NaibofTabr

Hmm…

Sweden is a highly developed country ranked fifth in the Human Development Index. It is a constitutional monarchy and a parliamentary democracy,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sweden

Sweden has achieved a high standard of living under a mixed system of high-tech capitalism and extensive welfare benefits.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Sweden

As a unitary state with a constitutional monarchy, Norway divides state power between the parliament, the cabinet, and the judiciary, as determined by the 1814 constitution.

The Norwegian economy is an example of a mixed economy; a prosperous capitalist welfare state, it features a combination of free market activity and large state ownership in certain key sectors, influenced by both liberal governments from the late 19th century and later by social democratic governments in the postwar era.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norway

Well, credit to Wikipedia and the people who spend so much time maintaining the articles there.

One other note I’ll make, just to avoid misinterpretation: repeating this information in this context might make it seem like I am particularly critical of the US, but I am not.

Very few other nations have such a legislative history of various groups being explicitly enfranchised. This is because in most other nations, disenfranchised groups are rarely if ever enfranchised throughout the nation’s entire history. The fact that the US has so many such instances in its legal history puts it in front of other nations in this context, not behind.

Dealing with bigotry in the US has been a long and violent process, and we’re not done, but at least we are dealing with it.

Bigotry was not one of our founding principles.

You say that, but…

1790: The Naturalization Act of 1790 limited citizenship to “free white persons.”[23] In practice, only white male property owners could naturalize and acquire the status of citizens, and the vote.

The 1828 presidential election was the first in which non-property-holding white males could vote in the vast majority of states. By the end of the 1820s, attitudes and state laws had shifted in favor of universal white male suffrage.

It was not until the passing of the Fifteenth Amendment that men of all races were allowed to vote:

1870: The Fifteenth Amendment prevents state governments and the federal government from denying the right to vote on grounds of “race, color, or previous condition of servitude”.

And it would be another 50 years before women were granted the right to vote:

1920: Women are guaranteed the right to vote in all US States by the Nineteenth Amendment. In practice, the same restrictions that hindered the ability of poor or non-white men to vote now also applied to poor or non-white women.

There’s some other interesting bits in here:

1943: Chinese immigrants given the right to citizenship and the right to vote by the Magnuson Act.

1948: Arizona and New Mexico became one of the last states to extend full voting rights to Native Americans, which had been opposed by some western states in contravention of the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924.

1965: Protection of voter registration and voting for racial minorities, later applied to language minorities, is established by the Voting Rights Act of 1965. This has also been applied to correcting discriminatory election systems and districting.

1966: Tax payment and wealth requirements for voting in state elections are prohibited by the Supreme Court in Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections, under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_rights_in_the_United_States#Milestones_of_national_franchise_changes

So… it seems like the bigotry has kind of always been part of the system, and had to be specifically legislated against ex post facto.

Um, if by “they” you mean SCOTUS, in this case declining to hear Trump’s appeal means that the previous court’s ruling on the case stands. The previous court ruled against Trump in favor of Carroll. This basically means that SCOTUS decided Trump’s appeal had no legal merit (although it did take them awhile).

And yet, somehow Microsoft can’t figure out how to monetize video games.

Rosen misses what he considers to be a bygone era of elite dominance. Lamenting the current state of democratized influence, Rosen says “the old gatekeepers were political professionals who could count cards; small dollar donors today are amateurs yanking the handles of ActBlue slot machines.”

Abundance adherents often bristle at the suggestion that the project is orchestrated by Silicon Valley elites. But as the leaked documents demonstrate, Rosen and his colleagues clearly view it as such, and even frequently use the word “elite” by choice.

ROSEN OPERATES AT THE NEXUS of tech titans’ “hostile takeover” of San Francisco politics through a “grey money” network, documented in reporting from The Guardian and Mission Local. The Phoenix Project has dubbed this overlapping set of organizations and campaigns the “Astroturf Network” and detailed its operations in a set of reports and a pair of influence maps.

These people are villains.

Every single generative model in existence was produced by stealing the work of artists for training data.

There is no nuance to this. Never mind the argument about generative AI taking away potential future work from artists. The training of these models is theft now. To use these models is to be complicit in the theft.

Edit: the people who downvote this while making no counterargument are doing so because they wish to remain in denial, so that they do not have to admit to themselves that they are complicit in the theft.

This should’ve been the default response for every state really - just some generic boilerplate description of where they can find the publicly available voter information. That way you’re not inviting conflict by outright refusing, but you’re also not helping them at all, and telling them they can do their own work or go fuck themselves.

Can we get 4chan to start a new rumor?

“Anti-vax parents make children autistic”

you can’t really bomb a supply chain

Fuck yeah you can, hence my example of bombing ball bearing factories.

Train lines are also a classic bombing target. Fuel production/refining/storage/transport, any kind of logistics hub, shipyards, airstrips, warehouses… all things that are difficult to hide because there’s always activity around them. Flatten them and the dependent supply chain grinds to a halt.

China and Russia both trade heavily with Iran and don’t care about embargoes.

Also even if they could produce everything they need within the country, that doesn’t mean it’s practical to produce it all in one location. At some point you have to pull raw material out of the ground and refine it, and you probably can’t get everything you need all from the same hole in the ground. You probably can’t manufacture electronics very well next door to a mining and refining operation. There’s going to be truck routes or train lines and logistics facilities somewhere.

Supply chain. Drones are complicated pieces of equipment, they can’t possibly be manufacturing all of the components locally.

During WWII the Allies brought the German tank corps to a halt by bombing ball bearing factories.

That didn’t happen.
And if it did, it wasn’t that bad.
And if it was, that’s not a big deal.
And if it is, that’s not my fault. <--- You are here
And if it was, I didn’t mean it.
And if I did, You deserved it.

A Narcissist’s Prayer

I actually get the feeling that the US stock market is being turned into a pump-and-dump scheme, not piecemeal but entire.

Don’t worry, this will still happen, they’ll just use stolen IDs from previous fishing victims, or from the database of 70,000 that Discord already had breached.

He’ll probably feel right at home in Klantee.

This is expected, planned for, anticipated and even desired by the people pulling the strings. Violent resistance will be used to justify mass murder in response.

but where is the sauces

birds of a feather

Ugh, I don’t want to live in a tipping point in history.