?? What do you mean how is it better to agree to the price before hand? That cannot be a serious question. If it's too expensive at least you know ahead of time and can just not accept. You cannot be scammed by a driver going around in circles and increasing the price when you've already paid. In a taxi, you can. Uber/Bolt are objectively better in this regard, there is no point denying it and expecting to be taken seriously. Even my old parents who can barely use tech prefer to use Uber for that reason.

It's an outdated system and one of the two main reason they are dying in so many places. The other is service quality - never heard of a cab you can call with an app where it shows you how far it is and how long you have. At least where I live, you have to call for one and just hope they show up.

You think it happens with violence? Look what the french revolution led to. 100 more years of imperial rule and the most deadly war in European history. Look at what the Russian revolution led to, the USSR. The Chinese revolution.

Now look at how anarchist societies/groups emerged in history. Cooperation and mutual aid. The violence was for the most part defensive.

The only people who think violence is the answer, are the ones with superficial understanding of history who are suffering from Duning Kruger effect. Violent revolutions always lead to authoritarian's grabbing power and kick starting oppressive regimes.

Today is the parent of tomorrow. The present casts it's shadow far into the future. (...) Revolution that divests itself of ethical values thereby lays the foundation of injustice, deceit, and oppression for the future society. The means used to prepare the future become it's cornerstone. - Emma Goldberg

Uber is still objectively better than cabs. You agree on the price before hand. With cabs sometimes there's no meter, and even when there is one, good luck knowing if you're being ripped off when you don't know the streets.

It's still miles better than Cabs, I can't believe this even has to be argued! When was the last time anyone here defending cabs/shitting on Uber actually took a cab somewhere?

The few times I had to/decided to take a taxi, I got absolutely ripped off. And with an Uber, even if it's expensive, you at least know before hand how much you're paying. You can decline if you think it's too much. Good luck trying that with taxis.

When I watched the video, I was shocked this even was a thing that happened.

I heard about the controversy for a while, heard some people say when they saw the fight they "understood why there was questioning", and heard something about a punch. As an avid MMA fan, I expected a scary knockout, like those where you hold your breath until you see the person start moving again.

Imagine my surprise when I finally saw the video, and watched an Olympic boxing fight for the first time. I see of them wearing headgear, one of them gets hit with a few good punches, gets to pause to adjust headgear, gets hit with a few more good punches and calls off the fight without her knees ever even buckling or getting stunned, and doesn't even have a mark on her face. Perhaps the neatest, least harmful fight I've ever seen.

To be clear, I don't hold it against her for realizing she probably won't be winning and quitting before taking unnecessary damage, I'm just shocked anyone would think Imane is trans or a man based on that fight. Imagine if those people ever saw Amanda Nunes, or Dakota Ditcheva, or Zhang Weili. But I'd guess most of those people never actual watch women compete in any sports unless there is a controversy like this one, at which point they become experts.

One problem no one has mentioned, is that it also makes life a lot harder for homeless people. I guess they need to open a bank account and start writing their account number on a cardboard.

This actually reminds me of when I went to a restaurant a while ago. I had some physical money to spend, so I figured I'd take it with me and pay with that. At the end of the meal, while my friends paid with a card, I asked if I could pay with cash. Immediately, the waiter's demeanor changed and he looked almost... disgusted? I don't even know. Then he asked me in a tone that matched his expression if I didn't have a card, and I answered something like "Well, I do, but it would be more convenient for me to pay with cash, if that's okay". Then he, for some reason, repeated the question, and I answered similarly. He didn't say anything and just avoided looking at me. While a friend next to me was paying I asked again, "so, can I pay with cash?", and without looking at me, he just barely shook his head yes. So I paid with cash, and then I awaited my 3€ change back (in my country it's not usually custom to tip because waiters actually get paid full salaries). Eventually he came back with our receipt, but no change. I just left without saying anything - at this point I wasn't going to argue about 3€ - but I'm most definitely not coming back to that place.

Still don't know what the dude's problem was, but it did leave me wondering how are homeless people expected to pay for anything, if even a person who isn't homeless can receive such cold treatment just for choosing to pay with cash.

Just want to point out that there is a difference between "Libertarian Capitalism" and "Libertarian Socialism"; and as per usual, the capitalists were the one who stole the label.

So fucking predictable.

Remember when Biden stepped down? Do you remember how unpopular he was and the massive wave of hope and support for Kamala that showed itself? Well, what the fuck did you think was gonna happen when Kamala glued herself to Biden, and tried to appeal to center right voters? They refuse to make compromises with the left, try to appeal to the center-right, and then blame the left for not voting for them; classic center/lib playbook, the same thing happens in Portugal, same thing happened in 2016 USA elections.

I thought that Democrats would win DESPITE the absolute dog shit campaign, given everything about Trump, but it was still an absolute dog shit campaign by people who claimed this was the most important election of people's lives, but then dug their hills in ideologically and refused to compromise with people on their left.

If the situation wasn't so dire, it would be hilarious to see the double think by Dem voters in this thread:

• "How can Rep voters not hold Trump accountable despite everything he's done!"

• "It's not the Dems fault that they lost, despite trying to appeal to the center-right instead of the left; it's never their fault! It's the leftists fault for not voting Dem! Kamala did nothing wrong!"

At this point, wouldn't it be safer for NATO to be working to kick the USA out? There are plenty (I don't know exact numbers) of military bases in Europe that contain US soldiers. Not only does that seem like an insane security risk at this point, but it delays any help coming the way of Canada and Greenland if the US invades.

I realize some people might be scared of escalation, but Trump is already escalating and I don't think shoving our head in the sand and hope he is bluffing is a smart move.

This is really just a very specific type of socialism, as indicated by Lenin being here; an authoritarian who killed other socialists. This is about ML.

The first and last panels are right, but, for example, according to this post Anarcho-Communists don't exist. They don't believe in "evolving to a point" as the third panel says, they believe in jumping straight to that point. Also, Libertarian Socialists wouldn't really be fond of "elected committees" controlling things, as the second panel talks about; maybe electing people into leadership positions inside of a company/cooperative, or maybe even having unions make those decisions, but nothing above that.

I don't know much about her, but directly from the wiki:

The rate at which Harris's office prosecuted marijuana crimes was higher than the rate under Hallinan, but the number of defendants sentenced to state prison for such offenses was substantially lower.[76] Prosecutions for low-level marijuana offenses were rare under Harris, and her office had a policy of not pursuing jail time for marijuana possession offenses.[76]

It sounds like her position on weed is not exactly what people are painting it as. At least these comments make it seem much worse than it is according to the wiki.

EDIT:

According to this, she even supported a bill in 2019 to legalize marijuana at a federal level, tax it, and use that money to (according to this):

Create a community reinvestment fund to reinvest in communities most impacted by the failed War on Drugs and allow those funds to be invested in the following programs:

Job training;

Reentry services;

Expenses related to the expungement of convictions;

Public libraries;

Community centers;

Programs and opportunities dedicated to youth; and

Health education

I don't know if it's on purpose, but you are definitely spreading misinformation.

I'm gonna remember this thread for the next time everyone starts going on about how:

"The average person is doing the best they can! Climate change is all the government's and corporation's fault, we literally can't do anything!"

Meanwhile, a post on a vegan community got several people to go out of their way to talk about how cool they are for eating meat. And they got upvoted for it too!

Reminder that:

• meat production is one of the largest producers of CO2 (beef is the biggest, and pork after that)

• most greens are cheaper than meat, pretty much everywhere

• the average person in a western country is typically overweight

"But there's nothing we can do! Don't you see? It's the governments and corporations who have to take action and force me to stop eating meat/insert-other-thing-I-can-do-but-choose-not-to-here! Also, vote for Biden/a-centrist-from-your-country!"

Ferdinand was just an excuse, the Germans had been planning and getting ready to invade France for at least a decade, meanwhile the French were also making their own plans and chomping at the bit to recover territory lost in 1870. The Assassination was essentially just an excuse to kick things off.

This is from June 2020.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says he is planning to effectively annex parts of the occupied West Bank in what would be a major - and highly controversial - act.

This is from July 2023.

Israel Is Officially Annexing the West Bank

A quiet bureaucratic maneuver by Netanyahu’s government has begun transferring control over the occupied territory from military to civilian leadership—violating international law.

Here's an entire wiki page about all they've been doing in the West Bank since 1967.

If you think this is new and is only happening because of Trump, you haven't been paying attention and are falling for propaganda.

I personally don't think the mechanics work that well or are very well thought out. This mainly due to 4 factors which, all together, just make the romances seem really forced, as well as annoying and unbearable sometimes. With maybe 1 exception that I know of out of the 9 companions:

• All companions are bisexual

• All companions are attracted to the player

• When attracted to the player they will all actively make a move on the player, instead of waiting for the player to chose to hit on one of them

• The dialogue trees are way too heavy on romance, to the point that sometimes the only friendly options seem way too intimate and even flirty.

Just 2 of those would be fine, maybe 3, but 4 really pushes it.

Part of what I mean by friendly options seeming way too intimate, is that instead of the game giving you friendly and obviously romantic options, it often seems to compress all of that into just one option (or just one way that the character acts) which skirts the line between friendly and flirty so as to try and retain plausible deniability ("I'm not interested in that character") while still giving you a way to role-play the romance ("That was clearly flirting/an intimate romantic moment").

Don't even get me started on Gale. His affinity was over 80 before Act I was over, and at one point I had four dialogue options out of which only one didn't seem flirty (the one I chose). Then, after he said we were friends, I had three choices "I want to be more than friends / We're not friends / That depends, what do you like about me?". Out of those, the third one is the one I went with, but even that seems a bit flirty to me. Then later he says he needs to talk to me "urgently", so my character goes to him, sits quite close to him in a way I would consider intimate and more than friendly, and he then professes his love for me.

Other than Gale: Shadowheart was quite easy to romance; Lae'zel said she liked my sweat or something; Wyll I've definitely had more-than-friendly conversations with; Astarion, simply due to his personality, has been hitting on the entire time despite me barely using him*. Halsin I don't use, Minthara is FUBAR, and I think Jaheira cannot be romanced. Karlach might be the only one I've used that hasn't hit on me yet.

*And I wouldn't even mind Astarian's personality if it wasn't for everything else.

China is a possibility because (AFAIK) they don't have any territorial ambitions in Europe, but Russia is definitely off the table. I don't think any significant number of Europeans would be OK allying with Russia. In fact, I think it's more likely that if a war breaks out that Russia and the USA will be on the same side.

For a "Solar punk" instance, this community seems to have very little of the "punk" aspect, and in these comments it sounds more like a "Solar rich liberal" place.

The amount of slander towards homeless people, the propagating of stereotypes, and the removal of personhood in these comments really blows my mind. There are even people defending that homeless people should be sent to prison and have their life managed for them; others claim how it's their own fault they are homeless; some cry about "private property".

And of course a bunch of people claiming this isn't a final/permanent solution, and so it shouldn't be done... as if to say, until we come up with better solutions, these people should just go without shelter. What is really a priority to them, is not having to look at homeless people.

In a nutshell: "It's their own fault! They're probably all heroin addicts anyway. Someone else should come up with and implement better solutions, but in the meantime I don't want to have to see and walk by people who don't have a home!". A Solar Punk Neolib community.

I agree with you, but Kamala will probably still be the most left leaning president the USA ever had by quite a bit (AFAIK), and has a good chance to start shifting the Overton Window; if only by showing the Democratic Party that choosing more left leaning candidates actually gives them better chances of winning.

I'm a diver but not that qualified, and far from an expert, but the fact that five (supposedly experienced) divers died, and now even a rescue diver has died, tells me this is in big part to do with the location itself rather than failure in the divers part.

I don't remember the names, but some caves have water currents pulling in, and others pushing out. Out are the safest ones because it's easier to get out. In are the most dangerous, because you might be going further than you realize and to come back you have to swim against the current - you won't have enough air to make it back. That said, usually even experienced cave divers stay far from those caves, precisely because they know how dangerous they are. Also, if you are diving in a foreign place, you should really go with a dive guide who knows the area. AFAIK, there was no guide.

So even then, there was probably some type of mess up on the driver's side. Because it seems they should not have been performing that dive, much less with no dive guide.

And statistically, the majority of victims of cave diving deaths were people who are not certified cave divers.

I'm saying all this because I've seen so many people talk about how dangerous it is, but statistically if you are qualified it's safer than free diving. But no one complaints about that being dangerous.

EDIT: I should also mention I could not read the article, I got paywalled. I'm having to go just by the title.

Unfortunately I'm not that young. I'm at a point where I would like to have my own place, find someone, get married, maybe have kids in a few years. But I don't have the money, and much less the work/life balance necessary. There's been a couple of times where a girl asked if I have my own place, and it always hurts to answer.