It’s the thin blue line flag , you’ll see it all over the US by right wingers who think police are the only thing keeping us from murdering each other.

This article goes over a bit of both if you trust npr more than some random socialist propagandist but The trends for both are nationwide. Police staffing has been going down since BLM became a thing and public respect and love for cops went down. This one doesn’t give years but it says 5% over the last couple years. The change is bigger in larger more liberal cities. Chicago is down 13% since 2018 , san francisco which inspired this meme is down 20% since 2017 while at the same time seeing a ~30% decrease in crime over the past year.

Crime is also down all over the country, home break ins have been steadily declining since 2018 when the police staffing “problem” started. Murders have also dropped 12% over the past year along with alot of other crimes

Not saying less cops = less crime, just debunking the classic thin blue line narrative of less cops = more crime

You could maybe argue that if the drop was only in small petty crime. Yeah a shopkeeper may stop reporting shoplifting after the 10th time the police don’t respond. That under reporting goes down as the crime gets more serious. Your probably going to report a home break in to the cops even if you know they won’t do anything since you’re going to need a police report for insurance, home break ins have been steadily declining since 2018 when the police staffing “problem” started. This seriousness holds very true for murders which have dropped 12% over the past year

That’s assuming the victims would be under reporting, if you’re saying the police departments, government etc. Are under reporting then that’s getting into conspiracy territory. Especially because we’re seeing this trend reported across the nation so the conspiracy would have to be massive.

Also if the government had the ability to do this why would they start now? This idea isn’t too complex so someone could have easily come up with it and started doing it a while ago. If that were the case we’d never see crime rates go up as the politicians would just under report every year and make it look like crime is going down. But we have seen reported crime go up, noticeably in 2022 , and instead of hiding that many politicians and police departments showcased it as a reason to Crack down on crime and increase there budgets.

Police staffing has been going down since black lives matter became a thing. They dont get the same unquestioned respect and love like they used too so no one wants to be a cop any more. This one doesn’t give years but it says 5% over the last couple years. The change is bigger in larger more liberal cities. Chicago is down 13% since 2018 , san francisco which inspired this meme is down 20% since 2017 and all the mayoral candidates are falling over themselves to say they’ll solve it even though crime is down.

Any exclusionary conformist society can look good on the surface if you ignore the people outside the dominant class. The 50s in America looks idyllic if you ignore black people, women who didnt want to be housewives, leftists etc. Same with barbie world, if you arent a hyper femme straight cis women you probably wouldn’t have a good time there. That was sort of the message of the movie too, if you don’t make your society open to different people or ways of life it will build resentment that can lead to the fall of the society

Revolutions by Mike Duncan. It’s a history podcast with each season about a revolution, American, French, South American etc. with a huge backlog

Already listened through once but now I put it on to go to sleep, cause it’s fine if I miss something now.

Kangaroos hop because they can store a lot of energy in there Achilles tendon and use that to propel them forward without using much energy. It’s good for covering long distances over flat terrain while using as little energy as possible , which is good for the Australian outback as they hop between small patches of vegitation separated by miles of desert. It’s not that good for ambushing or quickly chasing prey in a rainforest like the t rex is probably doing.

There’s also the issue of scale, a t rex’s Achilles tendon would have to be stronger then steel cable and as stretchy as rubber to store and re use that much kinetic force from its weight.

So all the authoritarian regimes of today and the countless ones in the past are in my head? All the hierarchical corporate structures with a male CEO at the top is in my head? What world are you living in where there isn’t a small group or even a single male at the top making the major decisions?

I never said this is the right way to organize things, or that those people should be leading, I literally said we shouldnt idolize them and let them rule us, I think outside of times of crisis that shouldn’t be how we organize society. I believe we need to fight these systems of organization but to do that we need to understand them, denying there existence or the drives that propel them just maintains the status quo. In order to fight fascism you need to understand what drives fascism.

You could say it’s not true for bonobos but I have no idea how you could make the case that a silverback gorilla is not an “alpha” unless you have some very specific definition. Just pulling from Wikipedia as I’m lazy, but if you have better sources please provide them:

The silverback is the centre of the troop’s attention, making all the decisions, mediating conflicts, determining the movements of the group, leading the others to feeding sites, and taking responsibility for the safety and well-being of the troop. Younger males subordinate to the silverback, known as blackbacks, may serve as backup protection. Blackbacks are aged between 8 and 12 years

That seems to describe an alpha beta hierarchy structure to me. With chimps it may be a little less obvious and more variable but still, according to wikipedia again:

Among males, there is generally a dominance hierarchy, and males are dominant over females.

And

Male chimpanzees exist in a linear dominance hierarchy. Top-ranking males tend to be aggressive even during dominance stability

Yes humans have way more complex social structures but almost always there is a hierarchy of men at the top usually with a single man at the apex, call them alphas, the patriarchy, the oppressors, the greats or whatever you want, they exist. Denying their existence or the fundamental drive powering them only helps to obfuscate there motives. We as a society need to recognize those people and harness them for the benefit of society instead of the benefit of themselves.

I mean it may not be true for wolves, but it definitely is true for gorillas and chimps who are very closely related to us. Also most societies from hunter gathering bands all the way up to multi-national empires usually have a single male at the top. Is that right, probably not. Is it natural?, sort of. There seems to be a drive in a lot of men to dominate society and reach the top of the hierarchy. If you combine that natural drive with someone naturally capable to reach the top of the hierarchy and you get an alpha male. You also don’t have to be an incel to recognize a lot of women are attracted to these driven capable men.

The question isn’t whether alpha males exist, it’s what we as a society should do with them. We shouldn’t idolize them and let them rule over us. We should harness there drive and capabilities to help society as a whole

Yeah but this is a “needle in a haystack” problem that chatgpt and AI in general are actually very useful for, ie. Solutions that are hard to find but easy to verify. Issues like this are hard to find as it requires combing through your code , config files and documentation to find the problem, but once you find the solution it either works or it doesn’t.

I mean you probably are a communist to this guy. If you mace him and he can’t insult you based on your race / ethnicity then he’ll probably just call you a communist.

I mean openais not getting off Scott free, they’ve been getting sued a lot recently for this exact copy right argument. New York times is suing them for potential billions.

They throw the book at us

Do they though, since the Metallica lawsuits in the aughts there hasnt been much prosecution at the consumer level for piracy, and what little there is is mostly cease and desists.

It’s the trans women in sports of veganism, it’s such a small part of the issue and no one in the group will usually bring it up. But people who are against them will use it to discredit and divide them even though they don’t really care about the underlying issues they claim to be for: women’s sports, cat nutrition and the way larger problems with them.

I mean a lot of people are feeding there cats cheap dry kibble that has almost no resemblance to the meat it was rendered from. If your argument is that it’s abuse if you aren’t feeding your cat what it wants then there’s a lot of cat abusers out there.

If it’s libertarian it’s libertarian socialist. There’s no property or capital on here, posts get boosted by collective voting, not based off your following or account. There’s not even an idea of karma, your account means basically nothing here. A capitalist libertarian social media would be something like nostr or what bluesky is claiming it’ll eventually do where you completely own your account and your following and you can use that social capital as you wish.

It will eventually have to happen, cars, including evs, are not sustainable, at least at the current levels of usage. If you look at any climate report looking into it the choice is between Americans driving a lot less or severe climate change. I hope murica will make the right choice but the more we tie cars to ideas of freedom and peace of mind the harder that choice will be. It will be tough to fight considering the tens of thousands of hours of car ads most Americans are exposed to pushing that narrative, so it will require just as much reinforcement on the negatives of cars, traffic fatalities, CO2 emissions, airborne micro plastics from tires, maintenance and repair costs, obesity, sprawled cities, etc.

It may not happen in our lifetime, or at least when your healthy enough to bike/hike , but eventually we’ll have to transition away from personal cars. Id prefer to build towards that future now for the reasons listed above but if you want to delay that’s fine, you’ll just have to explain to your grandkids why you did.

Yeah maybe there are are 2000 mountains, but how many have mountain bike trails? If there are trails then there is probably some organization maintaining them like the state or national park service who can also run the shuttles. Shuttles are also pretty cheap and can stop at multiple trail heads based off requests. You can also rotate where the shuttles go each day / week so if there’s a more obscure trail/mountain then you can just wait until it comes up in the schedule. The towns would also probably want to run the shuttles as well since it will bring business to the area.

Ok, let’s assume we want less people on the mountain, what gives you the right to go to the mountain then? Because you can afford a car? That doesn’t seem fair. Also most people have a car so it’s not restricting that many people. If we say only 30 people should go to the mountain a day that’s way easier to enforce if we say only 2 shuttles of 15 are allowed. It’s also fairer as who gets to go is just determined by whoever signs up first, as opposed to whether someone owns something.

I think many people would like to socialize. There’s a loneliness epidemic and many people are looking for friends but don’t know where to meet them. If I was looking for friends with common interests like mountain biking the shuttle up would be a great place to meet them. Just because I want to get away from civilization doesn’t mean I want to get away from socializing, I hike regularly with groups of people and they mostly enhance the experience. If you aren’t into that that’s fine too, just put on your headphones ignore everyone and set off on the trail solo, nothing stopping you from doing that.

For the last point like I said usage can be controlled, even better then cars, but assuming the same usage a shuttle is less pollution then multiple cars. If like you said there are 5-6 cars at a particular trail head then one shuttle carrying all those people will cause less air and noise pollution and make it safer for animals.

No I haven’t lived in rural America but most Americans haven’t either. Most live in the suburbs, cities or towns. It’s like saying people need to eat less sugar and we should stop using it for every food and people saying “what about the diabetics who need sugar” yeah they do but that’s not the majority of people. We can make exceptions for them while also overhauling our food industry to remove this thing that’s causing health problems for most people.

As for the mountain bike scenario ideally you would take a train to a town near the trail and then the town can have a shuttle up to the mountain. If we did fully invest in public transit this wouldn’t add too much to your trip and has some other benefits.

• This would be good for the park and wildlife in general as less traffic would make it easier for animals to migrate. Less roadkill

• This would lower the amount of development needed in the park as parking lots wouldn’t be necessary.

• It would make mountain biking more accessible for people who don’t have a car or can’t drive.

• It would make it more social, you could meet people on the shuttle on the way up, if there are regulars then a community could form.

• It would reduce the amount of air and noise pollution.