Most of the world actually has legal marriage between first cousins. In many places it’s not even taboo. And on top of that, the chances of genetic issues with it are actually pretty small. It’s multiple generations of first cousins having kids where it becomes a problem.

It’s wild how close the Amazon river basin comes to the west coast of the continent without draining into the ocean on that side.

Say tray deefee seal.

2023 has been the hardest and worst year of my life, followed by 2022. 2020 and 2021 were some of my best years ever. It’s hard to handle that whiplash and I really regret not seeing the hard times ahead back then with the inevitable economic crisis on the horizon.

I always thought it was funny while studying for my Cisco certification that their operating system was also called IOS. I had no idea there was actual drama behind it!

Well, it’s starting to look that way. They’ve reached the point of trying to overthrow our democratic institutions. The only thing left for them to do is openly advocate for the execution of political rivals.

Everything is all right with this Supreme Court.

The most effective ads I’ve seen in my lifetime have been podcast ads. I don’t remember shit I see in mobile apps or on most corners of the internet. I could personally sell Blue Apron or Harry’s Razors for all I’ve heard about them on podcasts though. The smartest companies allow the podcasters to joke around in their ads too. My Brother, My Brother, and Me will say some borderline offensive but hilarious stuff in their ads and I’ll be damned if it doesn’t keep me listening to their ads and hearing about the products being advertised.

I think it’s easier to understand net neutrality as something ISP’s can’t do rather than something they must do, since we’ve never seen them really act on it before. It just means they can’t speed up or slow down your internet based on what websites you’re visiting. Under net neutrality, there can never be a deal with Google to give people faster speeds using Google searches than Bing or DuckDuckGo searches.

If the contractual details of malt distribution were going to affect the quality of beers you were getting then you absolutely would care. Unity’s pay scheme will lead to studios shutting down if there isn’t pushback. Studios switching to a different engine like Godot will make their games feel different for better or for worse and efforts to help fund these alternate engines will help tip the scale towards that being “for better”.

But most importantly of all, this is a company using toxic and predatory practices. Regardless of the industry (yes, malt distributors too), if we don’t push back against toxic business practices, then companies in many different industries will see avenues they can take advantage of to make extra money. These ideas don’t hang in isolation. If Unity’s scheme works, other businesses will learn from it. This is the reality of capitalism. Whatever methods can turn a profit without generating negative attention will be employed. It’s in the hands of consumers, competing businesses, and the government to keep those toxic practices in check. I mean, why the fuck are we on Lemmy? Ultimately Reddit’s actions are not going to affect the majority of users on their platform. Most of us came here to protest shitty business practices.

These dumbasses are handed such an easy path to getting a majority and they’re going to squander it on these stupid conservative culture war takes. I really hope Canadians see soon that if they feel let down by the liberals, the conservatives are only going to be a shittier version of the worst aspects of the liberals. We should be looking to the NDP or green parties for real change.

I know City-Data Forums is still pretty active. I’ve used it a lot when deciding on places to move. I’m also a bit of an urban design nerd and there’s a lot of fascinating discussion I come across there.

Fuck Intuit and H&R Block, all my homies use FreeTaxUSA.

US history proves otherwise. Real change has been made in the labor sector without “revolution”. And on that front I will even concede that it took more than just voting to change labor laws. It took a concerted effort against the capitalist class itself with strikes and other resistance efforts. But it worked and things changed and it didn’t require overthrowing the government and destabilizing everything.

But voting would absolutely work too. At the end of the day, the people in charge are where they are because they were voted into their positions. Wealthy elites do not make up the majority of America. An angry populace would have the power to capsize their machine. “Voting doesn’t matter” as a position will only lose you ground. The “revolution” you speak of is pointless if you don’t have the majority of politically involved people behind you. At that point it’s not a “revolution”. It’s an “unpopular coup”. We see in the way people vote that the problem is that the voting populace has not been convinced by the stances of the left. Before any revolution would be an ethically sound idea, we should be seeing numbers that suggest that the majority of people are on board with radical change. And by the time that happens, those people would have the power to effect that change through voting. If the wealthy elites used underhanded tactics to suppress voting when the majority is clearly in favor of a certain change, then and only then does revolution become the ethical imperative.

In summary, don’t bother suggesting revolution if the majority of people aren’t behind you on it. Instead focus that energy on convincing people that radical change is necessary. Use the system to your advantage. Only when that fails through corrupt means does revolution become necessary.

The right wing understood this so much 3-4 decades ago and they have reaped the benefits of that understanding so thoroughly that people on the left have been running around like chickens with their heads cut off, calling for things like revolution. No, the playbook is simple. Use every advantage you can within the system. Fight for the SCOTUS and don’t be afraid to politicize it in opposition to the right wing fascists. Find wedge issues that you can call the other side on. Take control of the narrative. Be aware of your demographics and create a unifying message that brings the disparate groups together.

What you just said though contradicts itself. At the end of the day voting en masse for reform is “a mass movement”. Things won’t change when these politicians feel comfortable. Voting against them and being vocal about this as an issue will scare them. Voting absolutely works and all this rhetoric around “voting can’t fix this” is exactly how we end up with this bullshit. Boomers learned decades ago how effective voting can be at changing everything and they have consistently turned out and shaped society around their needs as a result. If young people could get this through their heads then shit would actually change. Especially since millennials and gen z now make up the majority of the voting age population in the US.

A lot of people here mentioning scientology’s history of litigation and taking down the IRS and while that’s true, I also think it’s worth mentioning Waco. After the Waco seige the government lost a LOT of interest in going anywhere near cults. It’s just a giant mess that nobody wants to put their ass on the line to deal with. When you’re dealing with fanatics you never know what crazy shit is going to go down. As long as they aren’t hurting people outside of their cult itself, many politicians would sooner keep away from them and avoid having something backfire. That’s not to say that they’re right to think that way. It’s just the truth. Everything changed after Waco. Before Waco, the government was actually trying to do more about cults. The Jonestown massacre involved a sitting congressman getting gunned down. All the IRS shit with the scientologists went down before Waco too. IMO, Waco is the most important turning point to look at to understand why the government won’t touch cults anymore.

What I don’t like about this argument is it feels like the government trying to pass off their own responsibility to someone else. Like, if guns are so dangerous in purpose that manufacturers should be fined for shootings, then government officials should just be regulating gun ownership to begin with. Like, imagine if instead of criminalizing tobacco because of its dangerous health effects, the government said that anytime a person is caught smoking it tobacco companies get fined. At that point you may as well just outlaw the company itself. Which is fine. I have no problem outlawing gun manufacturing. But this is just an unnecessarily roundabout way of doing that. What are we actually accomplishing if we allow people to be shot and then take action and milk money out of the situation? A responsible government isn’t trying to point fingers after a tragedy like a mass shooting and they certainly aren’t trying to make money off of it. No, a good government takes the necessary direct steps to prevent those tragedies from happening again, especially if it’s a common occurrence. No need to dance around a solution instead of tackling it head on.

100% agreed on all your points. I think a lot about government structure and what structures lead to the most efficient and ethical governments. To some degree there isn’t a “perfect system” that will keep the fascists out and prevent the suppression of minorities. At least not a system that allows for healthy change. People will always be persuaded by those ideas unfortunately. Our biggest job is to fight these issues at the ballot box.

With that said, there are some major thinngs we can do systemically to prevent people like Trump from making it to the head of government. The biggest one would be ranked choice voting or one of the other alternative voting methods. Those systems tend to make fringe candidates unlikely to win.

The other big and interesting question I’ve had specifically in my move to Canada is deciphering whether a parliamentary system is fundamentally better or worse than a presidential system in these regards. On the one hand, a presidential system can turn a presidential election into a cult of personality. On the other hand, parliamentary systems by design always hand executive power to the majority party in their legislature. That means split government isn’t an option in a parliamentary system (unless the majority is formed by two or more parties). I thought moving to Canada that I would find the parliamentary system better, but I’ve honestly started to change my mind on it. I think not directly electing the executive here just means people do it through their single vote for a representative. As a result, the representitive as a concept is valued less. Beyond that, people have less direct control over the executive and people like Trudeau have less incentive to represent the nation as a whole. I think I prefer America’s system with a separate election for each position of government. If a country is divided then maybe it’s not bad for its government to also be divided. I appreciated having a Democratic house when Trump was president. It felt safer to have more views represented. This is in contrast to say, Ontario, where once the conservatives won, they had full control of both the provincial legislature and the premiership together, allowing them to get involved in all sorts of nasty business. If the government had been divided, Ford would not have been able to do things like invoke the Notwithstanding Clause.

My brain is powered by memes. Memory? More like memery.

I answered most of this in other comments, but long story short:

Housing prices and cost of living are insane compared to incomes here. And I work in STEM. Think California COL and housing prices with a midwestern salary.

The healthcare system is underfunded and struggling. You can spend a day on the phone calling every family doctor in an area and not find a single one accepting new patients. We did exactly that. Called 32 offices and nothing. The ER has nightmare wait times and walk-in clinics are not able to provide the care people need because they have such a large volume to work through.

No major political figures are offering good solutions to these problems. In fact, they’re using wedge issues from the US to stir up their respective bases instead of even looking inwards at Canada. Conservative leader, Pierre Pollievre, recently called Trudeau a marxist! I’ve heard comservatives ranting and raving about trans people instead of caring about doing anything productive. Meanwhile, Trudeau’s admin was focused on a toothless gun ban when guns aren’t a major problem here like they are in the US. The lack of a gun culture is actually one of my big positives here, so I don’t know why Trudeau is focusing on things like that when there are major crises at hand here related to the costs of living.

There’s a lot of corruption too. Trudeau is in the pocket of big businesses including the telecom triopoly (Rogers, Bell Canada, and Telus). Trudeau placed a former telecom big wig in charge of the CRTC, the Canadian equivalent of the US FCC. They have refused to allow MVNOs into Canada. Those are those third party cell companies like Mint Mobile that allow cheaper phone plans in the US. This refusal is despite Canada famously having overexpensive internet and cell phone plans due to the tripoloy. The insanity creeps into everything related to cell phones and the internet here. As an example, I am allowed only 3 voice mail messages in my inbox unless I pay more. I also have to pay long distance for calls to the US, something that isn’t true with US telecoms for calls to Canada. As someone who works in telecom, I can tell you that these kinds of fees are bullshit and cooked up given how modern cell networks work. I have had to pay $50 for an accidental one hour call to the US.

Anyways, that’s all not even to mention Trudeau’s scandals. Namely the SNC-Lavalin Affair and the Aga Khan Affair.

And all of that is just the liberals. The conservatives are no better. Particularly in Ontario, the premier (governor equivalent) here, Doug Ford, has been inundated with scandals. These include his scheme to give away preserved lands through under-the-table deals, his decision to put his unqualified nephew into a ministerial position in government, and an attempt to use an exception in the Constitution to freeze people’s rights to strike.

These scandals are all so frustrating, but what makes them unbearable is that there just isn’t the political willpower here to scrutinize these politicians and bring them to justice. Both Doug Ford and Trudeau were reelected despite their scandals. Parties aren’t offering good alternatives and the candidate selection process for parties in Canada is far less transparent than it is in the US, so political activism is that much harder.

Unless Canada gets its shit together soon, you’re going to be hearing negative big item stories coming from here not too long from now. Right now the conservatives are winning federal approval polls and there looks to be a good chance that their leader, Pierre Pollievre, could be PM come 2025. As much as I am not a fan of Trudeau, Pollievre would be even worse. Canada really needs there to be a political movement that realigns the current toxic party dynamics. People here just seem so disengaged from politics that I don’t foresee anything changing anytime soon.