Honestly I have no issue with being able to sell your data, what I take issue with is the consent part both in the fact that companies are ignoring that law and that the law is set up to hoeplessly violate people’s consent constantly whether on paper they technically agree by clicking “I agree” or whatever.

I would also say I believe people are entitled to a share of profits made through surveillance capitalism done onto their identity whether the person is aware of the profits being made using their data or not at the time. I do not believe there should be a time limit on how far back you can litigate on this and I think the only way companies should be allowed to escape this legal conundrum is by explicitly educating their customers/clients according to regulations about this kind of thing and proactively sharing the profits made upon the personal data shared even after it has been “anonymized”.

Sorry I agree I really dislike the title, it doesn’t do the article justice at all.

I would posit that unfortunately Israel is the mirror and I am very worried thinly veiled lazy rightwing antisemitism will appeal more to people in the US than a reckoning with that truth.

oh shoot, definitely!

Disaster Response Preparedness = Localized training that centers the establishment of a practical working trust as the first critical step to protecting people.

It isn’t just about the knowledge it is about a pre-existing practical local network that is in place with a local reputation BEFORE the emergency ever happens.

Same lesson as the vaccine story I shared basically.

I think capitalism can solve this by marketing laundry microplastic filters as a way to get free 3D printer plastic filament to 3D print kids toys as an affordable way to entertain your family!

I can see the commercial in my head already.

I think heavy appliances should be designed with a smart “run at the best time in the next 4 hours” function that could have a monitor on the grid supply to trigger the appliance to run at the most optimal time.

They don’t give a shit about kids, this is about authoritarian control.

Nature does not have to be a shared experience to be valid

Yes it does, otherwise you are just moving around a living landscape remaining isolated from it. Going into nature is inherently a shared experience, that is my point.

No I am not impressed you don’t examine the world around you with a curious and analytical mind.

Witnessing is an experience. That’s your experience. You are conquoring the desire to interact with nature, fulfilling your ego goal of passive acceptance.

What a tortured twisting of my words, of course witnessing is an experience, it is an experience that brings you outside yourself unlike a physical battle with the limits of your body that draws you inward.

I joke - but really, go to a hiking trail sometime and tell all the people who show up to hike they are all selfish and egotistical for wanting to hike the whole trail instead of just stopping whenever the mood strikes them and going home.

Why would I do that?

Claiming the way an entire subset of other people experience nature is inferior and shallow compared to yours is kinda the definition of a sense of superiority, yeah

I am arguing our cultural framing around outdoor culture is inferior and shallow compared to a deeper more thoughtful relationship with the natural world and and an awareness of the living history of colonialism as it bends and warps our perspective our relationship with nature.

If you do not allow me this without labelling me as attempting to claim I am superior than you simply do not allow any kind of criticism of your beliefs/actions in this area. How else am I supposed to interpet this?

An invasive species introduced by someone with a vision about what nature should be not what it was.

I just think they’re neat

So… you like the aesthetic of them and you aren’t interested in examining it any deeper?

What are you actually trying to say here other than attempting to shame me for daring to critically question your relationship to nature?

By saying jogging through nature is inherently selfish compared to walking through it. I’d also say you pretty clearly look down upon those who like to exercise in nature based on your other comments here, and your framing of people doing it for ‘the drug chemicals’.

I like drugs, I have no problem with taking drugs I just don’t like when people pretend they aren’t taking drugs when they are.

You say you’re not bashing them, but I’m not sure that defense works since you’re kind’ve framing a different way of experiencing nature as inherently inferior and ‘selfish’ compared to your preferred way, instead of framing it as two equally valid ways to experience it (as long as it doesn’t hurt the local ecology, or leave any litter).

Yes and you are framing this conversation in a way that if I criticize a broad cultural movement centered around the outdoors for being shallow this necessarily means I think I am superior. You allow no other perspective other than one that agrees with your own unless that perspective is relativistic about everything with no judgements possible at all.

I can criticize outdoor culture without being selfish or adopting a position of assumed superiority and even if I was those things it doesn’t actually negate the points I am making since I am arguing the overall selfishness of outdoor culture is even greater? We are all a part of this problem as we are all part of the same society.

You seem to have strong opinions on how other people enjoy things. You also seems to want to dictate the proper way to enjoy what you enjoy. You also seems to think you can predict what memories will form in someone else’s mind. Check your own ego. I think the call might be coming from inside the house.

Yes I have strong opinions about people enjoy nature, that does not mean I want to dictate the way to enjoy what I enjoy it means I am criticizing the motivations at the heart of some other people who enjoy a thing I enjoy.

I have checked my own ego, I have not claimed I am better than other people for enjoying nature the way I do, rather I am pointing out that the embedded assumptions in popular outdoor culture are problematic and we need to examine them. How is that being egotistical?

I can’t speak for SuperSquirrel, but I certainly advocate for that.

Not only am I advocating for that but I am saying this is the only actual path to connecting with nature. The western/american idea of “going to the frontier” we insist on reliving over and over again as a fantasy never brings us any closer to nature even though we surround ourselves with the aesthetic experience of it, rather most of the time it distances us from nature even as we trample all over it.

Why?

Sure, but my argument is that it isn’t just about being physically in nature, that doesn’t magically make it impact you, it can end up just hurting nature and driving you further into an internal quest that diminishes your capacity to witness the world around you.

I am glad when people decide to care about climate change because their personal exercise facility is impacted but it is a shallow reason to care and it is fragile too. It is far better to invite people into nature in a way that actually deepens and radicalizes them.

I am currently thinking about going out into the park near where I live and experiencing a beautiful sunny day as songbirds fly by me.

as starlings swoop past me

An invasive species introduced by someone with a vision about what nature should be not what it was.