Literally anything by Nappy Roots.

The Game is underrated IMO.

Chiddy Bang — Opposite of Adults

I really like Mark Battles. “Real Ones, “Numbers2” and “How” are solid tracks.

“Nina” by Rhapsody is a great track.

Concise, eloquent, and fair. I regret that I have but one upvote to give.

You have two choices. There’s nothing anyone can do about that in the next 48 hours. If you refuse to vote for the “lesser evil” because of your “higher standards,” you end up with the greater evil. And in four years you might not get a choice at all.

Shove your standards up your ass and vote using logic instead of emotion.

What a buffoon.

Yes, Trump did set in motion our plan to return to the moon – Project Artemis. But with the same order he ended the program that had us landing on asteroids, which was far more valuable in terms of learning about deep space, researching ways to harvest minerals, and testing ways we could intercept a large asteroid heading towards earth.

Did he do this for his love of space flight? No. He did it because the billionaires whispering in his ear want a shot at the commercial contracts.

Did he appoint an apolitical scientist or former astronaut to head NASA as has been standard protocol for ages? No, he appointed Jim Bridenstine, a Republican congressman from Oklahoma who has struggled to get funding approved because he won’t produce a detailed budget – only ballpark figures that would give him more flexibility to shift how funds are spent without approval.

Of course NASA doesn’t have any of the things it needs to get to the moon, so it’s almost all having to be built from scratch. A totally new lunar lander is needed for instance, and as you’d expect, Bridenstine is pushing for it to be completely outsourced. NASA (your taxes) will help fund the development, but the private companies will get to retain ownership of product. A bill to ensure NASA retained ownership of the hardware it’s paying to build was introduced and promptly went nowhere. Bridenstine ended up getting his way, of course, with initial contracts handed out to both Musk and Bezos.

Bridenstine hasn’t been TOO bad – he certainly could have done worse, but we deserve someone better.

So yes, on the bright side, more money is flowing into NASA and toward space exploration. On the other side, that money is going right into the hands of billionaires who create the products that they will then sell back to us.

The idea that Trump cares about space exploration is laughable. But what about Harris? Aldrin’s statement didn’t mention anything about her. Well, we don’t know about Harris because she’s never been president.

What we do know is that Biden appointed yet another politician to the top spot. Yay! But he also appointed a climate scientist to second-in-command, which is consistent with the party line that, at this time, the NASA budget should be focused on climate research over space exploration — not that anyone is listening to their warnings about the climate anyway. Biden has endorsed the Artemis program to return to the moon. However, Biden also “initiated an internal review” of the program in order to get an actual, realistic budget and timeline for completion. In summary, he really hasn’t helped or hurt NASA.

Neither candidate (or their parties) has shown significant care for NASA over the last eight years. With so many critical issues in the country right now, love for NASA has taken a back seat. That’s unlikely to change under a Harris administration.

That said, I’m voting for the person (and party) who believes in science, and who recognizes that the disastrous consequences of climate change are nigh, and who embraces concepts like “equity” and “inclusion”. Because at the end of the day, exploring space and protecting our planet are pursuits that affect our entire species, and the tools needed to ensure the long term survival of our species should belong to the people and not someone whose net worths is greater than some nations’. I’m voting for Kamala Harris.

… after standing in line for four hours.

And how many of those won’t be able to get that time off work again or be able to get a babysitter again.

When Kris Kobach was able to go through Kansas voter rolls and remove “foreign sounding” names with no real consequences, I knew it would start a trend. Here we are.

Given this ruling I wonder what other voter registration purges we will see this week.

I’m tired.

American Sign Language?

“Cyber” 🙄

I believe that brings the number of women to 27.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump_sexual_misconduct_allegations

Better headline here: https://lemmy.world/post/21263675

Friendly reminder that under Obama internet service providers we were classified as utilities under Title II of the Communications Act of 1934.

Trump appointed Shit Pie, who reversed that rule as well as the net neutrality rule.

People, if you haven’t already, please vote.

We all have those words that drive us crazy. Mine is when people pronounce associate as asso-SHE-ate.

It’s petty. Like really, really petty. But for some reason it grates on my nerves.

Also there’s an Reddit, user named random_commas or something like that. They leave legitimately good comments but with a few, extra commas in places that really fuck up the flow while reading. It gets me every single, time! I get all frazzled until I notice, the username and realize i’ve been had. Respect to that, person for having such a harmlessly evil schtick.

Photos of Ken Paxton are permitted by the Taliban, because he isn’t concerned a living thing.

I assure you I’m only thinking of it in two dimensions.

Yes, that verbiage makes way more sense.

This phrase has never made any sense to me. It’s a circle. If one side is moving right, then the opposite side is moving left. So the phrase only makes sense if you specify which side we are talking about, which nobody ever does. Therefore it’s completely illogical to me while everyone else just gets it. Side note: Autism can be a real bitch sometimes.

Edit:

1. Some people don’t understand how I can see a problem. That’s cool, but don’t be a dick. We all look at the world through different lenses.
2. This is when I was a kid “helping” my grandfather in the garage. I’m older now and understand that “righty tighty” references the top of the rotation.
3. Some people rotate their perspective 90° and imagine themselves standing on the screw. Therefore when your face rotates to the right the screw is tightened. I hadn’t ever thought of that. But I had imagined rotating my perspective 90° the other direction –the top of my head as a screwdriver. In that case, “lefty tighty”

Here’s the thing… If we can control the weather so easily, why can’t the Republicans? Have they not figured it out yet? I don’t want to vote for someone who can’t even destroy Florida on a whim with a few clouds.

The problem isn’t consumer education, it’s implicit market collusion.

Nailed it. And this is why your comment about notifying customers is also correct. Consumers barely have a choice. Everything is overpriced.

they aren’t going to spend 5 minutes comparing the prices of soda bottles so they can squeeze out less than a dime’s worth of savings.

It’s all about those percentages. My favorite chips went from 60¢/oz to 85¢/oz. Clearly not worth my time in terms of absolute price difference, but that’s a 41.67% increase. If I just ignore the amount through my whole grocery trip, the difference at the checkout line is huge. It becomes worth my time very quickly.

Ok, but how do you see the proposed legislation playing out? How do you expect congress to set a specific amount of product that can no longer be reduced? It’s not like anyone can trust congress to revisit the law when changes are needed. Companies will just start making “six packs” of individual things that used to be sold as a six units per container in order to maintain flexibility to shift quantities in the future. This will lead to way more packaging.

Regulating capitalism is a very good thing, but I don’t see how it makes any sense in this case with the proposed legislation.

Implied in your question is the notion that a billionaire or corporation can never be right about a given topic. That just isn’t true.

Also, on any given topic people will have differing opinions for different reasons. Having an opinion that happens to align with a billionaire or corporation isn’t the same as defending those entities. Often you’re stuck siding with one of those entities no matter what side of an issue you fall on.

I like Mark Cuban’s efforts to lower prescription costs. Does that mean I’m siding with a billionaire? If you don’t agree with me should I be able to dismiss your opinion as support for the pharmaceutical industry?

Life isn’t black and white. Opinions can be nuanced and complex. I rarely see any comments defending companies for the pure love of capitalism. Reducing people’s opinions to an easy-to-villainize stance is just that – reductive. It doesn’t aid in meaningful conversation.