That's stupid as fuck. You don't need to snottily educate people on why the dumb shit you're doing has complex implications beyond the visible annoyance to the regular person. You need to find a way of protesting that has that regular person go "Fuck yeah! Let's do this shit!".
The other side has the entire backing of the oil and gas industry, as well as the growth of capitalism itself. The other side is on the side of the massively dominant ideology and economy system.
I don't have a solution. But I know that aggravating the situation for the wrong people isn't at all helpful.
Let's say you have a cold. You're dizzy, nose is stuffed, throat is scratching and shivering like hell.
Then somebody shows up and yells into your ear "Hey, you should do something about that!".
Will that help you? No. It will only add a headache on top of all the other issues.
because not fighting means getting killed, being marginalized, getting the groundwater poisoned, losing rights, getting put into concentration camps, etc? its not complicated. lots of people don’t have the luxury to just not “bother”. they aren’t blocking roads cuz they like it, people who do direct action can get put in fucking prison. they’re doing it because they don’t have the choice to sit on the sidelines and whine about how annoying protests are.
like, for real, do you think the people who built the civil rights movement didn’t hold meetings on this exact thing? that they didn’t talk about blocking roads and airports? that they didn’t do sit-ins and other kinds of direct action? like, if you think this is stupid as fuck, you must think a great deal of the people who built and participated in the civil rights movement were pretty fucking stupid, because they were doing this shit, and it was against the law, and it was the law that broke first.
I think people need to adjust to the times. Just because it worked for people in the past doesn't mean it will work again now.
Times change, people change, tactics change.
Governments and corporations have studied past protests and never stopped looking for ways to break them apart.
Without the means to counter their updated forms of interference, those old, rickety forms of protest will only fail.
I never said to stop protests and demonstrations. I said to do them differently or to do them better.
i’m sorry, but you really aren’t in a position to be saying anything about how effective these strategies are. direct action continues to be a huge part of basically every modern social movement up to and including the largest protests in history. if you aren’t open to learning those reasons, you have no grounds to contest their efficacy.
I sense some mighty strong projection going on here. The writer comes off like they believe they're correct without the need for any question, completely sure of this idea, for which they provide zero evidence. They then go on to call anyone who disagrees with them ignorant, infantilising and diminishing the opposing point of view before the reader has had a moment to make up their own mind. Meanwhile, the intended audience is being spoon-fed hate and gobbling it up. This is what division looks like. They make you hate your neighbors and demand action from you against them, after all it's what's right: you're a grown up and the opposition needs to be parented. This is the tone that makes sure you never gain power, because you don't believe in moderates, and you downright hate progressives.
they’re kinda right though. the things this person is saying aren’t new. the principles of direct action were instrumental in the success of the Civil rights movement, and many other activist movements throughout modern history. i’m really not sure where you think this person is coming from, though, with the whole “spoon-fed hate” thing. they’re a leftist. a socialist or an anarchist, something of that flavor. the action they’re demanding is action against climate change, against bigotry, against capitalism. or at least, i don’t really see many people who aren’t somewhere around that headspace talking about “praxis” and “direct action”. they kinda come off like a smartass to me, but the point they’re getting to is something pretty fundamental to organizing effective movements, and they’re talking about it because tons of people aren’t aware of the theory and politics that has grown up around making changes in society.
like, just for history’s sake, in the SCLC, the org MLK lead during the civil rights movement, Selma, among many other things, was organized by James Luther Bevel, the SCLC’s Director of Direct Action and Nonviolent Education. he turned out to have sexually abused his daughters, so uhhh… not a great dude , but if you look at his wikipedia you can see how instrumental he was to the civil rights movement as it is known today, and how the idea of direct action was foundational to that movement and its success.
You’re referencing well planned and executed protests. They picked their targets and actors to garner sympathy from the public.
The difference is that the original post is claiming that any protest anywhere is just as valid. It isn’t. Blocking random roads does nothing but turn people who just want to get to work against you. They aren’t agents of Capitalism moving to oppress us, they’re your neighbors and the people you want to be turning to your cause.
By all means, if you’re agitated about an issue to protest, please do. Block a road, maybe. But be damn sure you pick the right road to block.
i’m not really seeing any claim that “any protest anywhere is just as valid”. they’re talking about educating people on the strategic value of civil disobedience and direct action. that is important for any social movement that wants to succeed.
Blocking random roads does nothing but turn people who just want to get to work against you.
this isn’t true. it can turn people against you, for sure. that isn’t the only thing it does though. it can delay the construction of an oil pipeline. it can disrupt the logistics of an industry. like, the activist’s dilemma is important, taking care to recognize the PR of what you do is important, but direct action is about doing the thing you want done, rather than waiting for public opinion to turn.
if you are an indigenous activist trying to keep an oil pipeline from poisoning your water, or the government from leasing your land to corporate agriculture, it doesn’t matter if people are “on your side” or not. you need to stop the fully legal process that is guaranteed to make your people suffer, knowing that nobody but you and your people are historically likely to defend your home. there are so many situations where just waiting for public opinion to turn isn’t gonna stop the thing you want to stop.
no, its to achieve your goals. this is fundamental to the idea of direct action. you’re doing stuff. you aren’t trying to build support for helping homeless people, you’re going out there and feeding them. you aren’t waiting for people to legalize desegregation, you’re defying segregated public space. you aren’t begging public officials not to build an oil pipeline in your home, you’re chaining yourself to equipment.
if you confine protesting only to convincing bystanders to be on your side, you’re just saying the only way to win a just future is to be popular. what consolation is that to the marginalized? to those who have never enjoyed widespread public support, and can’t expect it to solve their problems?
if you think protests are only to alter public opinion? you don’t know very much about protesting. direct action has been part of protests since the beginning.
Direct action may include activities, often nonviolent but possibly violent, targeting people, groups, institutions, actions, or property that its participants deem objectionable.
Nonviolent direct action may include civil disobedience, sit-ins, strikes, and counter-economics. Violent direct action may include political violence, assault, arson, sabotage, and property destruction.
Looks quite efficient. See also: rocket stoves, specifically the pocket rocket design. Though the ones with lots of thermal mass probably serve folks better while taking up more space. Various wood gasifier stoves are pretty neat. I’ve got a little one for camping.
In this instance, I’d predict the components of this stove will oxidize away quickly.
It is all stainless steel. So it will be able to last.
I once combined a steel can wood gasifier with an aluminum alcohol stove using an ethanol and peroxide fuel that could boil 500ml of water in under 6 minutes with an ounce of fuel and burned violet. Not ideal for lightweight camping, as I intended, but man was it efficient.
It’s safe enough, in the Finnish army we occasionally get the tent heater red hot, and as long as nothing flammable touches it or is too close, it’s fine. It will radiate heat quite well when that hot, but won’t be anywhere close to dangerous if you know what you’re doing. In the tent we of course have some water nearby to extinguish the possible flames but still.
You basically need to have it glowing red if you’re to keep the tent warm in -15 °C or lower. - 30°C needs something closely resembling the picture posted.
Well, the example was with a tent which is a single layer of cotton between you and the environment, and by no means resembles anything even remotely insulated. That’s why it needs a relatively powerful heater to stay comfortably warm. In normal use you have quite a lot of control over the temperature of the heater, mainly with the size and amount of firewood -> effective surface area of the fire.
For static buildings the situation is different, with enough insulation you can get by with almost no heating. Zero-energy building is a thing in Finland as well, and although it has its challenges, it’s still possible to keep your home warm with only your body heat in e.g. -40. The main difficulty you’ll encounter there is getting rid of the moisture in air, since being that energy-efficient will require having your home almost fully enclosed. You’ll also need to be careful to properly limit the moisture getting out from the house, as the dew point will be inside the insulation and any moisture getting out will condense inside, eventually leading to mold.
I haven’t actually reached the end game in Frostpunk 1, but at a glance it would require some efficiency improvements and better insulation – and given enough insulation and heating anything is possible. If your people are sleeping under the sky hugging the generator, I’d assume you won’t get past the end game. A real-world example that somewhat resembles the Frostpunk world would be people living in Yakutsk, Russia, where they have more of a brute-force approach to the -60 °C temperatures – just burn enough gas to keep your log cabin warm. Surviving outside at those temperatures without protective equipment would be difficult though, especially since most materials won’t stay flexible at -120 °C or -140 °C. You’d find it pretty difficult to move around.
Edit: But also, a mandatory “don’t quote me on this”, as building is my hobby, not my job. I’ve some knowledge, and some experience, but by no means am I a professional.
Hmmm, send it back to R&D. The expelled gasses going directly into the horn would only produce a single-toned “HONK”. Instead, those gasses could be used to inflate a cuff that’s wrapped around a more traditional style clown horn bulb, squeezing the bulb and producing that same noise; but as the cuff loses pressure and bulb reinflates, the air it draws back will produce second tone, providing the clown horn’s signature “HEE-HAW” that our prospective murder victims expect and deserve.
Yes but direct gas impingement on a rubber chicken is going to wear some parts. Better to have an indirect system and avoid carbon deposits in your comedy noisemakers.
Hate to be that guy, but the icing on frosted Pop Tarts contains gelatin derived from bones, hooves, tendons, ligaments, etc., making it not vegetarian.
That makes it not vegan but last time I checked, vegetarians only steer clear of meat, not all animal products. It’s like veganism, but less obsessive.
I feel bad for calling in sick because my department is horrifically understaffed and 1 person not showing up for work increases the workload of everyone else by about 50%. And since it’s a hospital, it’s not like we can just continue working like normal and let the company eat the profit loss; if our department is not working at 100% then innocent people’s health suffers.
Unfair of the company to provide this service without adequate staff. If the people requiring the service suffer because of short staff, they are suffering because of management, not the workers.
I really hate how management uses their failures to turn the screws on their employees that they often don’t pay enough.
Oh, can someone explain this? What is wrong? I kinda don’t understand what is happening here. Did someone cut out a piece of carpet to lay under the toilet so it doesn’t damage the floor in the bathroom? Why did they do that?
Appears to me that, when they had the toilet sitting in the now-carpeted room as contractors worked on the flooring in the bathroom, a contractor tasked with applying carpet to the room the toilet was temporarily being stored in had a typical “not my job” moment and laid down the carpet everywhere except where the toilet was temporarily being placed.
You can even see the garish cut the contractor made on the right hand side of the hole so he could get the carpet to lay into the corner, behind the toilet, instead of simply moving it.
Reminds me of when someone came to fix my bathroom floor, which had a hole in it the entire time my house was on the market because some morons from Home Depot who ruined it were disputing whether they'd fix it. So this guy removed the toilet and sink, finished the bathroom floor, awesome... then he said "oh, I can remove the toilet and sink, but I'm not licensed to put them back, sorry" and left. This was the day before closing.
Lets see, I just looked it up in the city I lived in and no. No permit to replace in the same location, but a license is required for people who don't live in the house where the work is being performed. I wasn't remotely qualified to do that especially in less than 18 hours, though. My realtor ended up finding a plumber who could come the next morning.
In my city you can’t diy electric without a license if you intend to sell soon. It’s a reasonable precaution to prevent shoddy flips. I assume plumbing works the same way. Just installing a toilet might be fine though, it’s pretty straightforward.
Had a similar issue with a dishwasher. Unhooked it without asking us, refused to reinstall it. Bonus is that for whatever reason we apparently have a complicated dishwasher installation (it’s not next to a sink like they normally are). $300 to redo it.
I always thought it rewarded skill better. Instead of blue shells, karts were faster the farther back they fell in rankings, the lack of randomized items encouraged strategy, and if you didn’t touch the steering, accelerator or brakes, the boosts would last longer. Plus the music was dope.
slrpnk.net
Top