Gillitrut
Reading from the golden book under bright red stars
No bio...
User ID: 863
Gillitrut
Reading from the golden book under bright red stars
5hr ago
Unfortunately not. I saw them linked elsewhere. I do with discoverability of things like this was more of a priority for the government.
Gillitrut
Reading from the golden book under bright red stars
6hr ago
Gillitrut
Reading from the golden book under bright red stars
7hr ago
I think one can generally be (and feminists are) pro-sex generally while thinking particular categories ought to be prohibited or warrant additional scrutiny.
Are you saying we should restrict all sex at the workplace and in any relationship where power dynamics could be employed?
I think those relationships at least warrant extra scrutiny but I wouldn't be opposed to a general prohibition.
Gillitrut
Reading from the golden book under bright red stars
7hr ago
Situations like this are precisely why progressives are skeptical of employee/employer sexual relationships and it sounds like it was worse here because Gaiman and Palmer were also providing Pavlovich housing as part of the deal. If your combination landlord/boss came onto you one day might one go along with it even if they didn't want to? Might the implicit threat of "I could make you unemployed and homeless" convince someone not to resist? I hardly think we can generalize from "a woman might pretend to enjoy sex to keep her job and housing" to "no women anywhere can be treated with as having agency."
In any case I feel very comfortable asserting that ~no one enforces their own desires and boundaries as they might like 100% of the time. Do you tell your boss how bullshit it is every time they drop work on you that you think you shouldn't be doing or have to do? Do you bitch to your spouse every time they want to do That Thing they like but you don't? Or do you sometimes suck it up and do the thing with a smile anyway? Sexual assault is an extreme case of this but the consequences of not doing so (unemployment, homelessness) probably seemed pretty extreme to Pavlovich.
Apparently $MELANIA is live now too. There are like six different scam impersonation accounts in the replies, with hundreds of likes.
ETA:
To make this a bit more substantive, why assume the price action of $TRUMP is organic rather than wash trading in advance of a rug pull? It's not like Trump's previous crypto grift (anyone remember World Financial Liberty?) went all that well. Why do people want to buy this but not that?
Gillitrut
Reading from the golden book under bright red stars
2d ago
au contraire I think the medical malpractice was a result of the chilling effect. They were afraid to give her an abortion due to fear or prosecution so they wanted confirmation of the much more bright-line exception in the form of the fetal heartbeat results.
Gillitrut
Reading from the golden book under bright red stars
3d ago
My point is that the "reasonable medical judgement" standard is an objective one, not a subjective one. Whether you committed a crime doesn't, necessarily, depend on whether you thought your actions were reasonable. Rather it depends on whether you can do a better job convincing a jury your actions were reasonable against the state trying to convince the jury they're unreasonable. Most doctors, understandably, do not want to take that risk! That is why they obsess over the fetal heartbeat thing. That is a much clearer line.
Gillitrut
Reading from the golden book under bright red stars
3d ago
Sure, but this is quite different than "the physician need only say some magic words and will thence be immune to prosecution."
Gillitrut
Reading from the golden book under bright red stars
3d ago
This is precisely the opposite of what the Supreme Court of Texas held in Zurawski v. State. In that case the Supreme Court of Texas emphasized that the standard was objective and that if the State could prove that no reasonable physician would have authorized the procedure, then it would be criminal to perform. Quoting that case:
We examined the meaning of “reasonable medical judgment” in In re State. In that case, the trial court replaced “reasonable medical judgment” with “good faith belief.” While we observed some overlap, we held that the law does not permit an abortion based on belief alone. Rather, a doctor must identify a life-threatening physical condition that places the mother at risk of death or serious physical impairment of a major bodily function unless an abortion is performed.
The Center argues that such a standard means that doctors are susceptible to a battle of the experts when not every doctor might reach the same medical judgment in each case. We rejected such an interpretation in In re State. “Reasonable medical judgment,” we held, “does not mean that every doctor would reach the same conclusion.” Rather, in an enforcement action under the Human Life Protection Act, the burden is the State’s to prove that no reasonable physician would have concluded that the mother had a life-threatening physical condition that placed her at risk of death or of substantial impairment of a major bodily function unless the abortion was performed.
The state is absolutely permitted to second guess the judgement of a physician and potentially inflict criminal penalties on them.
Gillitrut
Reading from the golden book under bright red stars
3d ago
I don't understand why people suddenly forget about chilling effects in this context. The government passes a law that bans doing X but it's ambiguous whether some similar behavior Y is part of X. Even if Y is not covered by X that ambiguity might chill people from doing Y if they think the government might prosecute them for doing Y. Even if the government ultimately does not succeed (jury acquittal) defending yourself in a criminal trial is not exactly free.
So, let's ask how the exemption for a medical emergency works. Is the standard subjective or objective? Does the physician merely have to say the magic words "I think there is a medical emergency?" Do they have to actually believe there is a sufficient medical emergency? Is their determination open to challenge by the state after the fact? Maybe you're pretty sure, in the moment, such a medical emergency exists. Are you "the state couldn't find a doctor who could convince a jury otherwise on pain of conviction of a first degree felony" sure? Especially if the alternative is, what, a medical malpractice or wrongful death claim? Your insurance probably covers the latter. It won't protect you from a felony conviction!
These laws fulfill their obviously intended effect of chilling doctors from providing abortions whether or not they have a fig leaf of an exception.
Gillitrut
Reading from the golden book under bright red stars
6d ago
Is that not the norm for anonymous wire fraud or whatever charge they're levying here? I'm near-certain none of the Does (none of the major ones, at least) live in the US.
Probably? Microsoft did secure subpoenas to various ISPs to try and determine the actual identities of the individuals involved. Whether that can be done remains unclear.
I'm a rube unfamiliar with the American legal system - what do the results of that typically look like in ghost cases like this? Does Microsoft get their damages, if yes then whence?
Microsoft is going to get a legal judgment from a US court that X individuals are responsible for Y damages. How likely they are to actually get Y damages likely depends on the legal jurisdiction that X individuals reside in and their perspective on enforcing the judgement of US courts. US courts, for example, won't respect foreign civil judgements regarding liability for speech where that speech would be protected by the First Amendment in the United States.
Gillitrut
Reading from the golden book under bright red stars
6d ago
Why rely on random anonymous compilations? Courtlistener has the full docket and will almost certainly be updated as the case progresses. So far looks like no defendants or lawyers for any of them have made an appearance. If the case continues this way the most likely outcome is Microsoft secures a default judgement against them.
Gillitrut
Reading from the golden book under bright red stars
16d ago
I guess I'm not seeing the angle where the employees should be grateful to the company. This sounds like it's cheaper for you to train them than it would be to hire replacements and additionally you hope they'll accept a lower salary. Should they be grateful your business didn't waste money firing and replacing them?
Gillitrut
Reading from the golden book under bright red stars
17d ago
I can only speak to my own experience but I expect companies have a lot of incentive not to do this proactively (though it varies by company). The upside is increased retention of people who might have left for a better offer. The downside is paying a bunch more money to people who were not going to leave anyway. Depending on what your turnover looks like the balance could tip either way. Ideally companies would target these raises precisely to the people who would leave without them but identifying them is probably hard, unless they self identify by negotiating with you and another company at the same time. I got my largest raise ever doing something like that but it was definitely nerve wracking. Concerns about retaliation or adverse action even if I stayed. Would not be surprised if people just take outside offers and skip the further stress of negotiating.
January 3rd in an odd numbered year? Time for the United States House of Representatives to choose a new Speaker! Mike Johnson (the current Republican Speaker) is the favorite but the Republican majority in the House is even narrower than it was when Kevin McCarthy took 15 ballots in 2023. The current rolls stand at 219-215 Republican-Democrat. The Speaker election requires a majority of all votes cast, which will be 218 if everyone votes and less if some Representatives-elect abstain. This means Johnson cannot afford to lose more than two Republican votes (or more than four abstentions) in order to be elected. At least one Republican (Massie) has committed to voting against Johnson, meaning he cannot afford to lose another voting Republican (or three abstentions). This is all on the assumption that all 215 Democrats vote for Jeffries on every ballot. The first ballot is about to commence.
ETA1:
At the end of the first ballot the totals stand at 216 - Johnson, 215 - Jeffries, 3 - Other. No Speaker elected.
ETA2:
One hour later Norman and Self change their votes to Johnson, delivering him the win 218-215. Formally electing Johnson on the first ballot.
Gillitrut
Reading from the golden book under bright red stars
17d ago
I think I am lacking some clarity. When you make the decision to keep them on and train them as you migrate their infrastructure to the cloud is this a business decision or a charitable one? Would it be cheaper, for you, to fire them all and hire replacements/do the migration yourself? Or is training them as part of doing the migration also the correct business decision?
Gillitrut
Reading from the golden book under bright red stars
21d ago
Interesting. I guess what makes it breeding "kink" in my mind is that it's getting sexual arousal from the thought of becoming pregnant. It's less obvious to me how prevalent that is. Lots of people want to be pregnant and have sex with the goal of becoming pregnant but for what fraction is becoming pregnant sexually arousing?
The other way animals are bred just involves a stallion going to town, which I'd argue is better described by other kink names, including, if relevant, petplay kinks.
My impression is that a breeding link is often coupled with (though not identical to) what is being described in this paragraph and often subsumed under the same name.
Gillitrut
Reading from the golden book under bright red stars
21d ago
I recognize that it is because "breed" is standing in for two different mental images but the conjunction of these two paragraphs is something.
On the one hand, describing the act of humans procreating with "breed" is very disrespectful. That's what animals do, or what we do to animals, not humans! On the other hand, the existence of the term "breeding kink" is insane because the human urge to breed is natural and not at all kinky.
What if someone gets off by being inseminated like an animal!
Gillitrut
Reading from the golden book under bright red stars
22d ago
No, but that's because I've been in the same long term relationship since I was a teenager. Also the changes are in the opposite direction of your question. Generally it has led to me being more willing to date people I would not have otherwise, rather than less willing to date people I was already inclined to.
Gillitrut
Reading from the golden book under bright red stars
23d ago
As I mentioned in another thread I've done this same reflection myself and it's changed my own perspective on who I would or would not date. In any case I don't imagine this reflection necessarily entailing any particular change. I suspect most people who experience any change will do so in a way that's the opposite of certain standards of beauty common in their cultural milieu but that doesn't have to be the case.
Gillitrut
Reading from the golden book under bright red stars
23d ago
"We" is "everyone" in my mind. I've certainly changed my own opinions about who I would or would not date by doing the kind of reflection I have in mind.
As to "why" I think understanding oneself and one's beliefs is a good thing. Maybe one finds one's preferences are not grounded anything deeper than "I like this for reasons I can't articulate" and that's fine. But maybe one finds that one has a preference that could or ought be otherwise. I certainly did.
Gillitrut
Reading from the golden book under bright red stars
24d ago
I don't think anything in this comment contradicts anything in my comment. I did not have black women specifically in mind. I had some examples of women of various races that varied along some of the traits OP mentioned explicitly but decided not to post them. To my mind there is a pretty substantial difference between "I have not met (and may not be likely to meet) a person of a particular race who has the qualities I want in a partner" and "I could never partner with a person of a particular race due to some essential nature of the people of that race." I do think that many of our preferences are substantially influenced by the culture and environment we are raised in but the process of changing that fact is much more a socio-cultural one than an individual one.
Gillitrut
Reading from the golden book under bright red stars
24d ago
I suspect this is a case of (perhaps mutual) misunderstanding. When the post you were responding to said they were "not scared of ... crime ..." they did not mean "it would not be bad to be the victim of a crime" they meant something more like "as I go about my daily life I do not experience any subjective fear that I will be the victim of a crime." Your response, then, was not interpreted as "crime is bad, so it's rational to have some amount of fear of it" it was interpreted as "you ought to feel afraid of being the victim of a crime as you go about your daily life." This also neatly explains the responses you got. There is certainly a stereotype of conservatives in certain liberal bubbles as someone who experiences a fear response (often grounded in a belief they will be the victim of a crime) whenever they see a non-white, immigrant, Other, etc person. I expect you ended up being rounded off to this stereotype based on the interpretation of your comments.
Gillitrut
Reading from the golden book under bright red stars
24d ago
I don't think anyone is obliged to find anyone else attractive but at the same time we should be willing to look critically at the preferences and beliefs we do have. When we're talking about racial preferences I think the natural investigation is to ask what that racial preference is rooted in. Is there some trait you find attractive that you think people of a certain race have that people of other races don't? My impression is these discussions tend to flatten substantial intra-racial variation in the traits in question and engage in a lot of racial essentialism.
This seems very straightforwardly false. I've worked with a lot of women, none of whom have had relationships with management.
More options
Context Copy link