|
Popular Thug Drink posted:i'd absolutely love to see better mass transit across america, but you can't just say "americans are racist" like that explains the hugely flawed urban framework which has been the predominant style for the last 75+ years
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2016 01:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 12:19 |
|
|
Nextdoor might as well be bylined as Klan Lite Facebook
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2016 01:44
|
|
|
Arsenic Lupin posted:It isn't sufficient to explain that, but it's certainly a factor. I've lived in two major urban areas (Charlotte, NC, and the SF Bay Area) where there was public protest against mass transit because it would bring crime (read: black/Hispanic people) into the desirable neighborhoods. This particular racism/classism shows up in a lot of non-transit; somebody on my nextdoor.com neighborhood (yeah, yeah, a hive of scum and villainy) was arguing that apartments bring criminals, and that only homeowners can be trusted. (!) yeah but "americans are racist" can be used to explain basically everything about america in one way or another foreign policy, energy policy, education, housing, find an aspect of government policy that doesn't have one foot in racism. it's not a very useful explanatory framework asdf32 posted:China figured it out: oh yeah, the people crusher
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2016 01:54
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:yeah but "americans are racist" can be used to explain basically everything about america in one way or another It's very useful because a great many things about America don't make a lot of sense until you realize "because racism" is the answer to like...everything.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2016 01:56
|
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:It's very useful because a great many things about America don't make a lot of sense until you realize "because racism" is the answer to like...everything. Except its probably more accurate to realize that America isn't unique with respect to racism, it's unique with respect to diversity and thus the pervasive impact of racism.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2016 02:09
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:yeah but "americans are racist" can be used to explain basically everything about america in one way or another I'd love to see something like that in major metros mowing down cabs/random vehicles parked in the bike lane
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2016 02:26
|
|
|
mastershakeman posted:I'd love to see something like that in major metros mowing down cabs/random vehicles parked in the bike lane I live in Seattle. I am at half-mast just dreaming of that thing with threshers installed on the front ending the problem of people blocking the box in the Mercer Mess.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2016 04:19
|
|
|
asdf32 posted:Except its probably more accurate to realize that America isn't unique with respect to racism, it's unique with respect to diversity and thus the pervasive impact of racism. America is unique in that we ignore class so much as to pretend it doesn't exist
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2016 04:24
|
|
|
Twerkteam Pizza posted:America is unique in that we ignore class so much as to pretend it doesn't exist No, we don't ignore white people.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2016 04:30
|
|
|
computer parts posted:No, we don't ignore white people. erm, not what I said but thank you I think class is intersectional
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2016 04:35
|
|
|
Twerkteam Pizza posted:erm, not what I said but thank you So which aspects of class are currently ignored? Presumably the ones that don't involve race.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2016 04:38
|
|
|
computer parts posted:So which aspects of class are currently ignored? Presumably the ones that don't involve race. Working conditions, union-busting, and growing inequality were generally ignored until the recession and now were doing nothing to structurally stop the concentration of wealth Maybe I'm just tired but I really don't feel like we've made a huge amount of headway
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2016 04:41
|
|
|
asdf32 posted:China figured it out: That thing turned out to be a massive scam and is extremely unsound such as having issues rolling over when it turns.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2016 05:04
|
|
|
Barudak posted:That thing turned out to be a massive scam and is extremely unsound such as having issues rolling over when it turns. That depresses me as part of me hoped it would really work.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2016 05:23
|
|
|
Given that it has to take up a whole lane on its own anyway, why not just have light rail?
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2016 05:37
|
|
|
Cliff Racer posted:Given that it has to take up a whole lane on its own anyway, why not just have light rail? Because that would be Commu -- oh wait.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2016 05:49
|
|
|
Cliff Racer posted:Given that it has to take up a whole lane on its own anyway, why not just have light rail? The idea is it could be embedded into roads that already exist thus requiring no reduction in existing road infrastructure. The issues, in addition to it being a hundred million dollar scam, are basically every single thing involving a turn and any sort of truck with trailer. The idea I think was contemplated even as far back as the 40s based on popular mechanics issues but basically it's an extremely expensive non solution.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2016 06:19
|
|
|
Gawker died today 
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2016 06:25
|
|
|
Jumpingmanjim posted:Gawker died today How is that something to be sad about?
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2016 07:20
|
|
|
A billionaire destroyed a media company because he didn't like what they said. It doesn't matter if the company sucks for other reasons, that is the lesson every other media company learned.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2016 07:25
|
|
|
Tars Tarkas posted:A billionaire destroyed a media company because he didn't like what they said. It doesn't matter if the company sucks for other reasons, that is the lesson every other media company learned. That is horrible
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2016 07:26
|
|
|
I liked reading Gawker. It was funny. Oh well I guess some billionaire got offended.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2016 07:59
|
|
|
I would get this outpouring of support if Gawker had gotten nailed over actual investigative journalism or hard-hitting satire. Lord knows that there is no lack of things worth getting into going on in the world that will make you enemies. But it's not, it's a loving sex tape. The internet has thrust us into a second golden age of yellow-page journalism and you're all taking the wrong lesson from one its titans flying to high. For example, Tars Tarkas posted:A billionaire destroyed a media company because he didn't like what they said. It doesn't matter if the company sucks for other reasons, that is the lesson every other media company learned. That's the wrong takeaway from this. Why did it take notable shithead billionare Peter Thiel with a vendetta for them to finally get nailed for their poo poo? Gawker has been up to some seriously unethical crap over the years and they've basically gotten away with it. There's a tacit understanding that if you try to bring them to court they'll spend every penny they have making the process as long and expensive as possible as they lose and you'll get nothing. Basically guaranteeing that they're untouchable to everyone not rich enough to call their bluff and eat the loss.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2016 08:13
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:variable lane pricing works, it's just unpopular Yes, because those disincentives totally don't skew absurdly towards punishing the poor for having to go to work and not being able to afford housing close to their jobs. Tars Tarkas posted:A billionaire destroyed a media company because he didn't like what they said. It doesn't matter if the company sucks for other reasons, that is the lesson every other media company learned. Everything worthwhile about the company was sold off to Univision. The only ones getting screwed here are Gawker itself and the editors and executives who ran with embracing a total lack of journalistic ethics in the name of clicks.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2016 08:35
|
|
|
H.P. Hovercraft posted:mandatory vaccinations to make sure enough people get autism to support more trains That's a gamble, it could just make them libertarian
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2016 09:02
|
|
|
MiddleOne posted:That's the wrong takeaway from this. Why did it take notable shithead billionare Peter Thiel with a vendetta for them to finally get nailed for their poo poo? Gawker has been up to some seriously unethical crap over the years and they've basically gotten away with it. There's a tacit understanding that if you try to bring them to court they'll spend every penny they have making the process as long and expensive as possible as they lose and you'll get nothing. Basically guaranteeing that they're untouchable to everyone not rich enough to call their bluff and eat the loss.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2016 09:30
|
|
|
Tars Tarkas posted:A billionaire destroyed a media company because he didn't like what they said. It doesn't matter if the company sucks for other reasons, that is the lesson every other media company learned. A federal court decided that Gawker was responsible for hundreds of millions of dollars in damages. The only thing that billionaire did was give an aging celebrity the financial backing necessary to pursue his rightful legal rights. If Gawker hadn't knowingly violated the law and then doubled down on it by leaving the video up and then leaking the racial slurs tape they wouldn't have had to pay poo poo and Peter Theil could have spent eternity crying into his coffee.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2016 12:29
|
|
|
Cliff Racer posted:A federal court decided that Gawker was responsible for hundreds of millions of dollars in damages. The only thing that billionaire did was give an aging celebrity the financial backing necessary to pursue his rightful legal rights. If Gawker hadn't knowingly violated the law and then doubled down on it by leaving the video up and then leaking the racial slurs tape they wouldn't have had to pay poo poo and Peter Theil could have spent eternity crying into his coffee. Plus giving statements under oath while being flippant didn't help anything. "Sarcastically" saying "Any celeb older then 5 is a valid sex tape news story" in your official statements is definitely going to blow back on you especially when the opposing council brings it up and you try to pretend like it didn't happen.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2016 12:31
|
|
|
Gawker dug their own grave. They on many occasions have done completely irresponsible things like outing a closeted married gay man for no reason (he was not a public figure or anti-gay, and when people pointed this out the writer claimed that it was a legitimate story because he's related to Tim Geithner). In the Hogan case they had many opportunities to end the whole thing but refused. I can't really feel too bad for a company run by idiots.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2016 14:07
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:I can't really feel too bad for a company run by idiots. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2016 14:26
|
|
I CANNOT EJACULATE WITHOUT SEEING NATIVE AMERICANS BRUTALISED!
|
Nobody's asking you to feel bad for the company.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2016 14:31
|
|
|
Cliff Racer posted:A federal court decided that Gawker was responsible for hundreds of millions of dollars in damages. The only thing that billionaire did was give an aging celebrity the financial backing necessary to pursue his rightful legal rights. If Gawker hadn't knowingly violated the law and then doubled down on it by leaving the video up and then leaking the racial slurs tape they wouldn't have had to pay poo poo and Peter Theil could have spent eternity crying into his coffee. Wrong, dumb and wrong, and also wrong. Bollea got smacked down in Federal court so he took it to Florida, where the case was presided over by a judge who was appointed by Jeb! bc she was Terri Schiavo's Noble Christian Warrior-Lawyer. She's had more decisions reversed on appeal than any other judge in her county because she doesn't really have a good grasp on the law---which is why her order to take down the video was immediately reversed on appeal (they took it down later, though). And Thiel didn't just back Bollea--he was backing a half-dozen other lawsuits against Gawker from assorted lunatics (my favorite is from some idiot who keeps claiming he invented email because he once had a program called E-MAIL.EXE that no one but him ever used) Slanderer fucked around with this message at 14:42 on Aug 23, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2016 14:34
|
|
|
I can believe two things at once: that Gawker were bullies who had it coming -- outing that gay executive is only one example -- and that it is a bad thing that Peter Thiel was able to use his billions to destroy them. If I want a test case to be upset about, though, I'll pick the multi-millionaire who tried to take down Mother Jones. That wasn't a libel case, although it was disguised as one; it was SLAPP.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2016 15:17
|
|
|
Slanderer posted:Wrong, dumb and wrong, and also wrong. Bollea got smacked down in Federal court so he took it to Florida, where the case was presided over by a judge who was appointed by Jeb! bc she was Terri Schiavo's Noble Christian Warrior-Lawyer. She's had more decisions reversed on appeal than any other judge in her county because she doesn't really have a good grasp on the law---which is why her order to take down the video was immediately reversed on appeal (they took it down later, though). Weird how the Gawker ruling wasn't reversed on appeal if everything you said was true.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2016 15:42
|
|
|
Liquid Communism posted:Yes, because those disincentives totally don't skew absurdly towards punishing the poor for having to go to work and not being able to afford housing close to their jobs. lol given the insane burdens placed on the suburban poor anyway i dont think "not being able to afford variable priced fast lanes" is what's keeping them from work you know, aside from the structural necessity of owning a beater car in the first place next you'll be complaining about the forty cent gas tax
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2016 15:49
|
|
|
ocrumsprug posted:Weird how the Gawker ruling wasn't reversed on appeal if everything you said was true. The same judge (surprise surprise) refused to stay the judgement for long enough to make an appeal (which is not very long at all). They have not filed the appeal yet, because they still need to put up money for the judgement.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2016 16:02
|
|
|
ocrumsprug posted:Weird how the Gawker ruling wasn't reversed on appeal if everything you said was true. It is being appealed and the judgement is extremely likely to be reduced, at minimum. Thiel specifically selected Florida as a venue because Florida requires people to post the entire judgement into escrow during appeal. Everything about the case was designed to kill Gawker - for example the terms of Gawker's insurance became public and the lawyers in the case immediately dropped any claims which would cause insurance to pay the judgement and legal costs. What's really crazy about that is that it is directly contrary to the best interests of Hogan: the insurance would have made getting the judgement money much much easier.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2016 16:10
|
|
|
Shifty Pony posted:What's really crazy about that is that it is directly contrary to the best interests of Hogan: the insurance would have made getting the judgement money much much easier. destroying a company which sexually humiliated him in front of a global audience is in his interest
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2016 16:11
|
|
|
Shifty Pony posted:It is being appealed and the judgement is extremely likely to be reduced, at minimum. Thiel specifically selected Florida as a venue because Florida requires people to post the entire judgement into escrow during appeal. This presupposes that Hogan didn't simply want Gawker dead as well.
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2016 16:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 12:19 |
|
|
MiddleOne posted:
|
|
#
?
Aug 23, 2016 16:34
|
|