[-] Jordan117@lemmy.world 28 points 2 days ago

Important to note that the same is not true for political donations. Idk what the cutoff is but even relatively small amounts get reported to the FEC and make their way into various searchable public databases. Just something to keep in mind if you're in a vulnerable situation.

[-] Jordan117@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Tbh I debated posting it because it was late and there were already dozens of comments and I didn't have it in me to write some big review. But I'm so glad you enjoyed it! Make sure not to miss the soundtrack.

[-] Jordan117@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago

Perfect Days. Got it half-off from Criterion based on the trailer and little else. Absolutely gorgeous cinematography, and a subtle and compelling character study.

289
9
submitted 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) by Jordan117@lemmy.world to c/presidentialracememes@lemmy.world
382
Fuckin' weirdos (lemmy.world)
38
Fuckin' weirdos (lemmy.world)
112
21
244
104
64
132
-8
118
submitted 5 months ago by Jordan117@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

Excerpt:

A victory for Donald Trump in November’s presidential election could lead to an additional 4bn tonnes of US emissions by 2030 compared with Joe Biden’s plans, Carbon Brief analysis reveals.

This extra 4bn tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (GtCO2e) by 2030 would cause global climate damages worth more than $900bn, based on the latest US government valuations.

For context, 4GtCO2e is equivalent to the combined annual emissions of the EU and Japan, or the combined annual total of the world’s 140 lowest-emitting countries.

Put another way, the extra 4GtCO2e from a second Trump term would negate – twice over – all of the savings from deploying wind, solar and other clean technologies around the world over the past five years.

If Trump secures a second term, the US would also very likely miss its global climate pledge by a wide margin, with emissions only falling to 28% below 2005 levels by 2030. The US’s current target under the Paris Agreement is to achieve a 50-52% reduction by 2030.

[-] Jordan117@lemmy.world 136 points 5 months ago

So, for that matter, is Reddit. I have an RSS subscription to /r/all (routed through a mirror) and a sizable fraction of posts hitting the front page are word-for-word reposts of old popular content by bots. Even the top comments are recycled. It was always a problem, but the loss of good moderators and the shutdown of projects like BotDefense due to the API fiasco has caused it to absolutely skyrocket.

[-] Jordan117@lemmy.world 124 points 7 months ago

Defederating Beehaw would not only weaken it as an instance, but remove its positive influence from the wider fediverse. The big platforms wield so much power and influence and money, the smaller upstarts need to connect as much as possible to stand a chance at relevance as a credible alternative. We're all better together. I really hope you reconsider.

[-] Jordan117@lemmy.world 130 points 10 months ago

Tbh, I block ads when I can but have a hard time getting angry about this. YouTube is both incredibly useful and incredibly expensive to operate -- seriously, what other service lets you upload hours of HD video which anyone in the world can access instantly, indefinitely, for free, and at the same scale YT does? It's a peerless engineering marvel and it would be a tragedy if it were to shut down. If seeing some short skippable ads is what it takes to keep that resource viable, that's honestly pretty fair.

[-] Jordan117@lemmy.world 188 points 10 months ago

Convenient (for them) that they start this only after destroying all the coins people earned over years of using the site. I had over 80k coins and 18 years of premium from various awarded posts (all OC) that they just threw away for nothing.

If they respected my contributions, I might be excited about this, but now I plan on contributing absolutely nothing of value ever again.

[-] Jordan117@lemmy.world 278 points 11 months ago

I'm all for shitting on Xitter, but this is a pretty bad article. It's written like somebody put it through Google Translate a few times, and doesn't cite any sources for any of its claims. Closest I could find was this Business Insider story on a report by Apptopia, which only says that its downloads in various app stores declined 30%, not its overall userbase.

[-] Jordan117@lemmy.world 155 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

It's something I started noticing shortly before the API stuff. Bot accounts using ChatGPT to respond to random posts and comments. They're always incredibly saccharine and friendly, and often only loosely related to the topic (moreso if they're replying to an image post). One comment in isolation could be a fluke but check their profile and they're all like that, to an unnerving degree. I imagine they get sold off to spammers once they get enough karma. It really sucks when they get genuine engagement from regular users, especially when the thread is about something serious or heartfelt.

[-] Jordan117@lemmy.world 113 points 11 months ago

"WHEN LIFE GIVES YOU LEMONS, DON'T MAKE LEMONADE. MAKE LIFE TAKE THE LEMONS BACK! GET MAD! I DON'T WANT YOUR DAMN LEMONS! WHAT AM I SUPPOSED TO DO WITH THESE?! DEMAND TO SEE LIFE'S MANAGER! MAKE LIFE RUE THE DAY IT THOUGHT IT COULD GIVE CAVE JOHNSON LEMONS! DO YOU KNOW WHO I AM?! I'M THE MAN WHO'S GONNA BURN YOUR HOUSE DOWN! WITH THE LEMONS! I'M GONNA GET MY ENGINEERS TO INVENT A COMBUSTIBLE LEMON THAT BURNS YOUR HOUSE DOWN!"

view more: next ›

Jordan117

joined 1 year ago
MODERATOR OF