Mehr Infos zum Heft: https://www.kultboy.com/magazin/1606/

Let’s face it: a new generation of scholarship has changed the way we understand American history, particularly slavery, capitalism, and the Civil War. Our language should change as well. The old labels and terms handed down to us from the conservative scholars of the early to mid-twentieth century no longer reflect the best evidence and arguments. The tired terms served either to reassure worried Americans in a Cold War world, or uphold a white supremacist, sexist interpretation of the past. The Cold War is over, and we must reject faulty frameworks and phrases. We no longer call the Civil War “The War Between the States,” nor do we refer to women’s rights activists as “suffragettes,” nor do we call African-Americans “Negroes.” Language has changed before, and I propose that it should change again.

Legal historian Paul Finkelman (Albany Law) has made a compelling case against the label “compromise” to describe the legislative packages that avoided disunion in the antebellum era.1 In particular, Finkelman has dissected and analyzed the deals struck in 1850. Instead of the “Compromise of 1850,” which implies that both North and South gave and received equally in the bargains over slavery, the legislation should be called the “Appeasement of 1850.” Appeasement more accurately describes the uneven nature of the agreement. In 1849 and 1850, white Southerners in Congress made demands and issued threats concerning the spread and protection of slavery, and, as in 1820 and 1833, Northerners acquiesced: the slave states obtained almost everything they demanded, including an obnoxious Fugitive Slave Law, enlarged Texas border, payment of Texas debts, potential spread of slavery into new western territories, the protection of the slave trade in Washington, DC, and the renunciation of congressional authority over slavery. The free states, in turn, received almost nothing (California was permitted to enter as a free state, but residents had already voted against slavery). Hardly a compromise!

Likewise, scholar Edward Baptist (Cornell) has provided new terms with which to speak about slavery. In his 2014 book The Half Has Never Been Told: Slavery and the Making of American Capitalism (Basic Books), he rejects “plantations” (a term pregnant with false memory and romantic myths) in favor of “labor camps”; instead of “slave-owners” (which seems to legitimate and rationalize the ownership of human beings), he uses “enslavers.” Small changes with big implications. These far more accurate and appropriate terms serve his argument well, as he re-examines the role of unfree labor in the rise of the United States as an economic powerhouse and its place in the global economy. In order to tear down old myths, he eschews the old language.

I suggest we follow the lead of Finkelman and Baptist and alter our language for the Civil War. Specifically, let us drop the word “Union” when describing the United States side of the conflagration, as in “Union troops” versus “Confederate troops.” Instead of “Union,” we should say “United States.” By employing “Union” instead of “United States,” we are indirectly supporting the Confederate view of secession wherein the nation of the United States collapsed, having been built on a “sandy foundation” (according to rebel Vice President Alexander Stephens). In reality, however, the United States never ceased to exist. The Constitution continued to operate normally; elections were held; Congress, the presidency, and the courts functioned; diplomacy was conducted; taxes were collected; crimes were punished; etc. Yes, there was a massive, murderous rebellion in at least a dozen states, but that did not mean that the United States disappeared. The dichotomy of “Union v. Confederacy” is no longer acceptable language; its usage lends credibility to the Confederate experiment and undermines the legitimacy of the United States as a political entity. The United States of America fought a brutal war against a highly organized and fiercely determined rebellion – it did not stop functioning or morph into something different. We can continue to debate the nature and existence of Confederate “nationalism,” but that discussion should not affect how we label the United States during the war.

Why should we continue to employ wording that is biased, false, or laden with myth? Compromise, plantation, slave-owners, Union v. Confederacy, etc.: these phrases and many others obscure rather than illuminate; they serve the interests of traditionalists or white supremacists; they do not accurately reflect our current understanding of phenomena, thus they should be abandoned and replaced. I call upon historians in all fields to reexamine their language and terminology. Let us be careful and deliberate with our wording; though we study the past, let us not be chained to it.

(emphasis added)

Recently I dipped my toes in sim racing and I could run dirt 2.0 and AC fairly easily with a controller. A few weeks ago I bought a G920 and so far the only game that works with it proper is Dirt 2.0. AC and rF2 are a nightmare. AC shakes the wheel or doesn’t recognize it, rF2 just keeps steering on it’s own (even when the car is stationary, with autosteer off). I also tried RSF RBR, which runs, but after the first launch it doesn’t detect the wheel anymore.

DKMS is not supported on bazzite, I couldn’t get new-lg4ff to work. Oversteer works, but is sort of useless without the driver. I’m a little bit disheartened at this point. Since I bought the wheel, I spent way more time troubleshooting than racing.

Does anyone have any experience running these games on bazzite with a G920? Is there an easy fix to all of these issues that I’m overlooking?

I’m way too settled into bazzite to distrohop now and I really wouldn’t like to have MS in my household.

My main priority would be to get RSF RBR running and then AC or rF2 to have something other than rally.

Thanks in advance for any input

3D printing is all well and good for prototyping, and it can even produce useful parts. If you want real strenght in plastics, though, or to produce a LOT of parts, you probably want to step up to injection molding. As it turns out, 3D printing can help in that regard, with injection molding company [APSX] has given us a look at how it printed injection molds for its APSX-PIM machine.

The concept is simple enough—additive manufacturing is great for producing parts with complex geometries, and injection molds fit very much under that banner. To demonstrate, [APSX] shows us a simple injection mold that it printed with a Formlabs Form3+ using Rigid 10K resin. The mold has good surface finish, which is crucial for injection molding nice parts. It’s also fitted with ejection pins for easy part removal after each shot of injection molded plastic. While it’s not able to hold up like a traditional metal injection mold, it’s better than you might think. [APSX] claims it got 500 automatic injection cycles out of the mold while producing real functional parts. The mold was used with the APSX-PIM injection molding machine squirting polypropylene at a cycle time of 65 seconds, producing a round part that appears to be some kind of lid or gear.

This looks great, but it’s worth noting it’s still not cheap to get into this sort of thing. On top of purchasing a Formlabs Form3+, you’ll also need the APSX-PIM V3, which currently retails for $13,500 or so. Still, if you regularly need to make 500 of something, this could be very desirable. You could get your parts quicker and stronger compared to running a farm of many 3D printers turning out the same parts.

We’ve seen similar projects along these lines before. The fact is that injections molds are complicated geometry to machine, so being able to 3D print them is highly desirable. Great minds and all that. Video after the break.

From Blog – Hackaday via this RSS feed

On 2008-05-18 15:49:33, the father of the #Fediverse and creator of #ActivityPub, Evan Prodromou, sent the first ever message in what was later called the "Fediverse" social network (not Mastodon® social network).

• The first software was called Laconica.
• The first instance was Identica.
• The first prototol was OpenMicroBlogging.
• The first label/name was Identiverse social network.

Here is the archived post: This is my first post.

The network never went down. From the first protocol, OpenMicroBlogging, it switched to the protocol OStatus (also by Evan), then to ActivityPub as most know it today. It's exactly the same social network since 2008!

Happy 17th Year Anniversary Fediverse network!

#FediverseDay #FediverseMonth #MayIsFediverseMonth

Kajan Johnson grew up in the small towns of northern Canada and rose to prominence as a UFC veteran with an impressive career spanning 40 professional fights. As the owner and founder of Tristar Gym West Coast, he has built a legacy of developing both amateur and professional champions. Kajan and his team have now cast their net even wider by building a YouTube following and an online platform, sharing elite techniques and knowledge to empower fighters around the globe.

The Boston Celtics are shocked by the New York Knicks while the Oklahoma City Thunder lose to the Denver Nuggets in the Conference play-off semi-final first legs.

As Europe prepares to mark the 80th anniversary of VE Day, the YouGov polling also showed large majorities felt that events during and before the second world war were relevant today and must continue to be taught to younger generations.

Between 41% and 55% of respondents in the five European countries polled: Britain, France, Germany, Italy and Spain, said they thought another world war was very or fairly likely within the next five to 10 years, a view shared by 45% of Americans.

Majorities of 68% to 76% said they expected any new conflict would involve nuclear weapons, and between 57% and 73% also said a third world war would lead to greater loss of life than in 1939-1945. Many (25% to 44%) believed it would kill most people in the world.

Grey and Myke watch the 2010 biopic 'The Social Network'. They discuss their thoughts on the film, its portrayal of Facebook’s early days, and how it prompted them to reflect on their own use of social media today.

The crews of both ships were marooned.

It should be no secret that Comcast, as well as many other cable TV and internet providers, have a firm reputation for shoveling mountains of bullshit and calling it their base fees only to have a bunch of hidden or sneaky other fees attached to invoices that greatly inflate the price of services. These have taken the form of everything from so-called “Broadcast TV Fees“, really just the cost of programming as part of the television service, or “Internet Cost Recovery Fees” on the internet side, whatever the hell that means. The end result has been decades of pissed off customers who are only now beginning to have other viable options for content and internet services, with much of the frustration stemming from these inflated prices, sneaky fees, and a complete lack of transparency as to what any of this is for.

I’ve know this for years and years now. So, likely, have you, along with most of the rest of the public. Comcast’s President, Mike Cavanagh, acknowledged what we’ve all known, seemingly for the first time, on a recent Comcast earnings call.

“In this intensely competitive environment, we are not winning in the marketplace in a way that is commensurate with the strength of the network and connectivity products that I just described,” Cavanagh said. “[Cable division CEO] Dave [Watson] and his team have worked hard to understand the reasons for this disconnect and have identified two primary causes. One is price transparency and predictability and the other is the level of ease of doing business with us. The good news is that both are fixable and we are already underway with execution plans to address these challenges.”

The 183,000-subscriber loss lowered Comcast’s residential Internet subscribers to 29.19 million. Comcast also reported a first-quarter drop of 17,000 business broadband subscribers, lowering that category’s total to 2.45 million.

Nothing focuses the mind of a president of a major public company quite like a falling stock price, which is exactly what is happening to Comcast, with its stock dropping nearly 10% over the last five years. It’s a bit jarring to hear this said out loud by Cavanagh as though this is some kind of revelation, particularly given how often Comcast and other cable providers have appeared on lists of the companies that the public dislikes the most. Were they somehow not paying attention to those?

In any case, Cavanagh is saying all the right words about simplifying and locking in prices to avoid this frustration moving forward.

Cavanagh said that Comcast plans to make changes in marketing and operations “with the highest urgency.” This means that “we are simplifying our pricing construct to make our price-to-value proposition clearer to consumers across all broadband segments,” he said.

Comcast last week announced a five-year price guarantee for broadband customers who sign up for a new package. Comcast said customers will get a “simple monthly price starting as low as $55 per month,” without having to enter a contract, giving them “freedom and flexibility to cancel at any time without penalty.”

How well they pull this off is a matter of the specifics and the adherence to the promise. If Comcast finally fully goes all in on simplicity, knocks it off with the bullshit fees, and stops with the sneaky tactics to raise or otherwise hide prices, this will be received positively. Whether it’s enough to put the genie back in the bottle on public perception to turn around subscriber numbers is a different question, of course. I tend to think the train has already left the station on that one. Comcast apparently thinks that might be the case for a bit as well.

Comcast investors shouldn’t expect an immediate turnaround, though. “We anticipate that it will take several quarters for our new approach to gain traction and impact the business in a meaningful way,” Cavanagh said.

Look, Comcast has sucked on this stuff for many, many years. It’s going to take a bit of time and good behavior to gain the general public’s trust back, never mind someone like myself that cut the Comcast cord entirely years ago.

But if the company has finally found religion on its crappy behavior, that’s ultimately a good thing.

From Techdirt via this RSS feed

playlist link:

https://open.spotify.com/playlist/6F3sCPmocAQDMNRNg7TZZb

Here it is on YouTube: From Student Loans to Immigration Lies: Rep. Jasmine Crockett Sets the Record Straight

Originally Posted By u/biospheric At 2025-05-05 09:07:03 PM | Source

Comments