Yet here we are, talking about it. “There’s no such thing as ‘Bad Press’”, I guess? Are they right?.. maybe. Are they detracting from the plight?.. also, maybe. Am I sure of my opinion of their protests?.. no, not really.

Right, but we are talking about it knowing the consequences of not enacting changes. In the US fox news is watched by something like 40% of active voters. Meaning a significant portion of voters actively distrust news about climate change, another significant portion do not think about it on a day to day basis.

Giving the news network ammunition like this only further entrenches these audiences in anti climate change reactions.

Seems like something I’ll have to read more about.

Would knowing that this particular ngo is funded by an oil heiress that lives in a 33m dollar home affect your opinion?

Sorry for believing a protest should help your cause more than it harms it?

You do know this particular ngo is funded by an oil heiress, right?

Surely we’ll all be okay as long as people are teaching us to be civil and not… harm the cause.

I never claimed that I wanted people to remain “civil”, you can attack that strawman as you wish.

I don’t mind people engaging in violent disobedience or civil disobedience, every MLK needs a Malcom X. However, I just don’t see the benefit in this particular situation. If you are going to do something that could potentially harm public sentiment you should at least be doing something that materially changes things for the positive.

I’m done, a lot of us are. Good luck.

Get off your high horse, were all dealing with the same problem here. Just because someone differs in opinion on how political capital should be spent, it doesn’t mean your perspective has a monopoly on morality or anything.

I say they’re building political capital. They’re creating a fuss.

The people who think of this as a net positive are already supportive of climate change initiatives. So who exactly are they building political capital with?

They’re creating noise, which can then be turned into action.

How? In what situation is there a problem that is more easily solved when people “make a fuss”?

What are you doing?

Not turning potential allies into enemies?

What are you doing?

It was as pointless as everything else, that’s why they did it, it’s screaming into the void to get attention.

It’s not just pointless, it’s potentially damaging to the cause. I don’t mind if someone rubs against the grain of public sentiment for a cause, so long as the way they do it actually accomplishes a goal.

Are there though? I’m old enough to remember this has gone on for decades without anyone doing anything of significance and now we’re at the actual edge of global catastrophe and STILL people are like “hmn, those kids should be recycling.”

And how does cornstarching rocks, or defacing art make any kind of difference? Is there any possible outcome that benefits the cause? It seems like the only thing this accomplishes is drowning out any other news about climate change for 2 to 3 weeks.

Bruh, you and so many people have no idea how many lives are going to be lost in the next century while every milquetoast liberal and conservative in the developed world roll their eyes and get pissed at slight annoyances like… checks notes colored corn starch on rocks you will never visit.

Just because someone disagrees with you on how to spend the very limited amount of political capital accumulated for climate change, does not mean they are less informed on the subject than you.

I don’t give a fuck about Stonehenge, but it’s stupid to believe that others do not. It’s also pretty stupid to ignore concepts like blowback and public sentiment.

They HAVE sprayed BP’s factories and lots and machines, they have sabotaged equipment and chained themselves to machines and have caused material harm to companies like BP, but that doesn’t get any fucking coverage because media doesn’t want to encourage “violent activism” for fear of turning away viewers like YOU who are annoyed by such things.

Lol, they arent afraid of turning away viewers, they are worried about turning away advertisers. They are part of the capital class preserving the fossil fuel industry. Of course they don’t want to spread violent activism. They would much rather all climate activists display protest that they can utilize to turn the public against the cause.

Which begs the question, why are these groups providing the media with ineffective protests that turn public opinion against the cause and garter a ton of negative press in the first place?

I’ve heard of them. I’ve never heard of you.

Not exactly a good thing… One of the problems with making a lot of noise is drowning out the voices of others on the same side.

Political capital is a thing, utilizing it in a protest that doesn’t really accomplish anything but turning public sentiment against your cause is kinda a dumb way to spend it.

Haha, hey guys! Did you see we have sparkling on tap in the break room? This place is great, isn’t it? Be sure to grab a snack before the morning huddle. Great to be with the team again!

Oh hey GluWu, good to see you back in the office! Whenever you get a chance can you swing by my office? No rush or anything, I just have some questions about your PTO request.

More like the Indians, more specifically the early Indo-European. You can trace the migration of Indo-European by language groups. Sanskrit was carried from India to Mesopotamia, into the central step, to the northern caucuses and even as far as the eastern step and into Manchuria.

It’s possible that this particular particle was transferred from central step people like the scythian to eastern tribes of the xiongnu who eventually settled in Southern Korea, leading to the yayoi migration to Japan.

That’s kinda what I was thinking, the Korean use of Neh can be flexible enough to be used as a past particle. The Japanese like to ignore or outright white wash the influence and impact of Korean culture on the island.

The only situation where I agree with the radical constitutionalist. That opossum is the only entity in that stadium that actually lives there.

That college athletics team has the audacity to march an uninvited regiment of uniformed soldiers armed with instruments of psychology terror to this poor opossums home. They are quite literally marching all over this most American of marsupial’s 3rd amendment right. The state has no right to force this citizen to quarter these soldiers of the state.

You should be able to send a letter that serves as a contract, and include an invoice to pay to start the contract.

Yeah, but including a letter clearly explaining a service contract isn’t going to fool many accountants. And if it’s not clearly stated in the contact letter what exactly the invoice is for, it’s still fraud.

If you’re going to commit fraud, just don’t do it by mail/wire. Federal prosecutors have a 95% conviction rate, and the maximum sentence for mail fraud is ten years longer than bank robbery.

Still not advisable… You receive an invoice after services are rendered, not beforehand. Presenting an invoice for services not previously agreed upon would still be fraud, and unless the company personally wrote you a check, it’s either mail fraud or wire fraud.

So you have similar/more legal risks as a bank robber, but you’re doing it for petty cash?

I was right there with you. I work in a hospital and our lab actually has laser techs. I was completely confused when I got to the towel.

From the perspective of biology, sex is a bit more complicated in humans than with a lot of other animals. In primates sex is epigenetic in nature, meaning that the DNA that contributed to our sex is expressed as we develop. It’s not set in stone, and when we are developing into male or female that expression can vary.

Sex is not as important of a distinction in human biology, it’s epigenetic nature means that the difference between a female human and a male human is incomparable to the difference of animals who present with sexual dimorphism.

Epigenetics are also influenced by our environment, what we eat, and what we do, meaning that a lot of the characteristics we associate with sex can change or be developed over time based on the environment.

We have observed young female gorillas who behave more like male gorillas, and as they develop they are observed to not only be treated more like male gorillas, but start physically developing more like male gorillas.

In short, its really complicated. Namely because outside of a specific scenario, there is no real biological reason to define sex in such a dichotomy. And even in those scenarios which require more myopic detail, the difference between individuals of the same sex are great enough to need more information than just male or female.

From the years I spent delivering pizza while going to school, one driver I knew was murdered and another caught a pretty good beating. Surprisingly both times they were attacked by the people they were supposed to deliver too.

Idk, I guess people who rob pizza drivers aren’t usually the sharpest tools in the shed. In my experience most people are pretty chill when you go to the wrong house, most of the time they just joke about wanting to keep the pie.

I’ve allowed my partner to refer to me as girlfriend to make discussion with others easier.

That’s pretty understandable and reasonable, but something tells me bringing another girlfriend to the same party would probably make the whole point a little moot.

Something about the post reads as “I’m only poly to upset my parents”, and that’s not typically what I see when interacting with the community. All the successful poly relationships I’ve seen have taken a ton of work and communication for it to function, and tend to be more mature than let’s go upset my partners parents.

Nobody, which is why poly is exclusively for people with a scheduling kink.

But yeah, I’ve never met a poly person who would bring three of their partners to a single event and introduce them all as their girlfriends. In fact, I don’t think I’ve ever met a poly who calls their partners “girlfriend”.

Even in your particular hypothetical, it’s still not the best way to minimize liability or culpability.

The lockbox is fire-safe

Fire safes rarely survive actual house fires, they’re typically only rated to last 30min to an hour of exposure. In the event of an actual fire, it’s pretty doubtful that you’d be able to even find the safe afterwards. If it is recoverable, it’s going to be found by investigators, who will probably question why you have so much cash.

their home has extensive security.

Pretty much all security is theater unless it’s an armed human, and I doubt you’re going to have an armed guard available 24/7.

With the business they’re doing, their government is not finding out. If so, there are much, much bigger worries than taxation.

Right, but do you know how many fraudulent organizations get busted because of tax evasion? The goal is to separate the money (evidence) from you as much as possible. Having it sit in a secured safe that only you have access is evidence makes you culpable to the crime.

the average person though, I agree with you.

I would say anything that applies to the average person applies even moreso to a person engaged in less than legal businesses.

Keeping that much liquidity in your home is a huge liability. House fires, break ins, and hold ups happen more frequently than people like to think. Plus nowadays it doesn’t take much effort for the government to figure out if you’re avoiding taxation, especially if you’re using an electronic service like PayPal.

I can guarantee that the people who are avoiding the most taxation aren’t doing so by keeping cash stuffed in a safe. Properly knowing how to register and operate an LLC is basically the equivalent of a get out of jail free card in America.

These days inflation is going to get ya just as hard as the tax man. At least create an LLC so you can launder the money into legitimate investments like property or retail.