Except carcinnisation only happens in some crustaceans, so it's less a universal thing and more a selective pressure
Using Tubular, which is a fork of newpipe with sponsorblock integration. It's a bit buggy but I like not having to skip every sponsor
"Orcas were given the name ‘killer whale’ by ancient sailors’ observations of groups of orcas hunting and preying on larger whale species. They called orcas ballena asesina, or ‘killer whale.’ Their Latin name, Orcinus orca, also reflects this observation of orcas feeding on large whales. Orcinus translates to ‘of the kingdom of the dead,’ and orca refers to a kind of whale."
Source: https://us.whales.org/whales-dolphins/facts-about-orcas/
So seems like this etymology makes more sense.
Clicked just to listen to it again
It's cus he was a wealthy Roman citizen of the time while the Apostles were mostly poor Palestinians
To use a trolley problem metaphor, what they are saying is not pulling the lever is the same as allowing five people to die. If fascism is progressing and you do not stop it, you are allowing it to progress. Whether you consider that propagation comes down to your ethical framework, but from a consequentialist view it is accurate
The strongest argument I can come up with for why this should go is that it violates Spotify's explicit policy on hate speech, inciting hatred against trans people. They remove other stuff that violates, and they were aware this did, as they removed them album artwork, so them deliberately not removing the song isn't a lack of action, but an action of discrimination in and of itself
If others want to argue that shouldn't be Spotify's policy, we can have that discussion, but if we only have that discussion when trans people are brought up then the discussion was never about free speech and thus arguing platforms, censorship, and tolerance paradoxes is moot. It's just tone policing
Their planning is for the week
This is actually one of his dogwhistle tactics. He makes some comics that are more vague on his political beliefs and some that are explicit, so that he still gets algorithm boosts
You do this already. If you are part of a church or friend group or organisation or whatever, you usually sort out issues when they come up by talking to one another. Saying people are going to vote is a weird framing of normal collaboration, because most of the time we agree on decisions by talking and compromising
Anarchists don't believe in a state. That does not only mean that we don't believe in the government. It also means we do not see use in the centralisation of power and responsibility. This is a good example of that.
In an anarchist society, there would be no sewage workers and other job-havers. We would live in communities, where everyone takes up partial responsibility for the maintenance of the community. You might not want to commit eight hours a day to do sewage work, but what about four hours a week of dirty work? Elinor Ostrom did a lot of research into common pool resources that has shown under certain circumstances everyone does buy in.
We already allocate some work towards parts of our job we do not like (hell, pretty sure loads of people people spend more time in traffic than it would require). It's not that big of a stretch to believe we would do so in maintaining community infrastructure. Especially if it is a shared responsibility. Even people who work "dirty jobs" full time tend to have high job satisfaction as long as they have good work conditions and a strong sense of community and collaboration.
Failing that, social systems can regulate labour through camaraderie and expectation of reciprocity. If someone does not pull their weight in a relationship, you talk about it and set boundaries. In an anarchist society, you would do the same. You want to be part of the community? You better be doing your bit to help or you aren't welcome.
Me buying 1000000000 tampons right now