Chozo

Generally, the clowns don’t run the circus, though. We messed up somewhere.

No way, Elon said he could identify any conflicts of interest and recuse himself. He wouldn’t have lied about what an honest guy he is!

Well of course, that’s who sent it in the first place.

if one person may exploit the system but hundreds of thousands or more will have a very difficult life eased, the ethical thing is to let it go or at least engage an investigation, not a blanket ban.

I completely agree. Despite my reservations toward the account limits, I do still think this is an overall net positive. I just worry about the angles the Trump cult might use to attack these sorts of services.

I hate that this is the state of the world now, where I can read an article about something that lifts up a marginalized group of people, and all I can think about is all the ways it’ll be used as fodder for some fascist agenda. Sorry for being a downer. :(

Huh, I’m a little torn on this. On one hand, it’s great that people with disabilities have some more options for saving cash now, which is something that has been notoriously difficult for anybody on any sort of benefits program. The income limits for most benefits programs are disturbingly low. I like that this gives them some more agency in their lives.

But the account limits seem strangely high. Being able to save up to $100k and still get benefits on top of it seems troubling. I’m not trying to suggest that people with disabilities don’t deserve to have that amount of money, but somebody who has that much liquid doesn’t seem like somebody who also needs financial assistance from the government. That’s a very large amount of money for anybody (significantly more than one typically receives from government programs), and I feel like that person still qualifying for benefits, while others who struggle to save even a fraction of that amount may be otherwise disqualified, isn’t quite fair. And I worry that this argument could be weaponized by conservatives as a means to dismantle this sort of program entirely, which then ruins it for everybody.

Is there some element to this that I’m missing? Because so far this just seems like a way to allow people with disabilities to also have a seat at the “rich get richer” table. I’m curious to learn more, though.

Dammit, Bobby!

Exactly, even small inconveniences like this are part of the plan. Death by a thousand cuts.

A passport does not guarantee travel. Especially not a passport that has an erroneously-indicated gender. The purpose of any ID document is to prove who you are and what you look like; contradictions with that document are going to cause problems when traveling.

Does the court decide that he has to wear the vest, or was that a decision by his team? I know the shackles are typically requested by the court, but my understanding is that the rest of a defendant’s wardrobe is their own decision.

Just a reminder for everyone to follow and repost @ElonJet@mastodon.social.

Sorry, can you please be more specific? That hardly narrows it down.

I’d like to go back to a simpler time. A time when nazis got shot in the fucking face.

Well, mail was nice while it lasted.

What’s the difference between 8 billion dollars and 8 million dollars?

Approximately 8 billion dollars.

Good. I get why they were originally resistant to it, but fringe, outlier situations can be dealt with when you have actual mods maintaining things. The reason quote-retweeting was used so heavily for bullying on Twitter was because there were no repercussions for it, and Twitter never enforced their bullying rules for the practice. Mastodon instances have their own mods enforcing their own rules, to a much better degree than Twitter ever has. While the potential for bullying still exists, it’s far easier to mitigate on Mastodon.