According to Wikipedia she's a "Labor Organizer". Perhaps in her mind, only "unionized jobs" are real jobs? That's what it looks like from across the Pond. That's one of the reasons why I'm not a socialist even though I sympathise with many of their positions. I can't abide authoritarian paternalism, wherever it comes from. Not suggesting freelancers go join a union, but it would explain her attitude. That might be a good idea. The union would be able to campaign for a better deal for freelancers. They don't have the power of collective bargaining.
Copyright is hyped and presented to deny the hard, unshakable fact that "Many are called but few are chosen" is still the golden rule when it comes to being an artist. It's a religious belief, all right. Indeed, and pirates are the devil, who will be cast into eternal denial of internet access at home if they exceed the Three Strikes rule, amen.
Would your description of copyright as a religion also apply to the real world? I dont personally believe so. I dont think people (even copyright maximalists) believe that copyright signifies the belief that the creation came from solely the one person and is indivisible. I would think it is more about how much money they can make as well as the prestige of being known to have done something of note. "Religion" is not confined to monotheism. Take a look at some of the others. The religion of copyright is faith-based exclusivism; the belief that if you conform to the prescribed rituals*, you will achieve salvation, where "salvation" means "Huge piles of dosh you can swim in like Scrooge McDuck." The prescribed rituals include
Ah, yes. Fair enough. Papyrus differs from paper in that it's very fibrous. Have you ever tried writing on the stuff? Actual paper arrived in Egypt long after the Chinese invented it. Papyrus and modern paper are manufactured differently. https://www.quora.com/How-is-Egyptian-papyrus-different-from-modern-paper
She then claims that (of course) unnamed translator companies have been telling her they love AB5 because other companies have been undercutting them by bringing in freelancers.
The above comment suggests that she's actually out to screw freelancers in favour of people with permanent, full time jobs. What a disgrace!
What Stephen says. Hard work alone won't get you a flippin' Porsche. I should know, I worked two jobs while in college. When I moved to London, I had to work two jobs just to get by. I'm in a decent situation now because I had the good luck to come across a job in Facilities when web design wasn't earning me enough to pay the rent. It started out temp to perm, 30hrs a week, but while there I had the good luck to have two supportive managers who were happy to take me full time. I worked my tail off and had the good luck to attract the attention of a senior manager who was willing to promote me to a more senior position. When that luck ran out, I found a new job in a company that was willing to pay me more for the same kind of work. Lucky elements:
We still don't know who was offended or why. If you can't show Hitler throwing a tantrum without getting offended by it instead of laughing your socks off, what is that about? He wasn't being glorified. As one of the resident wags suggested, it could have been a right-winger who didn't like to see Der Fuhrer being denigrated.
I vastly prefer it when the racists and bigots are free to call a spade a spade...rather than hide their agenda behind a respectable veneer of civility. ^This. It annoys me when people are dishonest. Sometimes they don't even realise they're being racist as such, they're either going with the flow. But people, I tell you, if you ever want to reassure people who are different to you that you know what's best for them, you're a damn racist. Back when the neo-nazis of sweden were free to say exactly what they thought not a single one of their parties made it in politics no matter HOW bad things got. Today? Their "politically correct" party made it to the top three because of voter apathy. That's why I'm not keen on censorship. It's easier to get a political speech past the sheep in the electorate when what you speak of in public is "multiculturalism" and "the hazards of conflicting cultures" rather than the traditional spiel of racial and cultural supremacy. Their whole goal is to appear to be respectable and to make their hatred and intolerance mainstream. Alas, they're succeeding. And the problem is that what we call "hate speech" only means we prevent people from saying that which is objectionable to us. We don't stop them, even for a second, from carrying out an agenda of hatred. You can't seriously discuss apartheid law in the west. But it's easy enough to get political support for much the same legal functionality if you wrap it into a sufficient amount of polite and proper language. I'd like to present Denmark as the case example where, in reality, you are either an ethnic caucasian dane or a second-class citizen today. That's the same in every Western country, I'm afraid. My black friends from church were complaining about the way the level of racism has increased since Brexit. They're seeing it everywhere and what they really hate is people pretending to care about them when they actually don't. Political correctness and hate speech laws is social codeine, the overdose of which means your cancer goes untreated until it's far too late. Hate speech laws can also be re-purposed to fit a hate agenda if the haters can present themselves as a protected group. We've seen that in Poland's laws forbidding people to discuss the role of Poles in the Shoah.
Sometimes it is mere virtue signalling. It's the woke go-to for saying "I'm not a racist, but..." See 2016's #SafetyPin campaign for details. I don't need anyone to notice by basic human decency. I'm either decent or I'm not and it's for the people I interact with to make that evaluation, not the woke and the right-on.
This is why I use “personally considerate” instead of “political correctness”: I appreciate considerate people. It's important to be grateful for whatever good we find in the world. Even if someone is overzealous in their consideration, at least they’re kind enough to consider others in the first place. Eh, that depends on how. Suggestions such as as "Bow to people who look a bit South Asian and say 'Konichi Wa'" are best ignored. It basically means, "All you people look the same to me." 2016's #SafetyPin movement was well-intentioned but people don't like being patronised. The lulz when people of colour decided they didn't want earnest, well-meaning liberals frantically signalling their not-a-racist virtue to sit with them on the bus, etc... would have been recorded for posterity had James Melville not culled their responses, leaving only 16 mostly positive responses. It's dishonest and paternalistic at heart. Maybe cis -male-identifying parent figure doesn't know best, after all. Damn, I wish he'd left those comments up. I believe they rank with the Bic Pink pen reviews for unintentional hilarity.
"Political correctness" is what basic human decency is called by people who have none. Political correctness may wear the sheep's clothing of "basic human decency" but it's actually the wolf of division and dog-whistle racism and exclusionism. It presents "protected groups" as easily triggered snowflakes who take offence at everything, without bothering to consult with them before choosing the nom du jour for them. That's how the British father of a child whose mother is African-American was frostily informed, "It's dual heritage" when he described his child as "Mixed race." Ask people how they prefer to be described, don't label them and order everyone else to adopt that label without consulting them. And don't presume they're offended by Christmas, etc. Many of my Muslim and Sikh friends celebrate it. Why push political correctness when basic human decency will do?
There are no non capitalistic governments, Wyatt. Commies practice state capitalism where the government controls enterprise. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_capitalism
China got there first. https://www.pita.org.uk/images/PDF/Chronology_of_Papermaking.pdf
Add Mitch McConnell and Sean Hannity to that list.
He was made a public figure based on the content of the Washington Post article. It seems you can become a public figure very easily if you're not careful.
He's filing on behalf of the Does, and claiming standing on their behalf. Now that the cat is out of the bag, I can't see it going any further forward. However, he still gets to put the filing paperwork on his website and claim that he represented them.
They were from a high priced private school come to protest against abortion. Hence the MAGA hat.
Re: Re: Re:
Too true, Joe. We need them because our own ability to negotiate a better deal at work depends on whether or not our bosses like us. Collective bargaining levels the playing field.