deleted by creator

This is a good explanation of racism.

But this is not the reason coloring yourself with skin color of another person is considered racist.

As have others explained it is due to racist use of this practice.

I used word “personally”. I just added European for a context. I know a lot of Europeans know a lot of stuff. I myself just do not know a lot of stuff.

(And yes I know I could probably express myself better. I have never been good with English.)

I knew it is considered racist - and would be considered racist also in Europe. I just did not know why. I believed reason for it being racist came from american history. This is why I asked Americans.

I believe it is very well explained in the comments.

Yes. How did you know. 🤦‍♂️ I genuinely wanted to know why is this act considered racist. And got explained very well in the comments - no thanks to you.

Nahh… May be true in other cases (in extremes you have everything). But not in this case. As have others explained due to historical use of this act, the act itself is offensive.

Like using swastika as an ancient symbol of sun. People will perceive it as nazi symbol no matter what are your intentions.

Thank you! That helped a lot to expand knowledge of my ignorant ass :)

Well thank you! I can see there is much more to it than just “coloring your face to match skin tone of character you are trying to represent”. The coloring itself has been historically used as a racist act.

So I get it now. My question now reads as “What is wrong with swastika - old symbol for sun” or something like that.

Good for you. Or something…

I hope you feel good about yourself. Knowing stuff and all. God forbid you share your knowledge with us who know nothing. /s

Well there is ALWAYS pessimistic and optimistic view on everything. But I do not mean naive or stupid. I mean optimistic.

Pessimist: “It makes no sense to improve my situation, because I will fail! I will not even try.” Stupid: “Things are not bad. Nothing to change here.” Naive: “Things will fix themselves.” Optimist: “Well things may be bad, but we can, and we will fix them.”

So to answer your concrete questions:

• unhabitable planet: lets vote for green parties, lets push for green energy. Results will not be immediate, but we will get there. Yes it will get hotter a few degrees and will cause some weather problems. But we can fix it.
• fascist government: Vote for better, join movement. Or if things are really extreme in your country. Move to a democracy.
• money problems: you can change your job. Yes it can be very hard, but If you really try (improve your cv, reeducate yourself, change profession) you can get really good jobs. You can learn sales and be really good salesman with very high pay without ever going to college.
• social issues: go out, meet new people, join some class, start a hobby.

Yes I know mentioned things can be awfully hard to achieve. Buy you can achieve them. One by one. As to why bother? You do not have to. But that is the beauty of it. You can try to improve things as many times as you want. It will be hard, but things can be way better.

If nothing else I would bother to fix my life (and the world) just for the sake of curiosity. To see how good can life actually get.

I am sorry did not see your were planning on doing that. Well do not make your plan alone. Let’s make it together.

So here is matrix space now: https://matrix.to/#/#fairdonationplatform:matrix.org

I can see a lot of interest here. I believe we should start working on it. By working I mean it would not hurt if we continue the discussion. And if we can agree on implementation we actually start working on it.

Anyone interested in making this real, welcome to join matrix space: https://matrix.to/#/#fairdonationplatform:matrix.org

Never heard of them. Should we contact them?

1. It may not be only for web based stuff. The only things organization would need is the website and a bank account. Which is pretty standard these days.

2. We could have both systems. There should still be the default setting. I proposed the default distribution should be based on views. But the default setting could also be set by the community. This default distribution would also be used by the people who decide to favorize one project and give them 50% of their donation and leave the rest with the default distribution.

Also I believe it is crucial you can override the decision of this community. There will be bad decisions or decisions that you personally do not agree with. But because of that you should not give up on donations. You can simply pick your own, or blacklist one organization you do not agree with.

TLDR: We should make a browser extension where you assign points in what percentage projects get your predefined monthly donations.

So this will be a long text…

I have thought about this problem a lot. If we can have means to build necessary momentum I am all for that and would like to contribute.

I thought about it in a broader way. As to how to monetize content on the internet without ads (open source projects, creators, journalists), in a way we maximize collective good. It may be worth noting I was thinking it in terms of the new internet - Web 4.0 together with tools like ipfs, veilid, and new wave of web browsers (web 1.0 - protocols, 2.0 - platforms, 3.0 - crypto scams, 4.0 - something better, p2p, private…)

I placed highest focus on how to fairly monetize this web 4.0, since I believe the right monetization is the crucial point. If we put only donate our free time (max 2h a day) to projects things move slowly. But imagine what can be done if I am allowed to work 8 hours a day on eg. foss.

I have concluded that few things must have hold true:

1. Donator decides on who gets the money.
2. It must be very very very very simple to donate and to decide who gets the money.

I can propose one solution i am the most confident with. It would be a browser extension (or even better to be integrated in browsers by default).

1. First you set how much you would like to donate. (I played in my mind also with option to make some minimal donation - eg 1% of minimal salary in your country - may even be necessary as a subscription to internet content)

2. By default the sites (maybe preapproved sites good for community) get percentage of your donation proportional to your views.

3. You can explicitly set some (or all) sites to have higher percentage directly in from address bar by single click. Eg. I visit Linux webpage and I can click a button and set it to 20% of my donations. All the other donations then move proportionally to remaining 80%.

System based on (maybe even forced) donations changes whole behavior of monetization.

You start paying for what you believe in, and not for what you need.

And I believe this is the one of most important goals we can have. So people will have the highest incentive to work on stuff that makes the most good.

Also another note on forced donations: In Slovenia you can decide to put 1% of our taxes to non profit organizations. And this works.

If you read through that. Thank you! I believe my ideas have many flaws. So please comment and we can debate them.

r/slovenia

This is markdown thing. Lemmy supports markdown formatting.

Like this

or like this.

Well they do have a DNA of a suspect. It may be enough to get court order of DNA extraction of a subject. And matching DNA is definitely enough to get someone behind bars.

It must have been “Do you mind?”. And absurdness of hunting alone. Also i see nothing interesting on choice of female protagonist. Contrary to popular myth, women hunted together with men (based on evidence of broken legs) and had no strongly separate roles (like women being gatherers and men hunters).

I really like your view on your tragedy. And I am very glad you shared it. I also wish you and your son the miracle you need.