Today's political climate has all sorts of terms being thrown around with varying meanings and history behind them. There are Liberals (political ideology for FREEDUM), and Liberals (foreign policy), and Liberals (economic policy), and Liberals ("conservatives"), and Liberals ("centrist, anti-absolute monarchists"), and Liberals ("democrats"), and Liberals (some other field that annoys the shit out of me). There are Progressives, and Conservatives, Nationalists, Socialists, Social Democrats, unreconstructed Monarchists, Reconstructed Monarchists, Anarchists, and I'm sure some other political identity that I've missed.

So, given the rather long list of ways to identify politically, and the just about as long history for those ways to identify politically, I thought we should have a discussion focused exclusively on the political history of the terms we used.

So, the questions:

1. What terms do you commonly use to describe yourself and others in your political environment? 
2. What is the relevant history that informs the way you use common political terms to describe yourself and others?
3. Got any links, movies, books, etc., that delve into that history?

This has the potential to get hairy because of how broad it is, so I'm going to try to remind people of some best practices that I use when engaging in meaningful discussion:

• Understand before criticizing. - Be able to frame someone's view in a way that they can agree with themselves before critiquing their view. Questions are your friend, but make sure the questions are focused on better understanding someone's view, not on biasing reactions to a view.
• Assume good faith. - Calling people "trolls" makes me very angry. Don't do it. For any reason. To anyone. If your case is so bulletproof that you'd be willing to call someone out for it here, take it to @Deimos instead. I don't want to read it here.
• I Could Be Wrong - There is nothing wrong with having confidence in your view, but there should be some part of you that recognizes you can be wrong about whatever claim you make. Nothing is 100%. Absolutely Only Sith Deal In Absolutes, etc.

I'm a bit behind the news cycle, but I saw the first images of the families being separated on the news last night. I'm aghast. I'm just so utterly confused. Not addressing the issue of immigration or even the splitting up of families...

We don't fucking lock people in cages.

(Sidepoint: I know prisons exist, but this is a very different situation.)

Recently read a Reddit post about a jesus nut: the nut that holds the main rotor to the rest of a helicopter. In more general terms, it applies to a single point that would cause a catastrophic failure if it were to fail.

What is the "jesus nut" (single point of failure) of your field?

You can't talk about stupidity in corporate culture anymore - certainly on Reddit - due to the hoardes of people who will comment saying "They're a business, what do you expect" or occasionally "Capitalism at work" and general low-effort replies. Like yeah, I get it. I know why company x does greedy thing y. Obviously it's to make money. Your comment doesn't contribute to the discussion. Yes companies have to make money but that doesn't mean they should sacrifice all their morals to do it.

First of all: Desabafo is an idiom in Portuguese which means "to get things off your chest, when you're upset about something". I didn't find a one-word English equivalent, but, hey, at least your learnt something :P

Anyways, I'm a Brazilian man in my mid 20s and I can speak English and Spanish pretty well (at least, I think), but I don't get many opportunities to practice both languages verbally. I found this local group "poliglotas" which hang out in a restaurant every week for 2 hours to practice foreign languages (mostly English). I actually liked this group a lot and it's helping me get better at talking, each week there's a theme so we have something to guide the conversation

The thing is, yesterday's theme was "patriotism" and, as you can guess, the conversation got to politics pretty fast. And... it was weird...

The conversation started with Brazil vs US patriotism, but it quickly went to how the US border control policies are justifiable, how in the scandal about the children of immigrants being separated from their parents is the parent's fault. There were a few rebuttals mostly from me and one other guy

Then it went to the problems we have with Brazil and how it could be solved. The arguments presented were to inflate the sense of nationalism, taking votes away from people who they felt were not qualified to choose their own politics, one of them specifically feels that we need a dictatorship and gave compliments to people in the veins of "Rodrigo Duterte" the infamous guy from the Philippines and even mentioned things like how Hitler was great for Germany, just not the rest of the world (wtf). Needless to say, I didn't agree with anything about it and just decided to keep my mouth shut for the rest of the meeting

The most extremist one though did want to hear my opinion, which I said very non-confrontational way "we need stability, we can't keep changing our government whenever things go bad. We need to choose a path and stick with it" but I also took the opportunity to talk about the things we lose with a dictatorship: freedom of speech, transparency, people being alienated

And they countered by saying that in democracy people are alienated because of "fake news" and that giving rights to people is no good if they don't know how to use them. The worst argument in my opinion though is how an older woman said that our people are like children who can't take care of themselves, so they need a parent to give the rules and take care of them until their old enough to be able to take care of themselves

Their mindset border those of a conspiracy where democracy is actually hurting people and that we need some saviour to free us from some unknown enemy force. It really left a bad taste in my mouth, I think I'll keep going there because I don't think someone's political opinion defines who someone is, but it's a little hard to swallow this last experience I've had

Pheew, making this desabafo made me feel better :)

Thanks for reading, feel free to share your opinions about it or to make a desabafo of your own!

This thread isn't supposed to be about debating issues, just more of a conversation about the consequences/responsibilities for holding certain views. So what's the best way to talk to people with fundamentally different values from you?

I've been on mastodon for a bit now and I'm very much enjoying it. There's a few other options out there, with a variety of goals (pleroma/mastodon for microblogging, pixelfed for photos, hubzilla/diaspora for a more complete package).

I had some questions in mind (but feel free to discuss anything vaguely related): how do you think federated social media is doing? Do you use it? Do you try to get others to use it? What do you think some barriers to widespread adoptions would be?

It's hard to have a neutral position or tone about sexual assault. I think we can all agree that sexual assault is bad and should be punished when credible evidence exists, and I think most of us can also agree to the corollary that it's hard to prove allegations of sexual assault on a good day, let alone 10, 15, 20, or 30 years after the event happened (which is after the statute of limitations expires in many states anyway).

So from this starting point (sexual misconduct = bad, proving sexual misconduct = hard), let's talk about that lovely and unique junction we've been finding ourselves in, in the current year: (1) the use of social media to amplify stories of sexual misconduct and (2) to organize economic punishment of famous persons who have engaged in such conduct (when it is credible enough).

Let us take the case of Kevin Spacey. After Anthony Rapp publicly accused Spacey of sexual advances while Rapp was 14 years old, about a dozen similar stories surfaced to show a fairly similar trajectory of behavior. Even if nothing ever crosses the line into "rape," a clearer picture seems to emerge from these myriad stories of a pretty damn creepy, repressed dude. Spacey lost several acting jobs as a direct reaction to these stories.

We might also look to Al Franken for further insight. In this case, eight women to my knowledge have separately accused Franken of violating behavior, with one pretty outrageous photo as proof of the most famous initiating accusation.

There are plenty of other serial predators that have been exposed in the last year and change too. Let me be clear on this: I see exposing serial predators as a good thing. I hope you do too. There can be a problem of believing claims too quickly, which I think we're all aware of and need to be careful of, but as far as exposing and at minimum economically punishing serial abusers, I think that's pretty much a good for society as a whole, especially when done through legal channels (i.e., a Hot Cosby).

So to the questions:

1. How should we as a society deal the increased ability to share horrific stories of sexual misconduct and abuse?
2. How can our governments adjust to better handle cases of unaddressed sexual assault?
3. How should we individually react when someone we know (famous or otherwise) is accused of sexual misconduct? Along these lines, should we make economic choices based on the allegations that surface about some person?

I always thought that meritocracy seemed like such a loosely defined idea that people still always defended and in this article I just wrote I hoped to tear it apart. It is a core idea of our zeitgeist but it is so weak philosophically. https://diogenesoftoronto.wordpress.com/2018/06/13/against-meritocracy/

I live in the US.

I used to play music every day. I used to skate almost every day. I used to surf TWO times a day. I used to write songs and poetry. I used to contemplate the cosmos and reality and come up with fun projects with friends. I used to garden. I used to spend more time with my pets.

Now I work.

I work and stress so hard that I wear myself out, drink too much to "help me sleep", still stay up stressing about my job - how I can improve my standing, and stress about needing to do side projects to supplement my income AND stress that I don't do any of the fun things I used to do.

This is all to be able to afford a living space and ensure that if a disaster (personal or natural) happens I won't be completely screwed.

Any friends that did have loans are still paying them off. I have been fortunate enough (and diligent enough) to pay off all my loans, but I had to ditch my hopes and dreams.

Will I ever be able to afford a decent house in a metropolitan area? No. Will I ever do the things that used to make be happy? I don't see how. Will I ever be truly happy? I have no idea.

Is anyone else in this situation? What are you doing to mitigate? Moving to a more affordable area (leaving friends and family)? Are you learning a new trade to up your financial standing? Are you as bummed out as I am that we have to work so hard just for a mediocre standard of living?

I wrote this thinking about how people think that world peace is something worth moving towards in a lot academic spheres. It is being used to justify modern continued injustice and i have a lot of problems with that. I think that this more 'peaceful' world isn't that great of one if it comes at the sacrifice of our many current problems we face today. I look at few major academic theorists like Ian Morris and Pinker. I was thinking of actualy discussing both in more detail but i just gave their wiki sums for their books though i have read them becaause i was a little lazy. i should change that in a possible follow up but i wanted to hear what people thought about this before that. https://diogenesoftoronto.wordpress.com/2018/06/05/a-closer-look-at-world-peace/

My friend and I were talking the other day about how for a perfect society to exist, surely every person within that society must also be perfect, which lead us to discussing what defines a perfect human.

Clearly we live in a imperfect world and therefore it can never be accomplished, but we realised there are multiple ways in which a perfect human could be defined. This included such parameters such as emotional stability, morally perfect, physically perfect (whether or not this is even possible) and a whole array of other parameters that have escaped my memory.

What do you think defines the perfect human, assuming it's even possible in the first place? Should it just be defined by one parameter or a mix, and would some parameters be valued higher over others? For example, is a perfect moral compass more valued over physical perfection? I would love to hear your guys take on the question.

EDIT: By perfect I mean functioning within a society perfectly.

I feel so cheated- I went into college with no clue what my interests are and got a degree in something irrelevant that doesn't interest me ( BBA in digital marketing).
I was too young when I made the decision to get this degree and in the years since, I have discovered my passions are art and the environment- I can't see myself feeling fulfilled working in any other field.
But now I don't have the qualifications or skills to get into either, and it seems like a bit of a stretch to go back to college and do another four years!

I just don't know where to go from here, I feel demotivated and I wish that college was something that happened to us later in life. I would do things so differently!

I'm taking some time off to figure out what to do next, but honestly...I don't have a clue.

I'm hoping for serious, honest responses - i.e. don't make up stuff just to troll or try to trick people, nor to just exercise your creative writing skills for entertainment. I am optimistic that people can be respectful to those sharing stories that may be difficult to believe, or which might have mundane explanations.

I've had an interest in the paranormal and unusual for a long time, but haven't delved as deeply as might be warranted. I do my best to keep an open mind, have had a few experiences that are on the fringe, and have met and known people who have recounted much stranger things and i always love hearing about them. Since Tildes is at a point presently where there aren't easy throwaways, and where reputation matters to an extent, I would suspect that tales shared here might have a bit more credibility than those shared pseudo-anonymously on reddit.

So, any experiences you've had which just didn't have a completely satisfying explanation? Any spooks or strange places or times or sights? I invite you to share your experiences here. :)

My husband and I moved to Japan from America in March due to a job opportunity. There are several things that we've noticed that we miss, mostly food items! I was curious if 1) there are other ex-pats on the site and 2) what do you miss the most? Also, what is the best thing about your new home?

I've been consuming a ton of media about the world wars lately. There seems to be an inexhaustible supply of historical fiction, records, memoires, and documentaries. But so far, very few things have come close to painting a cohesive picture.

Most of it focuses on hot spots like Verdun, Pearl Harbor, Dunkirk, Normandy, the haulocaust, the atomic bomb, enigma, u-boats, the luftwaffe, Stalingrad... And I can see why. Even on a microcosm level, the conditions of the stories are unimaginable.

The issue I'm having is that I feel like our cultural memory of these events his been eroded over time. We have these impressions of what we think it was like, but not an overarching understanding of the complex series of events throughout the 20th century. We have an overabundance of records, photographs, film, and documentation in general, but maybe it's the overabundance that makes the digestion such an insurmountable undertaking.

What are your experiences with studying this time period? How do you feel about the quality of your understanding? And finally, do you have any recommendations for myself and others?

With the incredible pace of automation and AI taking place across all sectors of our Global Economy, countries/governments/citizens need to start seriously thinking about how we can continue to survive when there are simply not enough jobs to be had. UBI is one option that countries have attempted to "beta test" with varying results. What is ~'s[sic] opinion on UBI and automation and AI "taking our jerbs"?

Earlier I saw a post on imgur about how the mars rover has now been carrying out it's mission for almost 15 years, but recently a large dust storm has resulted in NASA being unable to contact the robot at all. Whilst reading the post I felt a sudden sadness for this poor little robot that has been on its own for such a long time and now it can't even communicate with home. I caught myself and wondered why I was feeling such sadness for a electronic device on the other side of solar system.

One possible explanation I had was that most humans all share a common disliking of the feeling of loneliness, and feel sad for those experiencing that feeling, regardless of whether that thing is human or not. Maybe it's just me, but I feel like a lot of other people also hate to see others in a position of loneliness as I think at some point in everyones life you experience some form of loneliness and therefore know how horrible it is to be in that situation. There's a really good quote by Carl Sagan that sums this up rather nicely: “In all our searching, the only thing we've found that makes the emptiness bearable is each other.”

Do any of you fellow users occasionally feel bad for robots or have done so in the past, and why? I'm sure I can't be the only one but I'd like to hear other peoples take on the subject.

I want to have a discussion about how decentralised communities and individuals best defend themselves. In the face of disaster there are many ways people can come together and find solutions through direct action but i think that constantly planning ways with your affinities will help you survive a lot of disasters or a attacks and figuring out a way to do this is of hyper importance as the state attacks or declines. Anti-institutional and formal or federal ways of doing this should be valued and investigated allowing people to still be incredibly flexible with various contingency plans for self preservation.

I'm conflicted about this. On one hand, not prompting users to post alot may result in more quality content; however, on the other hand it may mean that the website is missing out on great quality posts and discussions. Your thoughts?

Based on what I saw, and that user's follow up post, it doesn't seem like jokes are an unwelcome idea per se, but rather the goal is to promote discussion over low effort meme posts and one liners (I wholly support this), so shall tildes, tell me some of your favorite jokes! Dad jokes, mom jokes, dark (not racist) jokes, long and short form, what are your favorites? I prefer darker humor myself, but I'm not sure what's appropriate quite yet as far as this community is concerned...

Sorry if this isn’t appropriate for Tildes, but I’ve gotta get this off my chest, and a neutral third party seems best.

Don’t think I’ve ever felt this shit before. Still had feelings for her, and it completely blindsided her. Knowing that I absolutely destroyed someone I loved, and who loved me so much, is really tearing me up inside. Doesn’t matter how many times I tell myself it wouldn’t have worked out. Doesn’t matter how different the things we wanted were. None of that really changes how I feel about hurting my (former, I guess) best friend this badly.

So yeah, just had to get that out there.

I'm writing about my two trips to ER over the last two days, mostly as a way of processing for myself, but also because some things came up that were interesting to me. This story is very detailed medically, which may be gross to some people.

Many years ago when I lived in Chicago, I had a few weeks of life that were utter hell. I would be in constant lower right flank and abdominal pain. I would feel hot and cold flashes. I began drinking water constantly, but would throw up everything until I could vomit was bile. The pain would be so intense that I would have to take scalding hot showers to distract from it for a little relief.

After several weeks, I was convinced that I was dying somehow. Maybe something had ruptured? I didn't know. As a student, I had some insurance. But I had no friends or family at all in Chicago. Finally, one day I walked the three miles to the ER and was seen. They did a sonograph of my groin and said nothing was wrong. They asked me, "Have you been under a lot of stress lately?"

I had been, and they attributed it to that. This event forced me to move back in with mom (I was 19 at the time), back in a rural part of the state. I began the long and tiresome process of working on stress management as a religion, and strong boundaries as a lifestyle. Since then, my patience has grown, and I am able to stay calm even when being physically assaulted or threatened with death (something that happens often in the acute psychiatric setting in which I work).

I never really bought this diagnosis, though. It seemed like a diagnosis of exclusion.

Years later in the current day, I began having some similar symptoms. At work one night, I started having trouble focusing because of pain in my lower flank. I attributed this to stress and went through my steps to see what might be bothering me, but I couldn't find anything. I then thought about what I'd been drinking and realized that I had drunk nothing but coffee, tea, and Mello Yello for the last two days. I went out to my car where I keep 24 packs of water and started drinking some more. Pain went away, no big deal.

On Sunday morning, about 8:30 AM, I awoke in tremendous pain. The same place, I recognized it. I drank more water, the pain wouldn't go away. I took two Naproxen, no relief. I went to the shower to douse my back in scalding hot water - relief. Temporary, until the water stopped.

Then I tried urinating, and it didn't go very well. I couldn't get out more than a few drops, and they were brown. Having worked in medical settings for most of my adult life, I knew this was no bueno.

I hate going to ER, but I hate it more when I have to give a vague complaint like "Lower Back Pain." When I worked in the ER, this phrase was often coding for, "I'm here for my Norco." But I went anyway.

The ER was huge, and I was seen by a doctor very quickly. They did a CT which showed a <5mm kidney stone still in my kidney. They told me it would pass in a few days. They took a urine sample, which I was able to provide, and it was the darkest sample I've ever seen. They came back and told me that there was so much blood in it that they had to "swab it manually," because their machine wouldn't work fast enough (I assume this is common, but have no idea).

They gave me Norco 5 and a medicine to help dilate the ureters to encourage the stone to pass. I had never had Norco, and was intent on going to work that afternoon. The ER Nurse strongly discouraged this, so I called my boss (who is also a nurse) to see what her suggestion was. Per her, I took the evening off - and I am so glad that I did.

I got home and the first dose of Norco was hitting in. I really dislike pain medicine, and I usually don't take it even if prescribed because of a family hx of addictive behavior, not to mention my experience working on the front lines of treatment in the opioid epidemic. The stuff demands respect. I slept for a few hours, then woke up in minor pain. I waited for the 6 hours to have passed, took my next dose.

Except, nothing change. The pain got worse. I would not take more Norco outside of the prescription guidelines, so I went to Walgreens and got a heating pad, icy-hot, and Ibuprofen that the MD told me I could stack on top. Nothing helped. Around 10, I started vomiting. I hadn't eaten much, so I was vomiting up my medicine and all the water I'd been drinking. The pain was so bad that I ran a scalding bath and just laid in it. I had to do this over and over again all night, vomit, shower, bath. That hot water is what let me get a few 10-15 minutes of sleep here and there.

Finally, after suffering through to 6:30 when my next dose of Norco was up, I took that and the Flomax. I waited another hour, nothing. I vomited again and realized it'd be a big waste of time to keep taking the meds if all I was going to do was vomit them up. I called the ER to get their advice, and they told me to come in.

When I got there, about 24 hours after I'd been the first time, they put me in a different room and did their assessments. The pain was much worse, and I was holding back tears. They told me they were going to give me an IV painkiller and some other medicines. The MD came in within me having been in the room for about 10 minutes and told me about my CT again. He explained that a lot of "kidney stoners" are able to pass <5mm without a problem, but a small percentage become very symptomatic and experience a lot of pain. He said they were going to consult with Urology and try to get me into surgery today to have it removed if possible or at least put a stent in.

The nurse came back with a syringe, "This is fentanyl, it's going to help with your pain." I was astounded that they were giving me fentynal for this. Yes, I think it was appropriate, but I have never had a painkiller like that. Working in the field that I do, I hear many stories about accidental overdose often involving fentynal. We talked about dosage, half-life, and expectations before she gave it to me.

The feeling was... Strange. My whole body became a little numb. The pain went away about three minutes after the shot. My head felt warm, then the rest of my body did. I felt like I was floating. I now understand why the stuff is addictive. I was very tired, so I nodded in and out of sleep while watching CNN on the hospital TV.

A Urology PA came in to consult with me and explain the surgery, she was super nice and clear. I got moved up to Same Day Surgery and nurses there explained everything to me. They asked, "Who is picking you up today?"

"What do you mean?" I asked.

"You're going to be under general anesthesia, so we can't let you sign yourself out. Someone has to come up to provide care for you."

"I don't have anyone that fits that description within 100 miles." (I moved here about 6 months ago, and while I have friends from work, I wouldn't really put them in this category[1]).

The nurse got a facial expression that I've seen many nurses put on, I call it, "Well, that sucks, but too bad." She said that if no one could come, I'd have to stay in Observation overnight. Too rich for my blood. I put in a call to mom who started on the way up.

The surgeon came in and spoke to me, saying that the stone was probably too high up to try and get without damaging the kidney, so they would put a stent in if they couldn't get it out safely. I was okay with that. Went into surgery, it lasted less than an hour and woke up 20 minutes afterward in the recovery section.

I have a lot of experience coming out of anesthesia because of a birth defect that required a lot of surgery when young. Sometimes I came out combative, sometimes over emotional with a sense of the world ending. I came out of this anesthesia fully functional, running some of my own assessments and talking to the nurses about the surgery. My perception of time was wonky, as far as how long these were taking, but nothing too serious.

They had to put a stent in. Has anyone ever had a stent running from their kidney to their urethra? It's not fun. I constantly feel like I need to urinate a little, and there is a severe burning sensation when doing so. My first urine sample was straight blood, which didn't surprise me.

My mom got there around this time. I spoke to the nurse and discharged a bit later. We went to get some lunch, then the grocery store, and she dropped me off at my house before going home. I was very appreciative that she came up, but I don't feel like I need someone with me for the 24 hours they suggested.

I took a nap, and just now woke up.

I write this mostly to process in my head and help facilitate memory storage. But some themes came up:

1. I have insurance, and yet still waited as long as possible, because I have a $2000 deductible (this is lower than my old one, which was $4k.

2. I made a statement, "Not friends that I'm going to involve in this."
   This one, for me, highlights some old behavior. I used to have a very rigid social classification. Work friends, school friends, and that's it. I disliked when the boundaries crossed. This got me into serious trouble in Chicago, because I had gone out of my way not to make friends, and found myself in a bad way medically without help. Do other people do this? I find it to be a little unhealthy and will be trying to work on it as time goes on.

3. I think that I got better treatment once I started talking about working in ERs in the past and doing psych care now. I'm not sure, but medical culture loves the Patient Story or scary tales of practice. I exchanged some with the nurses and doctors and a sense of camaraderie develops quickly.

I'm also just writing for myself because I think it's super helpful to debrief. If you made it this far, hope you enjoyed!

Just the fact that it's even happening is amazing to me. There are cute Trump/Kim impersonators out and about, performances, Dennis Rodman is present, it feels really really exciting... i just don't even have words for how wonderful this will be if it ends up how I am imagining - not just for the USA, but for North Korea, South Korea, and the whole world.

It's better to be friends.

Also, I really hope the USA establishes an embassy in Singapore. That would be such an easy win.

edit: i found some relevant links:

• https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/white-house/trump-kim-handshake-summit-history
• live feed: https://www.c-span.org/video/?446916-1/us-north-korea-summit-underway-singapore

edit: for those curious about the significance of Dennis Rodman, here's a CNN interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IS494th_Js4

Today, IHOP announced, "Our new burgers are so good, we changed our name. That’s right. We’re the International House of Burgers now."

Is this just a publicity stunt to promote their burgers and boost lunch/dinner sales? Or is this a permanent re-branding of the 60 year old company?

I was on Facebook today and saw a video being sent around with the background and caption on the image I captured: https://i.imgur.com/uUvN7JS.png

I took a look at the comments on the post, and as expected found this sort of stuff: "She must hoping trump will come and give her a pickle tickle or a medal. These are the people who should be thrown out of the country."

So, I look it up and it turns out that this video is from 2014 (source of news report: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e0UUmTARaOc) which was during the Obama administration and has nothing to do with "Trump's america'". And watching a news report and the original video never shows anything about the black individual having a white mother, that's just further perpetuating race baiting to get people angry and heated over this as they're also trying to make it seem like it just happened. They even captioned the Facebook post "Think racism is dead in America? Watch this."!

What do we do about things like this where this is so clearly being used to further an agenda, but the actual content isn't indicative of that agenda at all? This is apart of an epidemic of misinformation used to drive opinions that sickens me to see so many people falling for, it really does.

Let’s imagine two women: Millie and Bonnie.

Millie has a body-wasting disease. Her body is slowly breaking down, organ by organ. The only organ which is untouched is her brain. However, the body that supports that brain is deteriorating, and she is near to dying.

Bonnie is a healthy person who suffers an unfortunate accident. She takes a sharp blow to her head which damages her brain, killing her instantly, but leaving her body intact and healthy.

Due to the magic of non-existent futuristic medical technologies, doctors transplant Millie’s brain into Bonnie’s body.

Who is the resulting person? Who is walking around? Is it Millie because it’s her mind, or is it Bonnie because it’s her body? Or is it someone else?

For legal purposes, we identify a person by their physical attributes: fingerprints, retinal patterns, dental history, face. According to that methodology, this person is Bonnie, because she has Bonnie’s physical attributes. If she used Bonnie’s passport, she would be able to travel because her face and fingerprints match the photo and fingerprints in the passport. She would be accepted as Bonnie.

However, this person does not have any of Bonnie’s knowledge or memories. She remembers Millie’s life and friends and education. If we asked her to sit an academic exam about a topic that Bonnie learned, she would fail, but she would pass an exam about a topic that Millie learned; she is therefore entitled to use Millie’s academic qualifications as her own. Her encephalograph would show Millie’s brain patterns. She would recognise Millie’s family and friends.

If Millie and Bonnie each committed a crime before the transplant, should the post-transplant person be held responsible for either crime, or both, or neither? If she was in court, a witness would identify her as Bonnie, who was at the scene of one of the crimes. However, she would not remember committing Bonnie’s crime, but would remember Millie’s crime. Can she be held responsible for a crime she doesn’t remember committing (that brain is now dead)? Can she be held responsible for a crime noone saw her commit (that body is now dead)?

So… who is she? Is she Millie or Bonnie, or is is she some new composite person: Minnie?

Partly inspired by a couple of science fiction works:

• 'I Will Fear No Evil', by Robert A Heinlein

• The Star Trek DS9 episode 'Dax', by Peter Allan Fields and D.C. Fontana

Well, there comes a time in every community's existence where someone gets an idea for discussion from another thread he wishes were better framed. So buckle in. This discussion is intended to sit at an uncomfortable cultural crossroads.

In the EU, gay spouses are now able to have the same freedom of movement rights as straight spouses. The Supreme Court in the United States ruled that a baker was treated unfairly by a Colorado regulatory commission when they tried to suss out if he discriminated against a gay couple who wanted to purchase a wedding cake.

In Brazil (you thought I was going to let this one be), courts have explicitly allowed conversion therapy to continue.

In Chechnya (a part of Russia that I always seem to struggle to spell), you could be hunted down and tortured or killed if you were gay, with people turning their own family members over to the local government. The local government, in absurdity, claimed after the purge that there were "no gays" in Chechnya, so there could have been no purge.

The point I'm trying to make here is that LGBT+ discrimination is an issue that should touch just about everywhere.

Before we get too deep, a point on terms. Discrimination, strictly speaking, is separating one thing from another. It is not necessarily a hostile act. If I say "you can drive only if your vision is good enough to read signs while you drive," that is discrimination on the basis of your ability to see, but most people aren't likely to say it's unreasonable discrimination (there is a rather obvious safety implication, for starters). Similarly, if you tell women to go to the bathroom in one space, and men to go to the bathroom in another space, that is discrimination based on gender. Is it reasonable discrimination? That might depend on if you're trans, and what state you're in.

This topic has to be more limited than this set up implies it will be. We won't be able to narrow things well enough to have a meaningful discussion otherwise. Today, we're just going to touch on the simple (ha!) matter of whether baking a wedding cake is art, whether refusing a wedding cake to a gay couple is discrimination, and what a government should be expected to do about it. So, the questions:

• Is making a custom wedding cake for a wedding "art"?
• Is refusing a custom wedding cake to a couple because it would be for a cause you do not support discrimination on the basis of that couple's identity?
• How should a just government resolve a dispute between a couple who feel unreasonably discriminated against and an artist who feels compelled to use speech for a cause they do not support?

And a bonus question:

• What role should a judicial branch have in advancing various groups' rights? Does relying on this less democratic method for securing rights open a movement up to counter-reaction or is the counter-reaction simply an inevitable consequence of a movement's success?

This article from last year provides an alarming look into the woes that media preservation (specifically audio and video) is facing this century due to a content explosion that shows no signs of slowing down. It’s not a new problem, as journalist Bill Holland showed nearly 20 years ago (warning, it’s a long read).

To summarize: In the past, many predecessors to existing media studios did a bad job of archiving their collections of recorded material. In some cases they actively destroyed or threw out parts of their catalogs to make way for new material. This wiped out portions of the available media to be preserved, especially the older stuff. Now that most studios have improved their archival practices though, their remaining catalogs are facing a new foe: Moore’s Law.

The problem with LTO (tapes) is obsolescence. Since the beginning, the technology has been on a Moore’s Law–like march that has resulted in a doubling in tape storage densities every 18 to 24 months. As each new generation of LTO comes to market, an older generation of LTO becomes obsolete… Already there have been seven generations of LTO in the 18 years of the product’s existence… Given the short period of backward compatibility — just two generations — an LTO-5 cartridge, which can still be read on an LTO-7 drive, won’t be readable on an LTO-8 drive. So even if that tape is still free from defects in 30 or 50 years, all those gigabytes or terabytes of data will be worthless if you don’t also have a drive upon which to play it.

If the worst case scenario were to happen, this is apparently what it would look like according to “a top technician at Technicolor”:

“There’s going to be a large dead period,” he told me, “from the late ’90s through 2020, where most media will be lost.”

But not everyone is that worried, the article also includes this counterpoint,

“Most of the archivists I spoke with remain — officially at least — optimistic that a good, sound, post-LTO solution will eventually emerge.”

/u/boredop and I have been discussing the implications of this in the thread they posted a few days ago about a John Coltrane release, and in the course of that discussion they provided that second link to Bill Holland’s multi-part investigation (thanks!).

So my question is this: What direct or indirect measures would you theoretically take to prevent or mitigate the loss of the vast majority of recorded media from 1990 to 2020? Should any measures be taken to preserve these cultural artifacts?

By direct measures I mean innovations to physical archiving or storage methods. By indirect measures I mean public awareness, strategies for choosing what to save, workarounds, etc.

Loads of people want to get to rich countries for various reasons:

• no war
• less crime
• better economic prospects
• no persecution
• no famine

The list is almost endless.

Should we, in countries not affected by such problems, accept these folks that want to get away for whatever reason?