Buo-y

Apparently we have the Dutch to blame for that one, as the verb form is apparently descended from Spanish.

It’s obtuse because it’s not like another one is going to crop up in the same town in the same day to give the workers jobs, nor is it going to solve the issue of regulating the industry properly. The people enforcing the policies need teeth, and those teeth should be able to bite at the people causing these conditions. Places get like this because 3rd party inspection is underfunded and underpowered. Shutting a place down means it cuts into profits while potentially cutting off workers’ incomes. It doesn’t mean the owners or board get significantly impacted.

Assuming you aren’t being purposefully obtuse, the answer is to make them safe and suitable environments for people to work in. You can figure out a way to punish the company who is creating these conditions, but for the time being, the answer is to make them reasonable to work in.

No. They’re saying that slaughter houses don’t appear to be going away in the near future since there is a still a fervent demand for meat, so the answer of “just shut them down” isn’t a valid solution yet. They should be removed of human cruelty until we can fully remove them.

I’d like to bring your attention to Crystal Project on Steam. It’s honestly one of the best jrpg games I’ve played in the last 5 years. It’s less story driven than the DW/DQ series, but it is platformy and very exploration based. I haven’t played since the balance patches, but the game was about everything I could possibly want in an exploration jrpg. It’s more Final Fantasy like, but it scratched a deep itch I didn’t know I had.

The link is to a piped video. The link is named after whatever the original hyperlink used. If it was labeled “butt penis” the piped bot would have a link “butt penis” as well.

My biggest advice to anyone who wants to start cooking or is too intimidated to cook: just start doing it. Find a recipe that’s simple, follow it to a T and then just keep doing it. You will suck at first, but that’s step 1 of any skill. If you cook every night, by month 1 or 2, you’ll be significantly better and can expand. Also, whatever time the recipe you looked up says, 1.5 times or double it (especially anything involving cooking onions). You don’t have the skills to get it down to that time, and most skip prep work to make it a “quick” recipe.

It also helps the slave business owners who need more workers to work in their sweatshops business. Less workers means we have to pay a reasonable wage won’t have enough workers.

I preface this by saying I’m far from an expert in either thing, but you can compare that same logic to AI and it doesn’t hand-wave the worry surrounding either. We’ve historically done a really good job of doing our best to understand certain technologies without really grasping the consequences without some hindsight. I bring up AI, because I think most people can understand the implicit possibilities that come along with the double ended sword that it is. I’m for GMO’s, but the worry isn’t the lab variant. The worry is what introducing something catastrophic into the wild to solve another issue we caused could actually cause. It would be ironic and on brand considering I’m pretty sure plastic was seen as an environmentally friendly alternative at one point.

My guess would be on the days you work, your body can stay in a working mode/mindset, whereas when you try to do so on non-work days, you have to force yourself into that mindset, which requires a lot of self control. It also might be your body telling you to take a break, and you’re overriding that feeling by writing.

I didn’t even know they tested for DHMO. I thought it was something they noticed was so prevalent at autopsy, they just assumed it was naturally present. It’s nice to see the awareness efforts have not been all for not.

Ye, I think his friends just regarded it as a dick move lol. Personally, I always enjoyed using the card later in the game when people start getting 2x resources every other roll.

To give an actual answer, Monopoly in Catan allows the player who played the card to name a resource, and every other player must give all of that resource to the player who played the card. I imagine the OP negotiated using a specific resource, got what they wanted, then monopolied the traded cards back.

8.49’!~=116699.97’

I am a human, hear me rar.

I used to have people pay back borrowed lunch money in 5 cent cracker packages. I still remember the time i saved up about $5 in crackers because of one friend’s debts.

To be less cynical, it’s possible those venn diagrams don’t overlap, or they’ve changed over time after removing layers of ignorance. There doesn’t always need to be massive hypocrisy behind every motive, nor do we need to immediately shove our fingers that direction. Sometimes the world comes around to where people who thought this all along are now given a pulpet with which they will be finally heard.

Which is not what the original video is talking about; almost the exact opposite to the study. I’m not confusing the mechanics of how capitalism works, nor am I misunderstanding the way in which the wealthy few use their wealth to manipulate the media to get voters to side with them just enough to not revolt. What you are confusing is the study effectively points out that the will of the populace is inconsequential compared to the will of the ultra wealthy. They don’t have to sway the people. They have a much smaller pool to sway, which are the actual people who vote on these policies. Why go through 8 iterations of of policy when you can purchase enough of the actual voters (senators and representatives) to where the populace is irrelevant to sway. The video is how to do it in a “fair” manner. The study implies how it’s actually done: purchased and paid for. That’s a flaw in any form of government; not some exclusive exploit towards democracy.

That study doesn’t conclude that at all. That study says that the policy will follow interest groups and generally what the “elite” want. It’s like saying “hey, if you use this strategy in Monopoly, you can generally win out against the other players in the long run. This study show if you’re a banker, you can literally just decide the dice rolls whenever you want”. That’s two entirely different things. Continuing the analogy, it’d be like if the banker decided another player land on one of your properties. Yes it benefits you, but the only thing the banker cares about is bankrupting that player. It just so happened to benefit you. It wasn’t some way to “slowly move the policy”.

I think the video is an interesting thought experiment, but I don’t know that is holds weight within the scale of the political spectrum. I think while a more progressive viewpoint of the world is by using a 2D map of economical and political leanings, that isn’t really the case in real life. People will usually vote along a 1D political line, wherein the entire point of the video falls apart. The choice isn’t between 4 quadrants, the choice usually is how left or right something is in a linear scale. On a linear scale, you can’t really gamify the policy to work like they describe in the video.

Would you rather It had a simpler, placeholder name like “X”? Kidding. But after joining a platform named Lemmie, I don’t think questioning Mastsdon is the right move. My 2 cents.