she/her

I am a feminist and some sort of left anarchist. I like video games, FOSS software, Lord of the Rings, math, and summoning uncountably many demons by digging too deep.

I am not LGBTQ+ but I try to be a good ally. (How’s my driving?)

  • 3 Posts
  • 21 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: July 21st, 2023

help-circle
rss
  • I can’t believe this comment chain is this long and no one has pointed out that drunk and stoned humans are terrible at figuring stuff like this out.

    You’re not planning for the dumbest human trying in earnest. You’re planning for humans who are tired, distracted and/or chemically altered. A 80 IQ person can figure out a weird trash can eventually if they are trying.

    These comments (not just yours) feel misanthropic. I haven’t been to a campsite in ages so I don’t know what sort of trash can puzzlebox we’re talking about, but I work somewhere with alcohol so I can guess what the true issue is.




  • You are always free to host your own lemmy instance. Then you can choose to federate with whoever you want.

    If I hosted an instance, I wouldn’t want to host hate speech or weird porn, and it would also be my right to not do so.

    I also wouldn’t want to bother moderating a lemmy instance for people I didn’t know, and having to hear their demands for what they want to see/not see. That’s just me, personally and I’m glad there are people out there doing the work for me.

    What I’m saying is, if you’re going to interact with a platform with possibly millions of users there’s going to be ground rules, and those take time to agree on. Lemmy is unique in that you can move to an instance that fits you better. I don’t think social media should be monetized, but we can’t ignore they take time and money to run. You have to compromise on somethings sometimes.

    Or you can just run your own.




  • FOSS software demonstrates that one of the suppositions of capitalism - that innovation is primarily driven by profit motive - is incorrect. Humans want to help each other. People want to improve the world even if they’re not paid for it.

    welcome to the team, comrade





  • The right to life starts at nidation as that’s when nature choses to attempt to bring a particular life to fruit

    Then in my example you would consider that women to be a murderer.

    Laws protecting fetuses should involve protecting women against domestic violence, and the suffering caused by losing a pregnancy through violence/another person’s negligence. Also, I’m not terribly concerned with what international courts and governments think about fetuses being people, I think they’re wrong.

    “X is not a person” is a rather weak argument in general. As that’s the US reasoning I’ll point you towards various adult people that the US has, in the past, not considered persons.

    A person can sustain it’s own life without needing the body of another person (so I do not support late term abortions if the baby is able to live outside the womb, naturally). The US’s terrible history with respecting human rights (slavery, indiginous peoples, immigrants) don’t have much to do with fetuses, because fetuses depend directly on another, specific human body to survive.

    If you don’t consider this to be a good argument, that’s fine. I know this is something people feel strongly about, and I’m not convinced anyone can be persuaded in an internet comment.

    Consider that she’s lost in a desert with her kid without water, she carries it back to safety but it doesn’t survive the trip. Is she a murderer?

    If she knowingly went into the desert without supplies and dragged her child there, or put herself in a situation where she was unprepared in a desert, yes she is a murderer. Not complicated.

    If she did not have the mental faculties to know that deserts are dangerous, she is not a murderer. Such a woman would probably require a guardian to care for her (perhaps she is mentally disabled) and that person is now guilty of neglect/manslaughter.

    If they were both kidnapped and dropped off in the desert, then there is still a murderer: The person who kidnapped them.

    I suppose there is also the fourth option: She was forced to flee across the desert due to circumstances in her home country. This is a tragedy. This happens at the border between Mexico/USA. The US government is at fault for forcing refugees across an unsafe crossing. My government has built border walls in cities in the USA, so refugees die in the desert. This is by design, they did this knowingly. People used to illegally cross the boarder in civilized areas. Nobody knows how many people die in the desert, nor do they care. They care more controlling the bodies of their citizens than they do for our neighbors in the south. My government is cruel and oppressive, Germany is a much nicer place I’m pretty sure.

    You can’t get counselling at the same place you get the abortion, conflict of interest.

    Even worse. More planning to be done. I mean, I guess counseling would stop people from getting abortions on a whim, because they’re having a bad day. Oh wait, actually people don’t do that because they’re painful and mentally straining already, not to mention the societal judgement etc. (By the way, I have had a miscarriage when I was young. It was painful, I literally thought I was dying, and while I have not had an abortion, I am guessing the pain is about the same. Nobody is having abortions because it’s an easy choice.).

    Also why would you take days off

    My job would require this. Laws in Germany are likely different, with more worker protections. In America, low-wage workers generally don’t get paid time off or sick leave, so cooldown laws here are tough on people without resources. It’s probably less of a problem in Germany, where your government cares for your working class (I assume). However, a waiting period is still a barrier to reaching services.

    None of those involve another person.

    But involving the justice system in another person’s (bad) choices always produces good results, no? That’s why you were arguing self-administered abortions should be criminalized in Germany, so the justice system can help them. It’s true these examples I gave don’t involve harming another person, but again, I don’t consider a fetus to be a person.

    Generally speaking the whole thing is 99.99% uncontroversial in Germany.

    I find it incredibly difficult to believe that the criminalization of the acts of desperate women to be uncontroversial… I’m betting if you polled people, or spoke to people outside of your social circle, you’d find that these ideas aren’t so unanimously accepted.


  • state’s constitutional duty to protect life requires it to minimise the number of abortions

    The state would find it’s money better spent through education and access to contraception, and opportunities for women.

    I will also point out that fetuses are not people, so you are not protecting life by minimizing abortions by restricting abortions directly. If you are unsure of whether you feel if a fetus is a person or not, consider a hypothetical example: Consider a woman who has been told that they would be unable to carry a child to term. She conceives anyway, hoping the doctor is wrong. She endures multiple miscarriages against the advice of her doctor. Is she also a murderer?

    three days cooldown

    These laws are written by people who cannot even imagine the lives that these women live. A cooldown period means multiple trips to the doctor. It means taking at least 2 days off work. It means finding child care and transportation for not just one day, but two. It also means obtaining the procedure is harder to hide, if she’s in a situation where she needs to do that. It’s incredibly burdensome and paternalistic.

    It’s kinda "but I would have gotten the building permit anyway, I’m legally entitled to get one!’

    I am not going to make any judgement of your character or insult you in any way. However, I do need to say this: comparing a woman’s control over her own body to needing to obtain a building permit is DEEPLY REPULSIVE.

    Does Germany also criminalize self harm (cutting)? Overeating? Recklessly engaging in sports without protective equipment? Should we not also give out fines and force people in front of judges for these activities?

    No threat of law will stop back-alley abortions. These women are already knowingly risking their lives when they do this outside of the medical system. They would risk death. That is what it means to them.


  • Self-managed abortion is a criminal offense with a maximum sentence of life imprisonment in the UK

    So… the punishment for doing something dangerous is life in prison? Someone who is administering an abortion themselves is desperate and probably not aware of services available to them. They’re the most vulnerable in society; someone your government should be helping and protecting.

    Further, this opens every single women who has had a miscarriage up to scrutiny. I don’t know if anyone has been jailed for miscarrying in the UK, but it happens in the US through similar laws, and it is tragic and barbaric.

    From the article:

    Although some involved women who were arrested for things such as falling down, or giving birth at home, the vast majority involved drugs, and women of colour were overrepresented.

    Here’s a particularly egregious example (This woman attempted to commit suicide by rat poison and survived, her baby did not).

    While I agree you probably shouldn’t use drugs while pregnant, obviously this won’t stop someone with an addiction. It just causes further harm to marginalized people to criminalize this stuff. These laws are used to hurt the poor and the addicted, and social services are better spent preventing these sort of things instead of punitive action.



  • UristtoMemes@lemmy.mlRigged system
    link
    fedilink
    13
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    Only if the deposit is over the threshold for KYC laws. (If the threshold is $X, and you get $X in chips, you will need KYC stuff collected from you).

    Otherwise no:

    Patron A goes to the table and receives $50 in chips. No information is exchanged. No chips are cashed out at the cashier because Patron A lost it all at blackjack. No KYC.

    Patron B goes to the table and receives $50 in chips. He does well at the tables and makes several good bets that means he’s ahead $X dollars. Since he won this in several bets, there is no taxable event, but trying to cash out $X in chips is a currency exchange and means the casino now needs to gather KYC information on him.

    Most people (99%) gamble like patron A. Patron B is inconvenienced because of Patron C:

    Patron C stuffs $X dollars into a slot machine and cashes out without gambling. Patron C now has $X in slot tickets, which he attempts to exchange at the cashier window. His goal is to claim his $X came from gambling winnings and not wherever it actually came from. The cashier has to collect KYC info on him, and the goal is to make a paper trail so the casino can comply with state/federal law.

    Patron C has a lot of other creative things he can try to do to get around these laws (see structuring)

    Since most people are going to fall in category A, the casino wants to make the barrier for gambling very very low. They will only ask what is absolutely necessary at the moment. This is why those websites don’t ask for scans of your license or blood-type or whatever when you sign up, because they don’t need to if they’re just taking your $50. I haven’t used a gambling website but if they’re US based they have to follow US law.



  • UristtoMemes@lemmy.mlRigged system
    link
    fedilink
    1
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    Also true, however, there are times you cash out more than you deposit (sometimes people win). Edit: there are thresholds of amount of money you need to start moving around before the casino will pester you for more info, because most people don’t need to bother because they don’t meet those thresholds.


  • UristtoMemes@lemmy.mlRigged system
    link
    fedilink
    382 years ago

    Casinos have to comply with Know Your Customer laws like banks. This is to stop money laundering.

    There are great reasons to dislike casinos, this is not one of them. Also, online casinos are probably shady AF, why are you using one?




  • A lot of these devices rely on security by obscurity and the fact that casinos have lots of cameras. Also, casinos expect any significant coordination between players and employees is caught eventually, because people are human and under film from multiple angles. Cheaters usually get greedy so they’re easy to spot, because they don’t know when to get out and some just can’t help bragging anyway.

    A lot of casinos are publicly traded so they’re cheap as hell. The burden of dealing with cheap awful hardware/software is placed squarely on the employee’s shoulders. “Corporate” thinks it understands security but will always buy stuff like this without consulting anyone that knows what they’re doing.

    This particular device isn’t something you’d be able to access easily, you’d have to be an employee or risk being spotted screwing around with the machine. Or have a vendor badge ;)