Downvote away but you know it’s true.

You don’t know what others know. Building codes vary tremendously between regions. Imo zoning and real estate speculation are MUCH more significant drivers than the cost of design and construction. But my opinion is based on my experiences in my region.

I mean both really

Yeah I thought the same about depose.

Russia is there, maybe you could say Mongolia too.

The near east and middle east are kinda there. Like Arabian peninsula seems

My point regarding south east Asia is that it’s not just the south-east, it’s the all south Asia, east Asia that are missing. (And also naturally the south east)

It’s very euro centric to dedicate two circles exclusively to representing the Mediterranean but to leave India and China off, and Africa dwarfed.

I would say it’s east Asia and South Asia that are missing, not “south east”. It’s like 3 billion isn’t it?

What happens if a retailer doesn’t update their SKU codes in time for Christmas and charges GST on items that are GST exempt? But does figure it out before it’s time to make a remittance?

I’m jumping in to ask what you think of my hair-brained idea of taking all these seized boughtback weapons and launching them into temporarily occupied parts of Ukraine and/or disaffected parts of Russia with ~2 magazines of appropriate ammo each. Via idk hot airballoon or something.

Since Russia already has the ability to distribute small arms to anti-Kievans in those areas, I don’t think it significantly increases the risks to Ukrainian forces. Would it hamper Russian operations in any way?

Retaliation can get ugly quickly. Does Toronto still ship its garbage to Michigan?

Although I guess Ford wouldn’t mind if Toronto suffered so he could look like a tough guy.

I reckon if you’re doing the work involved in managing a rental property yourself, you’re doing work and providing a service.

If you expect an employee/contractor to do all that for you, but to still collect profits: what would you say you do here?

I don’t give money to panhandlers because I don’t like being solicited. (Also why I don’t buy things at my door, or via telemarketing) however I do support the idea of programs distributing funds directly to those in need.

I just watched The Cynical Historian’s review of the recent Napoleon flick. It was great. The review I mean, not the movie. It tried to tell Napoleon’s whole story, which is just not feasible in the span of a single film.

I had no idea there were 7 coalition wars, that’s crazy.

I support robust enforcement of anti hate speech laws. In fact I’ve reported hate speech/ hatecrime to the police before.

We’re not talking about laws, we’re talking about social media platform policies.

Social media platforms connect people from regions with different hatespeech laws so " enforcing hatespeech laws" is impossible to do consistently.

If users engage in crimes using the platform they are subject to the laws that they are subject to.

I don’t care that it’s legal to advocate for genocide where a preacher is located, or at the corporation’s preferred jurisdiction, I don’t want my son reading it.

The question was: is there a way a platform can be totally free speech and stop hate speech. I think the answer is “kinda”

Listen to your body, assess how its feedback comports with your goals, then use your brain to decide what to do.

I think it may be possible if you understand a difference between the right to speak and the right to be heard.

Ie the right to say something doesn’t create an obligation in others to hear it, nor to hear you in the future.

If I stand up on a milk crate in the middle of a city park to preach the glory of closed source operating systems, it doesn’t infringe my right to free speech if someone posts a sign that says “Microsoft shill ahead” and offers earplugs at the park entrance. People can choose to believe the sign or not.

A social media platform could automate the signs and earplugs. By allowing users to set thresholds of the discourse acceptable to them on different topics, and the platform could evaluate (through data analysis or crowd sourced feedback) whether comments and/or commenters met that threshold.

I think this would largely stop people from experiencing hatespeech, (one they had their thresholds appropriately dialed in) and disincentivize hatespeech without actually infringing anybody’s right to say whatever they want.

There would definitely be challenges though.

If a person wants to be protected from experiencing hatespeech they need to empower some-one/thing to censor media for them which is a risk.

Properly evaluating content for hatespeech/ otherwise objectionable speech is difficult. Upvotes and downvotes are an attempt to do this in a very coarse way. That/this system assumes that all users have a shared view of what content is worth seeing on a given topic and that all votes are equally credible. In a small community of people, with similar values, that aren’t trying to manipulate the system, it’s a reasonable approach. It doesn’t scale that well.

Yeah I think we should believe that the witness correctly interpreted the meaning in the given context, but we shouldn’t assume that everyone that says it means it like that. It’s context dependant.

I’m not sure that the best way for a software developer to support the war effort is by carrying a gun.

Hopefully if they support the defense of Ukraine, they find a way to support the Defence of Ukraine. I’m hesitant to prescribe the best way to do that.

Yeah that’s a good point. Maybe I should amend my statement to say something like:

If this seems like an absurd hypothetical, consider reframing it. Multiply all the numbers by a factor of between 1,000 to 1,000,000 and make them “our soldiers”, “bystanders” and “enemy soldiers” respectively.

I’ve never heard anyone say that phrase, is it possible that people use that expression to mean “a man likes to feel like a man… not a machine”? Ie he has thoughts, emotions, and priorities. He is not a commodity, his worth is more than just profit he can produce.

Not that women don’t also have those attributes, just that “man” is being used as an outdated shorthand for humanity.

I think these scenarios might be easier to analyze if we made them a bit more realistic.

This an analogy for military intervention. If we empower our military to be proactive, we can save one "good guy"^TM by killing 3 bystanders. But if NATO’s adversaries are participating too we lose 3 of our "good guy"^TM

Thanks for the feedback, but I don’t find it very useful. I did not say that the mother voted with the goal of supporting transphobic policies, I said something stronger.

It is my view that a person cannot love a trans person unconditionally AND support transphobic politicians. Ie it doesn’t matter why the mother supports the politician.

If you love somebody you will not support politicians that want to unfairly discriminate against them. Even if the politicians have better policies in other areas.

Families need to understand one another and not devolve into a political shitshow

What makes you think anyone is misunderstanding their family here?

OP and everyone else is at fault for the drama

Obviously the family is dysfunctional, that’s what this post is about. I don’t think it’s particularly useful to try to apportion blame from where we are. Could OP have more effectively lobbied her parents not to support transphobic politicians? Probably, but we don’t know. Is OP trying to emotionally manipulate her mother? Maybe, we don’t know. My comment was advice on how OP can end her relationship firmly, while leaving the door open to reconciliation down the road.