinged according to the article and presented evidence and the video showed her crying due to the judgement.
It’s been two years since she murdered those people. She could easily feel true remorse now.
I’m in no way trying to excuse her actions, I just think it’s worth trying to do some level of empathizing for people. Not that what she did was in any way justified, but I can’t imagine trying to live with myself if I got angry enough to murder someone.
It's all speculation and assumptions anyway ! We can see different things. I feel disgust and see regret and you may see someone possibly showing remorse. We just don't know for sure either way.
Crying when the sentence was read doesn’t say anything one way or the other about her feeling or not remorse because that specific moment is about what’s going to happen to her, not about others, so she’s crying for herself.
She almost certainly feels regret (which is entirelly about the consequences for herself), but it’s unclear that she feels remorse (which is about the consequences for others of her actions).
Sure seems like she had a lot of issues at 17, that’s for sure. Most 17-year-olds don’t murder their friends and boyfriends.
I find her family’s attitude toward the whole thing troubling. I know my family, if I were in this situation and they had the same evidence, would be telling me to plead guilty and take responsibility. I have a feeling that concept was never big in her upbringing or her family’s.
Again it’s tragic for the victims, not for her. Saying it’s tragic all the way down, is a false equivalence.
I don’t want to be argumentative, but there is no false equivalence in my position. I never tried to apply any equivalence. Things can be tragic without being equivalently tragic, and one thing being tragic does not take away the tragedy of something else.
I think one could argue that you’re falling prey to the fallacy of relative privation. “X is worse than Y, so we shouldn’t care about Y.”
Tragedy is not a zero sum game. It is absolutely tragic that those young men were murdered. It is tragic that their families lost their loved ones. It is also tragic that this young woman thought the proper solution to her problems was to attempt murder-suicide. It is tragic that she threw away any promise her own life held along with theirs. It is perhaps not tragic, but certainly sad and troubling, that her family seems to think she did nothing wrong.
Yes, it’s more tragic for the victims, but it her story is still a tragedy.
It is important to note that I am in no way trying to excuse her actions or argue for leniency. She murdered two people in a horrible and reckless action. There are consequences for that action beyond the direct ones.
But empathy is important even for those we may hate.
Just wanted to say that I love this comment, and it’s a shame that so few people share this sentiment. Thank you for this.
I was actually just having an argument with my brother about this less than a month ago. Not this exact story, but a similar one where I was sad for everyone involved. He also fell into the “x is worse than y, so we shouldn’t care about y” mindset.
I didn’t realize there was a name for that, so thank you for that too!
It’s something that people often forget (because they aren’t like that themselves and have normal human reactions) is that narcisists, sociopaths, psychopaths and people with similar psychological disfunctions that make them act in “cold hearted” ways do feel.
However they feel only for themselves, never for others.
Great. Racism is bad and we should stamp it out wherever we find it. I find the punditry around this one troubling. As though white people can't experience racism.
White people can’t experience systemic racism in the US. A whole load of people can’t articulate the difference between systemic racism and plain ol race based bigotry racism.
Anecdotally, but I (a white dude) have been told that my race would eliminate me for job consideration in the past.
I’m not equating the systemic racism against whites to that suffered by other minorities, but to claim it simply doesn’t exist is wrong. I’ve experienced it.
Edit: I should clarify that I am Canadian, but the culture is similar enough for my point to stand.
What exactly is your point? Where and when were white people denied jobs because they were white? You say you experienced it, but you also just say that someone told you about it. I’m pretty skeptical that you experienced systemic racism towards whites lol
So because you don’t believe it happened, it couldn’t have happened? How enlightened of you. FTR: Have you heard of affirmative action? Spend some time thinking about what that was and all that it entailed to the individuals at the time it was implemented.
First off I never said I “heard” about it. I said I was told. As in when I went in for a job, I was told I wasn’t going to get it cause I was white. And they (govt agency) were not permitted to hire white people.
And affirmative action was absolutely systemic racism. It was literally telling people and institutions that they needed to hire less white men and more minorities. I’m not arguing that it was a necessary evil required to correct years of injustice. I’m just saying that at the time it was implemented (also the same time I entered the work force), govt agencies and private companies were essentially strong armed by the government to not hire white men. How is that not systematic racism?
Listen we obviously have different stances on this and I’m not going to get into a drawn out argument over this. I do t care that much, it was years ago. But don’t tell me that it didn’t happen. I’m was there, you weren’t.
The only reason Affirmative action is a thing is because whites are already overrepresented in the work force. If we’re talking about a race, how can this policy be institutional racism when the race that you claim it affects negatively is actually still overrepresented at all levels of power??
Sucks for you, but you clearly got over it with ease. You weren’t imprisoned for an 8th of weed a cop stashed in your car at a traffic stop.
Keep acting like your minor inconvenience is evidence of systemic white oppression tho.
I’m not even disagreeing that it’s discriminatory, but institutional/systemic racism is by definition at a high level. It affects individuals but the scope is much higher level. So it cannot be evidence of said racism against whites. That’s why people get argumentative about this. It’s hard for the white race to be simultaneously oppressed and enjoying the majority of global power, right?
Going back to the imprisonment for weed example, that’s the kind of thing that could have real generational impact. You having to job search for an extra few weeks or months probably didn’t affect your grandchildren, right? The statistics for black men in prison for non violent crimes is shocking in the states.
Once again I’m not equating anything I experienced to experiences had by minorities. My original comment was refuting a user who said it didn’t happen. So your weed imprisonment example is irrelevant. I’m simply saying it does exist.
And it absolutely existed at high levels. Affirmative action wasn’t something we all just decided to do, it was legislated.
And just because there is a majority of whites in power doesn’t mean that a law limiting the hiring of whites erases the racism of that law. Both things can happen simultaneously.
Once again I’m not equating anything I experienced to experiences had by minorities.
By claiming to have been a victim of systemic racism, this is exactly what you are doing. You don’t get to say that you were a victim of systemic racism, because systemic racism against white people is literally im-fucking-possible because they control (and created) the system.
Sure. The point I’m trying to make is that I, a white dude, was told by hiring managers at several places including government agencies that I would not be considered for the position as I was white and at the time there were policies in place that prohibited the hiring of white men. Ergo, there was systemic racism in place at that time.
I try to make sure to verbalize the difference in these conversations and label them separately as systemic, such as government and other systems dictated by the majority race. White people can’t experience that kind of racism most of the time, because they are usually the majority party in those systems.
And then interpersonal racism. The racism anyone of any race, creed, or color can experience and put out on others. You could be the last of your kind and still be a horribly racist motherfucker when it came to your interpersonal relationships. And you could hate and be racist against any race whether they are the majority or not.
Not a conservative, and I’ve heard people in person argue that racism requires you to hold power, ergo you can’t be racist against white people, since they’ve got all the power.
Is it everyone on the left that believes it, obviously not. But there is a very loud segment that does.
There’s a very loud segment of conservatives that belive Trump is the second coming of Jesus, but it would be inaccurate to state that conservatives think that Trump is the second coming of Jesus.
When the word is used in an academic or legal context, that’s what it means. It’s not a “belief”, it’s the definition.
“Believing” that bigotry without systemic power is racism is just playing idiotic semantic games. You know what they mean and yet you’re trying to communicate badly on purpose to “win”.
It’s just an imbecilic fascist word game, and you’re either complicit or you fell for it.
I think the problem stems from there being two beliefs (that I know of so far) where people believe in systemic racism and some believe in social racism. My fiance believes in systemic racism where you can’t be racist to someone who is white because their race is in power of the government, we bud heads all the time because that doesn’t make any sense to me
Wait, they transplanted a pig's kidney into a... corpse? How did they get authorization for that experiment exactly? The family donated the body to science? I know they'd have just kept him on dialysis if they were actually attempting to prolong his heart beating corpse status.
The possibility that pig kidneys might one day help ease a dire shortage of transplantable organs persuaded the family of Maurice “Mo” Miller from upstate New York to donate his body for the experiment.
“I struggled with it,” his sister, Mary Miller-Duffy, told the AP about her decision. But he liked helping others and “I think this is what my brother would want. So I offered my brother to them.”
"He’s going to be in the medical books, and he will live on forever,” she added.
Because it’s a pointless waste of money that’ll stop people from getting anywhere in life.
I am not going to repay mine. If I have to make major purchases in another country, I will. If I have to expatriate to escape the debt, I will. But I am not gonna give them a dime of my money, at least until I’m rich enough that paying off the debt won’t affect me in any meaningful way.
There is nothing you can say or do to change the truth behind what I said or convince me to adopt your way of thinking on the matter. I will not pay student loan debt and that’s final.
I find this interesting. By all accounts it seems it is unavoidable but to pay it back, so I am really curious how you plan to escape it. College prices are certainly predatory and this whole thing is awful, I just haven’t seen a real solution for those suffering. It seems like the new slavery to me. Is there a viable escape?
In my case it’s a moot point since I am going back to college to finish my degree next year, and student loan payments are paused while you go to school at least half time.
I think the best plan for people is to do all business through LLCs – maybe negotiate as a group with your bosses to have checks sent to an LLC where they are then distributed to individual members. They get taxed that way but oh well. I have no idea if companies would do that.
Failing that, conduct all business in crypto. Band together with a group of people, buy land in a remote place, set up mobile homes or RVs there and escape everything.
Ride out the student loan renegotiation process as long as possible.
Expatriate.
Start businesses and then just refuse to garnish employee wages. Switch assets to different LLCs to avoid the IRS.
Try to apply for poverty based forgiveness – I don’t know if that’s still a thing or not.
Honestly, if millions of people banded together and just refused to pay the loans outright, and went on strike from them, it could cripple the money lenders and force them to the table to negotiate, and hopefully wipe the debt.
Honestly, if millions of people banded together and just refused to pay the loans outright, and went on strike from them, it could cripple the money lenders
All the people here screaming “but they will garnish your wages!!” keep forgetting that it only works that way if there are a few people at a time who can’t pay. The whole thing falls apart if enough people refuse to pay.
What about younger people who need loans? Your refusal to pay will hurt future generations by making their loans more expensive or just impossible to get.
You could have just made college free for them, but you’ve already proven handily you don’t give a fuck about future generations, only yourself. So your opinion and talking points mean nothing
I know that I’m personally gonna blame this one random person on the Internet for all of our student loan problems. Definitely not gonna blame all the systematic issues.
I don’t use TikTok, and there are a ton of reasons to be concerned about sending massive amounts of data to corporations, especially when they’re state associated, but a very large amount of apps scan your clipboard.
Have you ever had an app text you a one time use code, and automatically input it? That app scans your clipboard. Facebook, Instagram, X, all scan your clipboard.
I see this brought up a lot and it just seems like the wrong argument against TikTok.
It doesn’t show any more private than Facebook, Instagram and X. Also you should aware that you are mixing up a legitimate usecase of the clipboard than a more malicious usecase. Tiktok also repeatedly scans the clipboard instead of a one time thing for SMS codes.
All of those are espionage channels for unaccountable, non-democratic organisations with a history of interfering with democracies and funding coups. All should be considered equally malicious.
This is so incredibly inaccurate. Nazi’s killed communists before coming for other groups. In fact, communists were one of the largest roadblocks to Nazi’s gaining power so they were one of the first groups be be targeted and eliminated. Despite what the name of the National Social German Workers’ Party might have you assume, the Nazi party were very much capitalists. They deregulated, supported business owners, squashed unions and even privatized public industries. All of these are hallmarks of capitalism. The one thing I will agree with is being anti-fascist means being anti-nazi, however this doesn’t work the other way around. Equating communism with either fascism or nazism is asinine. Comparing fascism and nazism to neoliberalism would be much closer to an apt comparison.
Instances should ban other instances with heavy communist content and users that advertise the communist ideology, just like they’re most likely doing to nazism and other harmful ideologies.
These are both ideologies that pray on the weak minded and on their life issues. Oddly they began in the same way, they both hate someone because they were wealthy while some in society were passing through difficulties. In case of nazis they hated on the jews, in case of communists they hate on everyone that has any money at all.
my point being you have no idea what the fuck you’re talking about, liberalism (which im assuming you are) has historically killed more people than communism and further more is activelly still killing millions of people in modern wars and trade embargos
And capitalism, and the resulting lack of basic medical care in America despite us spending the most money per capita on it, killed my son and my dad. Go fuck yourself with a piece of rusty rebar you inhuman piece of shit. Tired of trying to have good faith arguments with folks like you. I’m ready to just start shooting on sight
Even attempting to draw a parallel like that between race/ethnicity and material wealth is a fairly questionable take to most rational people I’d say, or at least hope.
They did it and with success. Sadly when people are having a hard time they will be always search for someone to blame, and that’s why those populist nazis/communists/socialists/fascists come in.
They always blame the problems on a specific class of people, then they present themselves as the “solution”.
Trump did the same with the mexicans, and it worked.
You may have misunderstood my comment; it was intended to suggest that I strongly question your values and priorities because you’re attempting to equate something as innate as race with material wealth. I’d go further to say that your conflating communism and socialism with nazism and fascism is merely ideological drivel.
The fact they seem to think communism, a ideology with scientific princables at its core and advocated for by Einstein reproduces by preying on the ‘weak minded’ clearly tells me how they view neuro-divergent people who dare to ask for representation too.
what the hell are you talking about? Victor d’Hupay was an aristocrat. John Goodwyn Barmby was a Chartist, one of whose literal tenets is “pay persons of modest means if they have to serve the interests of the nation”. Thomas Moore was the Lord High Chancellor to Henry VIII. Charles Fourier was the equivalent of a millionaire at age 9. Marx was a lawyer. Engels was the son of a wealthy mill owners. William Morris was the son of what today we’d call a Wall Street fatcat. Kropotkin’s family owned serfs.
Nearly everyone involved in suffrage movements started wealthy and observed the treatment of the poor and was moved to do something about it.
Yeah Lemmygrad and Hexbear are garbage. They’re not fully about communism though, they’re designed to look like communism and support the CCP (and Kremlin).
Exploding Heads is just as bad on the other end of the spectrum. They’re ruining Lemmy, I’d be ashamed to recommend it to anyone with all the authoritarian propaganda.
Ah yes, the ultimate form of communism: VENTURE CAPITALISM.
And I think you need to investigate how a lot of open source gets funded (if it does at all) and why. It’s definitely not communism and in some cases, it’s a worse model than even capitalism.
Because the internet itself functions based on the ideals of Communism… Literally.
There are many moving pieces to “the Internet”. Literally none fundamentally work based on Communism. Any “free work” is a fancy version of Black Friday doorbuster sales.
Who designed the internet?
The United States military and research universities. Universities fund research to attract prestige, patentable technology, court donations, etc.
Did they make everyone pay for it?
The early Internet was not available, period. For pay or not. Al Gore as Senator, pushed for it to open it for commercial exploitation and commercial ISP’s began. Unless you had 500 hours of free AOL dialup, you were paying for it.
Who designs and maintains the protocols the internet uses to communicate with?
Cisco, IBM, Google, AWS, and others hire engineers to sit on the IETF, w3c, etc committees. They publish protocols so their employers can sell new products or maintain marketshare. As a side gig, they also review and approve protocols like ActivityPub.
Do they charge licensing fees for you to use them?
No, the expense is recouped when companies buy products that are built around those products.
Who writes the encryption algorithms that make HTTPS actually secure?
RSA is a multi-billion dollar security company. HTTPS certificates are products that you purchase from Certificate Authorities. Let’s Encrypt is funded by commercial companies to ensure consumer confidence in their main products.
Are they open source?
Sure. The algorithms are also reviewed and approved by NIST, a Communist agency run by the Communist country, the United States of America. You generally do not commercially use use an algorithm if it has not been approved by NIST.
Can you use them without paying a licensing fee?
Yes. Again, the expense is recouped when companies buy products that are built around those products.
Who designs and maintains the HTML specification?
Google, Apple, Mozilla, etc.
JavaScript?
As above.
Video codecs that make YouTube function without royalties?
Streaming services are communism now?
Communism is EVERYWHERE, and it’s glorious. Why do you so utterly fail to understand what it even is?
You remind me of a quote: “Libertarians are like house cats: absolutely convinced of their fierce independence while utterly dependent on a system they don’t appreciate or understand.”
I'm glad companies are pulling out of X but I've never understood this reasoning for removing your ads tbh.
Every single person who sees your ad knows that it has just been served by the website and has nothing to do with the post/content or author.
Like on youtube, why do companies not wanna advertise on a video with cussing? We all know that the language used in the video has nothing to do with the ad playing before.
Nazis were very stupid people. Conservatives in Germany in the 30s were appalled at these chicken farmer bumpkins trying to tell them about what true German values were. They oozed of anti-intellectualism and refused to educate or read. Which is how these morons invaded Russia in winter.
I never understood the logic. I think someone with half a brain understands that the ad is given by the platform, not the creator of the content. The platform shows that ad to you because algorithms think you’re interested in seeing that, does have nothing to do with the creator you’re watching.
Out of interest can you give some examples of what you have gotten removed? Both on Reddit and Lemmy I have seen users post that they are not having success when putting in moderation requests. Either they are faking those screenshots or the moderation is at the very least hit and miss.
“The platform shows that ad to you because algorithms think you’re interested in seeing”
There’s your answer right there. The platform sees what you’re interested in and serves up this ad. “You seem to be interested in a whole bunch of Nazi shit, here’s an ad for my product” is not a good look for most companies. It’s very simple PR.
In this case since the algorithm doesn’t (obviously) have nazi advertising to show you, it shows what it has instead.
So the companies clearly don't want to then become associated with nazi-posting, because then it might have the connotation of being Nazi adjacent because they didn't say anything. That's basically the definition of tacit support.
How is it so hard to understand that normal people don't want to associate or even be implied to associate with Nazis or their content? Pulling out of twatter is the only sure fire way of keeping their ads away from the Nazi base that's made it's home on twatter with the express approval of its idiot founder.
Association is unavoidable regardless of logic since it is an emotional response. Much like disliking a certain food you associate with a person that was mean to you. Marketing is a Social Science not a Technical one.
IDK if you know this but… rarely is it the food, as long as they get it to temp it should be fine (and lets be honest most dumpser burger joints are overcooking their food). Most often its your own hands that are the reason for food poisoning. Think about all the things you touched (your phone?) between the time you washed your hands and the time you touched the food that went into your mouth. Especially with food that you eat with your hands.
It’s a platform that allows and encourages Nazi content. If your ad is getting served next to Nazi content on a website that allows and encourages Nazi content, it stands to reason that you do, in fact, support Nazis because you bought the ad in the first place. Twixxer or whatever tf it’s called has undergone a lot of fast changes and sometimes corporations are slow to react so I can give the benefit of the doubt up to a certain point, but at this point we all know that you’re supporting right wing terrorists by advertising on Twitter.
Huh… So companies can’t be racist against white people?!?
I hope this brings about a whole ton of new lawsuits as workers finally say enough is enough with token hires which push out white employees only to fill a position with a minority just to fill some arbitrary and rather bullshit diversity target.
I hope this brings about a whole ton of new lawsuits as workers finally say enough is enough with token hires which push out white employees only to fill a position with a minority just to fill some arbitrary and rather bullshit diversity target.
Middle aged white guy here. I've been in my field about 30 years. I've had a lot of different jobs in that field. I've worked with a lot of people who weren't white. Somehow, in all that time, I've never run across one of these "token hires" who were only there because of their skin color.
I've met a lot of bigoted, racist white folks though. When you look like the stereotypical maga, folks are pretty free to share their ugliest opinions with you. Most of them have no idea (and will never try to deepen their understanding) about why the benefits of diversity are more than just not having exclusively white faces around.
Ditto here: I’ve actually seen “token” hires on gender (and only in one place), never on race.
Furthermore, that one place which had gender quotas and which at least in the departmemt I was working with clearly had hired some people for their gender, not their competence, had massive corporate culture and even profitability problems (think bankrupt bank with strong political connections that got unconditionally rescued with taxpayer money after the 2008 Crash and just kept losing billions and getting even more disfunctional).
It makes zero business sense to care about anything but competence when hiring somebody, and I say this as somebody who has actually been part of hiring decisions in a few places.
There were two women that were rumored to have been hired/promoted into a VP position and a Director position only for their gender about 6 years ago. I didn't work with either of them closely. They both left the company a year later. I'm not sure whether that was vindication of the rumors, or just a turn of circumstance, but worst case their gender bought them only a temporary position.
Just to be clear - plenty more women in both leadership and technical positions, and have been for years. Just those two were the only ones where I ever got a hint of that sort of thing.
I think we're overall in agreement, just putting a finer point on it - On this and the related racial topic, I'm of the opinion that far more people think these policies result in unqualified people getting jobs they don't deserve than ever actually happens. No business has payroll to spare that they can just shovel onto worthless bodies to satisfy diversity goals, and I refuse to believe that there's more than a vanishingly small percentage of folks who remain in such a position longer than the time it takes for management to realize they are worthless.
Well managed places hire the best person for the job and don’t need to try to hide the visible results (racial or gender imbalances in a company which cannot be explained by pre-existing manpower inbalances in that professional domain) of the kind of widespread mismanagement which includes treating hiring responsabilities as a license to do favours for one’s mates, using yet more merit-ignoring practices such as quotas.
It really isn’t a benefit for anybody to be hired as a token anything because places which hire people for token reasons are just covering up mismanagement with it and are thus not good places to work in.
PS: I can tell you from my own professional experience which is quite extensive (as I worked as a Freelancer in most of my career so saw a lot more places than average) that lots of places do have payrol to spare and there’s a lot of wastefulness going on in the business world: the idea of a Free Market where there’s lots of competition is pure fantasy in a lot of domains and even in competitive areas non-core-business departments often have a lot more budge than they would if they were in an Industry were what they do is core to the business.
On the outside of businesses, the Economy is riddled with markets with less than “flat playing fields” (most of them, actually have barriers to entry, some even being natural cartels and monopolies) and the very same informational-advantages that allow for example companies in expert domains to swindle non-expert customers (say, car mechanics overcharging) also apply inside the companies themselves (which is why people at times discover to their surprise that the CEO of their company is a complete total idiot).
Old lady here - I was the first woman in my role in a couple of jobs back in the 80s and was accused of being a token plenty of times. Had to slog my way uphill through a mountain of sexist shit every single day while seeing men cruise along because they played golf with someone high up.
The “old boys network” is still alive and well, though its “membership” criteria are usually on things other than gender specifically: for example in the UK “membership” is often having gone to the right exclusive private schools and as those are often gender-segregated (i.e. “all boys schools” and “all girls schools”), you end up with discrimination in both the gender and social class one was born in axes.
Personally I find the whole “being buddies with the boss” type career progression extremelly unprofessional and any manager who is taking decisions in a professional capacity based on who his or her mates are, is working against the best interests of the company and needs to be replaced.
Then again, my professional training during my core professional learning years was mostly done in The Netherlands so I’m very strict on such things in the context of the management cultures in other countries I worked in such as the UK and Portugal were cronyism is rife in management, often linked to the kind of pre-existing relationships formed in non-gender-neutral situations.
PS: And the place were I saw “token” women openly had quotas and the incompetent but somehow working here thing only affected permanent employees in management positions. The interesting part is that of the 3 female low level managers in my department one was clearly very competent, one was clearly very incompetent and one was unclear. Further, this was the single most sexist (as in, very machist) place I ever worked (and my career now spans two and a half decades and 4 countries).
I get the feeling that the very competent manager there who happenned to be a woman lost from there being quotas for female managers rather than gained from it (she constantly had to prove her competence and was often not take seriously), whilst clearly the incompetent one was only there because of quotas and in meetings acted as an “attractive female provider of adoration” for her manager.
None of this justifies the unjust treatment you suffered, by the way.
news
Newest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.