I live in an area of the world that gets winter. My preferred form of exercising is walking, and fuck if I’m doing that in -5 °C climates.

Looking into some treadmills to potentially go with standing desks

I’d add a place where you won’t get attacked or threatened while sleeping, and maybe where you can store your stuff that also won’t get stolen easily

Cool, now do Gaza you pos

Oh I agree. Republicans are the originators of all this shit. They are the cause for so much ill effects.

But Democrats are supposed to be that counterbalance in a duopoly. They haven’t lived up to that. They’d rather chase after evil instead of standing up for something good.

I’m not sure what’s worse. To use a historical example: are the Nazis worse, or are those who didn’t speak up and fight back when they could have?

Right? Seems like even on Lemmy, a platform seen as progressive compared to the status quo, you’ll still find Liberals that would rather point blame at their fellow class rather than holding their elected officials and their donors accountable.

Exactly. Democrats failed to end the genocide in Gaza because they didn’t create a partisan line in the sand to separate the State’s current bipartisan stance towards Israel.

Most Americans support ending the way in Gaza. Kamala should have run with this right out of the gate, breaking away from Biden and cutting any strings she has with him. The reason why Americans and donors pressured Biden to drop out is the same reason why Kamala lost. Both represented more of the same, and that voters felt like the current administration wasn’t hearing their voices.

So out of spite or piss poor messaging on the Dems’ side, people chose Trump instead.

This is absolutely an issue with establishment Democrats. Don’t get discouraged from sharing this idea in a post not having to do with Bernie Sanders or AOC. It’s the truth.

My industry is STEM?

Again, part of my argument in favor of cover letters is that they help the candidate better prepare for the (sometimes multiple) interview process. They can help a candidate distill the main reasons as to why they want the job, which can make conversation easier if you’re more comfortable speaking to those more personal things.

Some organizations in my industry require them, so guess it depends.

Regardless of if it’s required, however, I would still argue that it’s good even if you don’t have to send it to the company. To me, it helps me put my head in the right mindspace to argue for myself and make a case that I’m the person for them.

Great dialogue!

I think cover letters are still absolutely relevant to the job process.

I liken cover letters to cheat sheets that you prepare for an exam. You may not need to make one to be successful, but can be very helpful.

Usually with cover letters, I try to make the argument that I’m good for the company, and the company is good for me. This usually allows me to frame the way I look a new job as a business agreement where both parties can benefit, and that I’m not a parasite taking from them and not giving.

I don’t make cover letters for each and every position I apply to or look into, but for those ones i think I have a good chance of landing and those companies I believe in, I’ll absolutely put in more effort with cover letters.

Oof yeah true

I’ve been using Original Commenter (OC) to talk about the person who starts a comment thread. Seems to be pretty intuitive. Wonder what the acronym would be for commenters responding to OC and starting different comment branches. Probably makes sense to just use their name

What do we mean by effective?

One might say that the effectiveness of reddit is its niche communities that allow each and every user to find somewhere they feel like they belong. Not only this, the complexity of niches gives rise to interesting information that bubbles to the surface and front page of the platform where more users have exposure. One might contribute this to the quantity of users on reddit’s platform, and also the discoverability of the platform itself.

Personally, I think Lemmy is decently effective now aside from the saturation in political and tech news and memes. I think things will get better as for-profit companies squeeze more and more people out of their platforms, and people look to alternatives rather than dropping their digital consumption habits.

I do think discoverability is still a downfall of Lemmy, from both internal and external views. I want to better find /communities from inside the platform and via a search engine should my use and value of Lemmy increase. Wonder how development has gone on this front.

Ultimately, the FOSS nature of Lemmy is one of its greatest strengths. It can improve over time, ripping features from the big players without the destiny of being killed eventually if not profitable. I think this characteristic alone gives rise to the potential of Lemmy to be very effective over time.

Yeah I also saw the similarly to ALM in the comments of this post.

Yes, women also abuse men (and also other women), but the vast majority of cases that appear before a judge involve men as the perpetrators. I’d want to tackle the big problems first if I have to prioritize cultural (and sexual) progress of a society.

But I also recognize bias exists at pretty much every level of this process, inside or outside of a courtroom. I think we should still value evidence over hearsay, as was demonstrated in a case like Depp v. Heard, yet show compassion for victims because they need to feel safe to speak up, no matter the gender.

JFC haha

They’re doing it to produce goods that people want at the absolute minimal price possible.

And there are portions of people in our society that will pay for those minimal prices either because they can’t afford anything else, or strictly because it’s convenient for them to spend that little so that they have more money left over to do more stuff in their life elsewhere.

But there are also people that are willing to sacrifice and make changes to their lifestyles and spending practices to accommodate the impacts of their actions.

The same is true with corporations. Some large corpos in the world are actively trying to move towards sustainable, circular economies. I’m doing a lot of research right now into the textile industry, and two of the biggest corporations in that space that I’ve seen are doing decent work on the two fronts I previously mentioned are Lenzing (TENCEL™) and Aquafil (ECONYL®).

Lenzing uses wood of various species from places in Europe, all managed well and FSC/PEFC controlled, to draw out fibers and filaments that are just as fine and useful as polyester fibers/filaments, yet with the added bonus of biodegradability. They also recycle cotton clothing from collection centers in Spain and some larger textile service companies in southern Europe and mix that in with their wood-based feedstock to produce the same rayon fibers.

Aquafil runs on a similar model to Lenzing, except they base theirs on nylon instead of rayon. Aquafil collects ghost nets from around Europe and South America, along with other corporations’ scrap nylon (pre-consumer waste) and post-consumer waste from a number of brands (e.g. sunglasses, jackets, etc.) to regenerate nylon back into the same quality as you would find in virgin materials. Now, I don’t think that plastic is sufficient anymore thanks to the non-degradable waste associated with it, but it’s better than nothing.

Are there flaws with those 2 companies: of course. Their chemical processes might not be 100% closed loop and their claims might be overexaggerated in ways, but it’s better than nothing.

Anyways, what this examples shows is that there are corporations and even people on the ground that are willing to make more sustainable choices because they legitimately see the benefit of doing so compared to convention. Someone else might describe this as a form of an adoption life cycle, where you have those more willing to change and those less willing to change as practices and habits shift over time.

Could government help with that? I believe so. I think that’s just one lever of change though. If you’ve been following solar PV growth over the last decade and a half, then you know about the “contagion” phenomenon: some early adopters pick up solar, only for considerers and even late adopters to do the same as word of mouth and other social drivers influence decision making at a people level.

Could the same happen with other sustainable choices in the economy? I fall more into the early adopter camp, so I would say yes. I think corporations spend a lot of time and marketing convincing their customers that said corporations are the best and only options and that no other alternative exists out there: when there absolutely is or might be. Perhaps all it takes is demonstrating to people, doing, not talking, walking the walk, to change their minds. I think the same tactics could be used, in addition to government intervention.

Bottom-up + top-down is the strategy I’ve heard described by many proponents of sustainability, most notably Al Gore, and I’m all for it too. Luckily humans, at least in some countries around the world, live in free societies and can divide and conquer to work on both of these fronts to affect change.

So fucking stupid, we can’t wait for corporations to fix our systems. It’s one thing to allow rezoning so that such a project can be built and then offer the project/bid it out to someone like Musk to build, but it’s another thing to place all expectations in a corporation on for them to completely drop the ball.

Hope this gets put on the ballot again. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, fuck me

Edit: ballot not ballet :)