Saw a great article that was critical of the Uyghur labour camps and their relevance to China's dominance in cheap tech just silently disappear from [email protected] the other day. I don't know how to find the modlogs, and I've been wondering about that ever since. I expect that kind of shit from the fascist triumvirate instances but I found myself wondering who has their thumb in the .world pie.
Glide
joined 2 years ago
Because it is never the service that privatization seeks to make better. Private corporations make more money. That is the only target metric.
Nah man, "parents rights" advocates. Because it is your right to give suffering to life you create.
0% homelessness in China btw.
Which is like the US declaring homelessness a federal crime, imprisoning everyone who lives on the streets, and calling homelessness a solved problem.
This. The "leftists" arguing for accelerationism are welcome to go to any of the fascist countries they love so much. They don't need to keep trying to force America down the same path.
Last I checked, Authoritarian rule under a single leader screaming about the importance of "merit" isn't found on the left of the spectrum.
I'd challenge the word "illegal" in the Republican strategy, but I'm with the spirit of your post.
Don't get me wrong, this is some pretty par for the course .ml logic, but that screencap isn't evidence of that being said? This is someone from .world stating that as a supposed quote by "ML," which reads as hyperbole.
There are plenty of unapologetically awful tankie things being said over there. We don't need to exaggerate or flat out make things up.
In any other setting, when we take specific, tiny stones and carve patterns into them until they can perform tasks for us, we call it magic.
The BMI was created by a social scientist to place people into rough categories for a study on how obesity impacts social interactions, in greater research on how the "average man" represented a social ideal. The fact that we now use it to define who is obese and overweight is a little insane. While it's been adopted by major health organizations (and hopefully adjusted by genuine health professionals), it is a horrible singular indicator of physical health. People in the extremes are statistically more likely to face health issues. This is not the same thing as "being in the obese category makes you unhealthy because you are fat."
I see this tossed around occasionally with zero reason or evidence, while the majority of people seem to think it's a respectable resource.
What's the controversy here? What'd I miss?
They're not sending their best.
Depends on the article. That could absolutely be a headline for an opinion piece, or a professional interview, etc. Because of the context here, I'm suspicious that the "not news" argument is a dishonest one.