The world and the internet are so low on trust, I kind of wish there was some entity we trusted.

Some website where you could upload a photo, and people would actually know for sure that all the site is going to do is compare the photo to an ID, verify you’re over a certain age, and send a simple boolean “Yes” to the website that wanted to know if you were over-age. Or, to somehow know that your account is human and not a duplicate.

We could do a lot with that, but as it stands, no person or entity can ever really be trusted with that kind of data; I think most wouldn’t even trust the same governments that issue those IDs.

We definitely see a gross incentive where companies don’t want people to become citizens because it allows their labor to be cheaper.

I think back in Trump’s first term, he had one policy that I genuinely agreed with - that the H1B Visa program should have a very high minimum salary to it, returning it to its intended purpose of being used for rare, high-talent specialized positions. As it stands, HR will just invent overly specific criteria so that they can deny local citizens jobs, claim they can’t find anyone, and then hire cheap H1Bs - and threaten them with deportation anytime they complain.

Needless to say, because it was a good idea and anti-corp, Trump dropped it almost immediately.

Hollywood and the anime industry have done much the same - helping people around the world normalize the feeling of living in their home societies.

I’m from the bike/pedestrian-friendly community of /fuckcars. It’s a far whiter immigrant mentality, but I imagine trends like that wouldn’t have occurred if not for Dutch immigrants; or even American immigrants visiting the Netherlands, most specifically the Not Just Bikes channel.

I’m imagining something like being able to go to a lawyer, or journalist’s office - somewhere they’d have established notaries, and show them a driver’s license or other notable documentation. They wouldn’t be granted rights to record that information permanently, but would grant a cryptographic signature sourced from their office to express that their office has seen them.

This would rely on professional trust - that the people you show your info to will not record it; and, that if they for some reason have to, they won’t turn it over to warrants. By the same token, they’d be trusted that they’re not inventing people from thin air.

You’re right that someone engaging online long enough could be exposed. That would then rely on any effective “Right to be forgotten” laws to erase unnecessary data.

This is the one thing I hoped for out of crypto/blockchain.

You, commenter, don’t need to know that I’m “Brian Brianson, a citizen living at 123 Abenue Avenue”. But, it’s good to know that the person commenting is a real person who has been seen and verified by someone, as a simple true/false flag. If there were good ways of verifying basic conditions of people you interact with online, without exposing personal details, then it could curb botnet opinionation as well as be useful for a lot of things.

I have heard that Obama supports breathing.

I really want a better formalized framework for argument/discussion of a topic that either participant can feel safe in. Currently, we have courtrooms, our old schools have Debate Clubs, but I’d want something far easier to pick up on that allows for time to research/validate discussion points.

Especially since far-right groups have been falling for Musk’s same bullshit in Europe.

There’s been reports that Germany’s AFD party fell out of favor after their news got to see how Trump played out. I seriously hope that ends up being true in their next election.

50501 refers to “Fifty States, Fifty Protests, One Movement” (originally “One Day”). While some states have more presence than others, it has 50 chapters for the 50 states.

I don’t think there’s as much presence on Lemmy, but lots of media gets posted to Reddit at https://www.reddit.com/r/50501/.

Their website also links to social media accounts covering more of it: https://www.fiftyfifty.one/

Everyone here was alive when the invasion started. Russia invaded Ukraine. THEN Ukraine considered entering NATO. They were happy to stay out of it as long as Russia stayed away. They didn’t. Some saw it coming, as Russia has violated just about every treaty they’ve entered.

There’s a few points I maybe want to bring up on this, though.

Through Trump’s installation, many learned what USAID was for the first time. For all it does in the world, it was never tooting its own horn. Sure, its existence is a tradeoff we made to allow for the fact of having one of the strongest military presence. But I still don’t think its existence and actions up until now should’ve been taken for granted.

Plus: Other nations in Europe cannot currently claim to be beyond manipulation via far-right rhetoric and misinformation. Germany is currently dealing with those issues in its own elections, and the very identity of that country is rooted in acknowledging the evils of 1940. Vladimir Putin targeted the United States because it was their biggest singular obstacle to expansion, acknowledging that there’s no single presidency to easily “corrupt” the European Union.

I agree that much blame lies on the USA’s population for so gullibly accepting such terrible campaign lies. I just don’t think that kind of evil ignorance is uniquely American, and the rest of the world needs to stay vigilant, rather than assuming all threat will come externally.

It’s erroneous to claim the judge orders blocking the executive orders have done anything.

As judge of Lemmy, I order you to stop posting. /s

^ There, that statement alone had just as much effect as the judicial orders. Fact is, DOGE still has extensive access to most of the systems that they breached, and judges have largely been ignored, or have given rulings complicit with Trump’s actions.

This is very much a fair take - and ties back to the realities of the French Revolution. It wasn’t actually the poorest people on revolt, but a slightly more wealthy class that had just enough comfort in their lives to make decisions like organizing for change.

I know it’s not possible for every person to join. I can only ask for those capable to think about it. For what it’s worth, the original post has suggested other ways of contributing aside from attending.

This was the bit that I think scared me at first. It’s not suggesting “Stop working now, and stay out of work until we get 10 million members and then Congress acts and then everything’s fixed”. More like “Add your name to a list, and WHEN there’s mass agreement, take the plunge so that there’s too many people for businesses to replace.”

I neglected to post it on Lemmy when I found out about it earlier. Key word being “earlier” - Lemmy is just one branch of where it’s been shared, so don’t assume the momentum started here.

I’m dubious of the reality of said comment, or the support it got in upvotes.

Most of us understand that protesting carries risks, and encourage others to risk what they feel okay with.

General strikes take a pretty large mass. To build that, a very important step is making sure more people are aware of how many are committed to resistance.

It’s like being invited to a party, and the host says “Well, you’re one of the first ten people I’ve invited, but I’m encouraging others to share-” and you just reply “Nope, I’m not going unless there’s already a million people going.” Of course, in this case, the protest has been shared outside of just Lemmy, so don’t use local numbers as an indicator.

One thing I’d recommend that I’m unsure how to easily obtain, is getting the phone number of a civil rights lawyer ready. It does kind of contradict the point about not bringing phones, I suppose. At the very least, if one is available in the vicinity after attempted arrests it can be useful.

I also feel somewhat guilty, as I will be attending in a very blue state that’s unlikely to have so much resistance, so I may skirt some of those rules myself.

Okay, totally off topic…what is it with this annoying trend of censoring a company/name with an asterisk when it’s a subject of ire? It just bugs me - and not in a way that focuses my anger to Microsoft.