paul_funyun

When they passed laws that put tribal myths on the same level as western science. Found a 10,000 year old skeleton? Sorry, the Lakota-Sioux say he's an ancestor and you're racist if you want to test DNA to confirm (not that DNA could ever show tribal membership). If you pay big bucks they'll let you test, but the right to do anything with the results will depend on the tribe's assessment of your results. Repatriation laws as they exist are cancer.

Of course, tenured academics have strong incentive to support the paradigm that doesn't require any real work, so there's that.

CLE requirements are and always have been nothing more than a handout to providers. The jurisdictions that don't have them are doing fine. The best thing you can do if you're sitting at a CLE is complete another CLE on your laptop so you don't have to waste any more time on that crap than necessary.

Edit: Correction; high-end ones are an excuse for big law lawyers to booze and schmooze on the company dime.

Sounds like an AA meeting with powerpoints. Avoiding research of which natives disapprove, collecting data, or digging up bones and artifacts is an easy way to make a living, but not something to subsidize with grants or taxpayer funds. Quit paying academics not to do anthropology; at worst you'll get the same results for free.

If you dislike social media switching to an inferior product could help you cut down on usage.

People moving to Mastodon fall into two groups, by and large - people who like it for normative reasons, and people moving there to see what the buzz is about. The first group sees practical concerns as an obstacle to be defeated; they would say you ought to move to Mastodon regardless of technical problems or lack of utility. The second isn't defending it in offsite discussion board.

In terms of utility for social networking, there's no defending Mastodon relative to a Facebook or Twitter. The small userbase is reason enough not to switch; what use is a social networking site if the people you want to interact with aren't on it?

That there are so few if any people who both recommend Mastodon and don't have moral/political objections to Twitter is damning. Where are the objectors who recommend it on purely descriptive grounds? It's a bit like GNU - it's cool, but don't try to tell people it's a viable replacement for Windows.

Would you see it if they did? Finding people isn't as easy on Mastodon as it is in other places.

That doesn't follow from the fact that admin decisions don't reflect the will of the userbase. I'm not a fan of my state' laws about fishing licenses, but that doesn't mean I'll move to another state. Same for Mastodon users.

I expect clients that combine timelines from alt accounts using different servers to become the norm. Users get all the benefits, with more ability to opt out. If I've got Jim@alt.net on banning-instance, and Mike@tim.com on the banned instance, and their timelines are combined client-side, it's the best of both worlds.

No, it indicates only that the administrators of 90% of the network don't want others to hear what you have to say. If the admins don't want to hear you they'd use the block function.

The profit is to be derived from the efforts of others. People staking at this point are entirely dependent on the Foundation to add the ability to withdraw your staked ETH. Do stakers expect to make a profit if the Foundation doesn't add this feature?

Ethereum post-merge looks a hell of a lot like a security. We'll see what regulators do, but it's concerning that the Ethereum Foundation has been so quiet about regulatory hazard.

Also alarming is the question marks as to when you'll be able to withdraw staked Ethereum, given the security risks from attacks intended to cause slashing and the dependence on total stake for what the staking rewards are.

"is neither cheap nor all that clean."

In terms of greenhouse gas emmissions, it's very clean. That's the whole point of bothering with green energy.

"If you are in a location with plenty of sunlight and wind, I don't see how this could possibly by less expensive than some kind of integrated wind turbine/solar PV/solar thermal linked-to-storage grid of the same capacity."

Unsurprising - things that exist are generally more expensive than things that don't. I'm not sure how you can even assess the cost of storing the power from those sources to compare them.

Until a realistic method of storing that energy is created (if it ever is), nuclear as well as waste-incineration and hydroelectric are superior by virtue of being viable.

If it could take prompts ala Dall-E I'd like to read "a sequel to C.S. Lewis's "The Last Battle" co-authored by Friedrich Nietzsche and JK Rowling." You could make a lot of mischief with new religious texts as well. The Quran demands a sequel!