jadero

I obviously didn't write clearly. I'm not objecting to DST or timezones as they exist. I'm was trying to point out that there are unresolved disconnections between solar time and the ways we want to set our clocks.

There are actual health recommendations based on solar time. For example, we are cautioned to be especially careful of summer sun exposure between 10 am and 2 pm. As far as I know, that makes sense only in the context of solar time: the 2 hours on either side of when the sun is at it highest (solar noon.)

Unless there is something about the actual timing of the risk I don't understand, under DST the recommendation should be "between 11:00 am and 3:00 pm."

Where I am, in Saskatchewan, my local time is about 1.5 hours distant from solar time. Thus, that recommendation should be "between 11:30 am and 3:30 pm," although I suspect 11-3 is close enough.

I cannot know your experience and won't pretend to.

Unless your objective is to be even more disliked and disrespected than you are now, being deliberately annoying will not get you far.

If you just want respect as a thinking, feeling human, you're going to have to be respectful of other thinking, feeling humans, ignoring and blocking those who are too immature to have respect for others.

There are people out there who think that power is the source of respect. They are, of course, wrong. The only path to respect is through the elimination of power structures, so that respect can be mutually sought through understanding, not obedience.

I don't like assholes, so I don't seek them out. I try to give the assholes who engage with me the respectful engagement they crave but don't deserve, then block the ones who stay assholes. If I feel surrounded by assholes, I disengage completely until I've figured out whether I'm actually the asshole or I've stumbled into a snakepit. (And everybody is sometimes an asshole. The secret is to not make it part of your identity or to assume that it's part of theirs.)

Life is so much more pleasant when disagreements are respectful engagements with learning opportunities instead of just screaming matches.

Good luck on your journey.

Move the exams to an online platform.

That usually comes with invasive proctoring software that is of questionable effectiveness. What are the chances of that being avoided?

Very good writeup. I agree that it's definitely possible. What I doubt is the necessary level of support or political will to make that scale of operations possible.

The only way I can imagine the necessary support and will would be to decide that the Israeli state is an evil and dangerous aggressor like the USSR was thought to be. I suspect that creating that perception, however accurate it might be, requires more time than the people have.

But I sure like the idea. It is, in a sense, war without guns.

This is great news.

Now we just need a follow up where the prosecutor and Attorney General rip the police department a new one for failing to adequately train their staff on the law.

And one for low vision.

If our community did that, it would also cover school bus drivers, highway workers, and others who have no employment relationship with the community, yet have legitimate need to access those locations.

If they want to pursue a lockout, there already ways to do so.

True enough, and a valid consideration that must be accounted for in any actual change to building codes.

Keep in mind that I said "by now" not "starting today". Obviously, having done little to this point, we can't just jump to perfection in one step.

It's worth pointing out that Ford claims that their F-150 Lightning can provide up to 3 days of backup power to a household in some configurations. Given what seems to be a trend of building EVs that are capable of providing backup power to households, that should be factored in as we move forward.

And it doesn't have to be 3 days. Overnight in summer would be a good start, followed by overnight in winter, then moving on from there.

The real issue is that I see $350k houses being built in Saskatchewan with nothing. No solar, no heat pump, no passive heating or cooling, and sketchy insulation. The latter 2 were figured out in the 1980s and nothing has been done since at the building code level.

That same money would build a house 1/2 to 1/3 the size, a still adequate size, with solar, heat pumps, good insulation, and decent passive heating and cooling.

The only real difference is men's lib burdens themselves with a feminist perspective, which does not help, and as this post shows, hurts.

At risk of getting out of context, I (cis male) did not become aware of the systems that were damaging me until I started studying feminism. Whatever a "men's liberation movement" looks like, it is so young and inexperienced that it would be well served to examine and learn from feminist ideologies and perspectives.

Many of the power structures that feminists have identified as being damaging to women in general are also damaging to men in general.

Many of the power structures that favour men in general are damaging to women in general. As we grow and develop, we should be striving to tear down those structures that are harmful to others, rather than further entrench them as if in battle or in a zero sum game.

I'm not aware of any modern feminist ideologies or initiatives that present a danger to men, but if there are any, they should be called out by both feminists and "masculinists" in the same way that both feminists and masculinists should be calling out any masculinist ideologies and initiatives that present a danger to women.

Modern intersectional feminism has grappled with the inclusion of women who have been "othered". We should be trying to learn from that and avoid making the same mistakes.

In the end, we all have to figure out our place in the world, and that cannot be done without considering our relationships to the power structures and each other. At present, that looks like it's necessary to have feminism and masculinism as separate movements, not as enemies, but as collaborators and intersectional movements. Biology, including the fact that sex and gender are spectra with bimodal distributions, may always mean that they remain at least somewhat separate even as shared goals are achieved.

Retired. I should have included that in my comment. I'll go back and do that now.

Thanks.

Who gives a rat's ass what others are doing or not doing, getting or not getting, paying or not paying? Having a spine isn't about whining, it's about doing what is necessary in the face of opposition, even when it goes against personal self-interest.

It's necessary to decarbonise. Among those honest economists not under the thumb of or on the payroll of whiny babies, a carbon tax is one useful lever. Therefore, the ethical thing to do is implement and accept a carbon tax.

If our political and business leaders were ethical and had spines instead whatever whiny organ they use as a substitute, we'd be a lot better off.