You say that because you've never had the good stuff. :-P
memfree
joined 1 year ago
Alternate story from https://www.etymonline.com/word/cheesecake
The modern slang meaning dates from 1933; a "Time" magazine article from 1934 defined it as "leg-pictures of sporty females."
Is it any good? I used to like Lidl and Aldi breads before COVID, when you could slice it right there. They stopped that, and so I no longer had a reason to drive 5-10 miles out of my way to go there. I'd go back for a good sauerkraut, though.
I generally agree with you, but it is so complicated. I read a piece in The Nation a few years ago (written 2019) and whenever I see a question like this I have to dig it up. Sex workers in Spain applied to become a union (OTRAS, for short, full name basically means “the other women") and were approved in August 2018. Here are a few snippets:
After OTRAS was legalized, its two dozen or so members—who include women and men, both trans and cisgender—quickly found themselves engulfed in a national controversy. Prominent activists, academics, and media personalities swarmed social media under the hashtag #SoyAbolicionista (“I’m an Abolitionist”) to denounce what they saw as basic exploitation masquerading as the service economy. The union’s opponents argue that in a patriarchal society, women can’t be consenting parties in a paid sexual act born of financial necessity. They liken sex work to slavery, hence their name: “abolitionists.”
OTRAS calls this abolitionist opposition “the industry.” “They live really well off of their discussions, books, workshops, conferences, without ever including sex workers,” Necro says. “We’re not allowed to attend the feminist conventions.” OTRAS accuses “the industry” and the government—the two loudest arms of the abolitionist camp—of racism and classism, and is irked by their claims to feminism. “A government that refuses to guarantee the rights of the most vulnerable, poorest women with the highest number of immigrants? How is that feminist?” Borrell bristles. “We’re the feminists, the ones fighting for their rights.”
While advocates for legalization argue that it will make sex work safer, abolitionists counter that it could instead endanger women who, unlike the members of OTRAS, did not choose to enter the profession on their own. Abolitionists frame their anti-prostitution stance around the issue of human trafficking, specifically for prostitution. They argue that regulating sex work will simply allow traffickers to exploit women under legal cover.
“The trafficked women have no papers, so if police raid a club, the women have no choice but to say they’re there because they want to be,” says Rocío Nieto [...] Once law enforcement is out of earshot, Nieto says, “none of the women tell you they want to be there. None of them tell you they want to do that work.”
A handful of smaller radical-left parties also back OTRAS, as well as one unlikely ally: the right-wing Ciudadanos party, known for its harsh anti-immigration stance, among other more traditionally conservative postures. “Experience shows us that when the State refuses to regulate, the mafias make the rules,” the party’s press corps wrote me in an e-mail.
I'm going to be repeating this whenever this ad blitz is mentioned because it is MUCH WORSE than you think. America PAC is partially funded by Musk and his old pals at Palantir. They sell data and analyses of it. You might get registered to vote if your state is a solid red or blue, but CNBC reports (archive):
[...] users who enter a ZIP code that indicates they live in a battleground state, like Pennsylvania or Georgia, the process is very different.
Rather than be directed to their state’s voter registration page, they instead are directed to a highly detailed personal information form, prompted to enter their address, cellphone number and age.
So that person who wanted help registering to vote? In the end, they got no help at all registering. But they did hand over priceless personal data to a political operation.
“What makes America PAC more unique: it is a billionaire-backed super PAC focused on door-to-door canvassing, which it can conduct in coordination with a presidential campaign,” Fischer said. “Thanks to a recent FEC advisory opinion, America PAC may legally coordinate its canvassing activities with the Trump campaign — meaning, among other things, that the Trump campaign may provide America PAC with the literature and scripts to make sure their efforts are consistent.”
The America PAC raised more than $8 million between April 1 and June 30, according to FEC records. It has received donations from veteran investor Doug Leone, cryptocurrency investors Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss, and a company run by longtime venture capitalist Joe Lonsdale, according to FEC records.
They also quote the NYT in saying Lonsdale is one of Musk's political confidants -- which is interesting because he's at Palantir which was you'd think of as his buddy Peter Theil's gig. Again, Palantir sells information, so in all likelihood they are going to take that input to figure out exactly how to target people to 'vote Trump' using the very information the public gave them for free!
Why can't the U.S. buy decent sauerkraut at the store? Why must we make it ourselves or get awful kraut? Germany has a unique and delightful kraut for seemingly every town and village, but the U.S. has exactly one type from a handful of companies that all make it the same. Well, maybe two types if you count 'canned' but I don't reckon that to be actual sauerkraut. What was the topic? Sandwiches? Well, if I could find a good kraut, I would spend my days trying to recreate a reuben-like masterpiece.
Is the statement at the bottom of the article new or did the earlier posters simply miss it?
... One of Best Friends’ recommendations for due diligence within the adoption process was to focus on the shelter’s existing system, Chameleon, which pulls information related to animal welfare cases. This includes animal abuse and animal cruelty cases. Checking MyCase was discouraged, as its use was problematic and could lead to biased, inequitable vetting of potential adoptees.
This story does not have enough detail, so I looked for more.
First, I looked up Best Friends and they are firmly no-kill to the exclusion of all else. I am guessing the 'Chameleon' referenced is this CMS, but I could be wrong. If that is the software, it looks like there is a way for people to add notes about specific animals, but it isn't clear if you can enter notes about specific people. It certainly doesn't look like it has a way of automatically checking police records for criminal records. It does suggest you can enter these types of 'field' data:
- Calls for service
- Citations
- Bite reporting
- Field staff dispatching
- Shift control and tracking
- Laptop implementation
- Case photos
I'm guessing MyCase is this free Indiana-specific portal.
Now: if they aren't talking about the free MyCase link I found, then perhaps they are using software that charges the Animal Shelter for each search. I can see getting fired for incurring costs that aren't in the budget. Alternately, perhaps 'Best Friends' is giving them funding based on the shelter NOT rejecting any adopter ever for any reason -- or at least thinking that is a condition based on this statement from the Best Friends 'who we are' page:
We’re making sure that everyone has the same access to loving pets and that every adoptable pet has access to the comfort of a foster home instead of a kennel in a shelter.
-- note that the above is meant to foster diversity and its links to their diversity page (which seems focused on income disparity), but that quoted bit COULD be read to mean 'everyone gets a pet, no matter what'.
I would think it incumbent on all employees to create notes/warnings about known abusers and have that be a flag if they come back to adopt, but I do see a case for allowing people to re-adopt an animal they voluntarily gave to the shelter because they had gone through a patch where they couldn't afford to feed it, but now they can. Others might argue that this is abuse or that the owners don't deserve a pet, but it is clear that Best Friends thinks that refusing such people is discriminatory.
That doesn't mean that the particular abuse getting uncovered with MyCase was simply surrendering a pet until people got on their feet. Mostly, it just feels like there's a bunch of stuff going on that no one reported.
Context?
Without knowing how this compares to other states, which areas have higher counts of rental properties, how other states compare, and things like average or percentage of: ages, incomes, ethnicities, and probably party affiliation, this doesn't tell us much by itself.
I am encouraged that it is given as a percentage of the voting population instead of a numeric count (XKCD's pet peeve #208), but it still looks a lot like a population map. I had to find a straight population map to compare where it differs, and as a quick visual trend they are similar. From https://www.someka.net/blog/ohio-zip-code-map/ :
Overlap that with an income map (from https://proximityone.com/srdmi/ohdmi.htm):
With only a visual examination, I still have little idea of what the map says about voter purging. I can't tell if old people are getting purged as they die, if college students are getting purged as they fail to change from their school address, or if a particular party is getting purged just to sway elections.
If you are willing to switch, tell your current carrier and sometimes that will light a fire under them to actually address the Support call. We had that happen recently. Internet went out. The issue was outside our house with the provider's line. They said they'd send someone a week later, so we pointed out it would be faster for us to switch providers, to which they replied, "We can't get there tomorrow but how about the next day?" We accepted and they actually did fix it in two days instead of seven.
Uhg. No. Well, yes in the most literal sense: if it is recorded there is a record of it, BUT if you ask a journalist to keep something off the record and they agree, then whatever you then disclose is usually not published of otherwise made public. See: journalists like having good relationships with their sources and if the journalist gets a reputation for saying something is off the record and then writing about it, people stop talking to them. OTH, if a journalist happens to see something heinous, you probably won't be able to retroactively get them to let it slide -- but in that case the journalist isn't betraying a trust.
TLDR; You can't force a journalist keep something off the record, but if you ask in advance, they might agree.