Sometimes my comments are mistaken for AI, which I don’t understand, because I’m a horrible writer.

Now I like to imitate AI just to piss people off—new trolling potential unlocked! Also, I like characters :—…⁝.

TLs

Clear & uplifting.

🪫

Low power, drain?

Yep, delicious irony of keyboard activists:
✔️ express consciousness
❌ take real, immediate action that doesn’t even require leaving the keyboard/mobile app

Speaks to the sincerity of some.

I would just say that in very tense situations where the exact details of a law very much matters, the difference between different legal systems might be worth some consideration.

That’s a good point. My understanding was College of Policing gives professional guidance for all UK, but its bearing on Scotland & Northern Ireland may be looser.

British Naturists seem to think it’s legal in all UK, Scotland & Northern Ireland follow similar policing practices (consider every case on its merits) & may take that document into consideration. They provide a summary mentioning the Scottish counterpart of the law you mentioned: their language look quite similar (similar purposes/conditions to qualify as offenses).

While the similarity in these laws is compelling, and naturists report they are policed in similar ways, case law might qualify their interpretation.

The rando’s writing shown in the OP could mean anything, and if you follow the link to that post, you’ll find a similar discussion to this one that links similar content.

Wikipedia tells me UK includes England, Scotland, Wales, & Northern Ireland. Though each jurisdiction may have more specific laws, the laws on this seem to be broadly alike, and the guidance appears to apply to general policing in all of them. Someone better versed can get into the nuances.

image of text
long, narrow, harder to read, not searchable, not accessible
no text alternative or link even through a demonetized client like nitter.net

breaking the web like this is unnecessary: OP should edit the post to add a link as suggested in rule 4

It appears that having an “intention to cause alarm or distress” may be relevant for protests like this — arguably the entire point of the protest is to use the shock value of the nudity as a protest.

I was looking at this, too, it looks like public nudity is legal, and I don’t think peaceful protest counts as disorderly conduct. The policing aid cites relevant law & provides a decision aid. It states

Naturists have a right to freedom of expression which only engages criminal law if they commit sexual offences or use disorderly behaviour that they intend to or are aware may be disorderly within the hearing or sight of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress.

A decision aid clarifies

Decision aid for responding officers

Is there a clear sexual motivation to the subject’s actions?
↓ No
Has the person been ‘disorderly’ and caused another person ‘actual’ harassment, alarm or distress (as opposed to considering the likelihood of this or the complainant finding it personally distasteful or offensive)?
↓ No
It will normally be appropriate to take no further action
Advise complainant

Personally distasteful or offensive doesn’t qualify.

Disorderly conduct seems to mean disruptions that intimidate or prevent people from exercising their lawful rights or accessing goods & services they are legally entitled to. Police can impose restrictions on start & finish times, location, noise levels.

Maybe someone better versed in UK law can clarify.

Isn’t public nudity legal in all UK? Policing aid:

Behaviour described by caller

Passive behaviours in public
↓
Sunbathing, walking, cycling, swimming, gardening, home maintenance, etc.
↓
Provide advice
If they are just being naked in public, it will be lawful activity
Explain to caller that no offences are being committed
No police action necessary

encouraging someone to kill themselves

I’m pretty sure that can be ignored without harm. Whether someone elects to kill themselves or not is up to them.

A fundamental right is not really a problem. Expression that doesn’t directly harm (defamation, incitement, threat) can be ignored.

steak

stake?

Accepting funding from sponsors responsible for pollution & publishing environmental toxicology studies that disfavor those sponsors was pretty common at the university medical office where I worked.

I don’t know, guys. Hatshepsut has a proven track record of breaking political barriers for females, leading recovery from a foreign occupation into prosperity, and commanding prolific building projects including some masterpieces of ancient architecture: she delivers. What has AOC done? Dismissing all that accomplishment would be a mistake.

image of text that people with accessibility needs can’t read

very bad

Introductory economics is a bit simplistic. It gets a bit more sophisticated at advanced & professional levels.

Some introductory textbooks give a glimpse of that: here’s a more nuanced treatment of minimum wage with a more sophisticated model.

Economics goes further than the treatment you’ll read in some economics 101 textbooks.

there’s repeatable experiments/steps to take with proven and proveable outcomes

Is astronomy a science?

Some sciences rely more on analysis & indirect observation. Direct experimentation can be intractable making testing of hypotheses & theories less straightforward.

Academic economics resources I’ve read (decades ago) are dismissive of trickle-down/supply-side economics.

That’s probably why Mesopotamians chose them: the convention traces back to them. Measuring angles in degrees also traces back to them.

Still, those numbers/units are quite arbitrary & introduce unnecessary conversions. Radians are dimensionless & require no conversion. Converting seconds to a more natural unit like days involves reintroducing those highly composite numbers that fit better in base-60 than the base-10 system we now use.

Yea I think they’re gonna freak out upon seeing this ballot.

I think you missed the first sentence I wrote:

The ballot is the same for all ranked voting methods.

Maybe explaining what you think that means would clear up confusion?

I can see a bit of strategic voting happening.

Yes, approval voting is indeed susceptible to strategies including burial, which leads to a “chicken dilemma”.

The ballot is the same for all ranked voting methods. The method of determining winner from those ballots varies, and some are clearly worse.

For instance, if a candidate would beat all others 1-on-1 (Condorcet winner), then should a decent method always select that candidate as winner? RCV doesn’t do that.

Other methods also fail.

This nice table compares voting methods by a wide range of properties. I don’t think it hurts to make a more informed decision before backing a method that will be difficult to change. The US got stuck with FPTP through inadequate research, and it’d be great not to repeat that mistake.

While rated voting methods fail the Condorcet winner criterion, by rating instead of ranking candidates they satisfy another set of criteria also worth considering.

Among ranked voting methods, ranked pairs seems most compelling to me. Among rated voting methods, approval seems pretty good (and extremely simple).

we are criticizing how that simplified model is abused without considering the other variables and applied to policy-making. does that make sense?

That indeed makes more sense: it only fits short-run predictions. It justifies short-run policies.

Longer term policies need a different justification: you’re definitely right there.

I think economists have a name for mistaking short- & long-run effects (something to do with equilibrium), but the course was too long ago for me to recall.

Maybe go SI with day as base unit & SI prefixes? Eg, deciday, centiday, milliday.