I run a 4chan archive, fireden.net, I don't archive /b/ and my #1 reason I need to take down things is because of child porn, to the point that I honestly think about why i still run it anymore.
Yes, there are points in time when posters have attempted to post child pornography there, but it gets taken down swiftly and gets reported to moderators as swiftly as its posted.
Your "epicentre" of child pornography on the Internet is Facebook, not 4chan.[1]
No, not really. I would still have gone with the taxi if it was 15% more. I just would have known about it and come prepared, rather than being deceived.
According to the chief medical officer for the American Lung Association, the only legitimate medical exemption is people who are on supplemental oxygen. Even patients with chronic lung disease can wear a non-N95 mask with no detrimental effects.
The CDC does recognize intellectual and developmental disabilities as legitimate medical exemptions, which I believe is the most common case we are seeing the US.
No, It has been determined time and time again that if you have a respiratory illness that means you're struggling to breathe so much that you can't breathe with a mask on, that puts you in the extremely high risk category from covid
The only legitimate reasons are associated with anxiety issues, which aren't medically exempt.
Is this purely a US phenomenon? I don't see this much at all from people who live here t(the UK), but we're really starting to feel the effects of social media censorship hit hard, and I know a lot of people are really angry about Big Tech pushing their own moralistic world view on our country.
America has a long tradition of being vocal and offensive in its communications. At the very founding of our nation, you could find political cartoons of George Washington on a donkey, with the caption, "An ass being led to Washington."
In general Americans seem to be more thick-skinned than others. Or at least we used to be.
EDIT: Here you go buddy... this is almost a word-for-word of the argument that was used in the actual Supreme Court case, and should illustrate why we're at such a dangerous time in history - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MeTuNES82O0
Check out the book Infamous Scribblers: The Founding Fathers and the Rowdy Beginnings of American Journalism.
> I'd think that's how people you happen to hang out with, or talk with on the internet, might be.
You literally have no data to support that comment, whereas I'm referencing existing documents throughout American history that show just how vitriolic communications were.
You realize that our politicians used to get into fistfights on the floor of Congress, right?
> But not people in general, at least not the ones I've met from the US (lots of people).
What you've just described is selection bias, but I understand why would you feel that way. You're likely not exposed to a diverse selection of Americans. Do you know many corn farmers from the Midwest states? Do you know any deep sea welders from Mississippi? Do you know many club promoters from California? Do you know many book editors from New York?
The EU didn't want to give up on UK market, it was the UK that gave up on EU, but they simply couldn't give them the same benefits every other member has just because it is valuable - that would defeat the perks of being a EU member.
I can give you an example, a lot of people I know that did ecommerce and sold on PAN EU Amazon used UK as a hub for imports - not anymore of course.
Maybe things will improve on customs processes because there might be a big volume of bureaucracy that wasn't there before, but it will always be a bottleneck. Such bottleneck makes sense because the EU must guarantee that the block businesses aren't being penalized by UK businesses.
UK represents only 18% of the post brexit EU market. The problem is that that the Uk now is a completely seperate market, so is in direct competition for attention with other non-EU markets. Why should a EU company focus on the UK when e.g. China is a much larger market and growing much faster? Or Japan? Or Brazil?
> Why should a EU company focus on the UK when e.g. China is a much larger market and growing much faster? Or Japan? Or Brazil?
Some reasons would include China and Japan being highly protectionist and difficult markets to enter into successfully, the language barriers, but most importantly, distance.
Also, in practice the EU is arguably less of a single market than it appears to be on paper anyway. Different countries not only have different languages but also different regulations in a surprising number of areas, and shipping between EU states isn't particularly cheap or fast from what I've heard.
The situation wasn't perfect (or, indeed, finished) but nothing has been gained, and EU & UK consumers buying goods online, EU & UK small businesses and EU & UK large businesses are all complaining about the new restrictions on trade and flow of goods between GB and EU, and GB and NI.
I don't see a good way around the language issue -- every developed country requires most consumer products to be described in the official language(s). (I see French and Spanish on "Made in USA" things, presumably so they can be sold easily in Canada and Mexico.) Medium and large manufacturers put multiple languages on the label, either all of them (e.g. Ikea) or some of them (e.g. my toothpaste is labelled for sale in Britain, Ireland, Norway, Sweden, Finland and Denmark). Very small manufactures just stick a sticker over the default label, you see the same at the Chinese food shop and the Polish food shop -- that does increase costs.
The EU has a project to improve cross-border delivery, which I think is particularly motivated to improve the situation for individuals and small/medium businesses -- large businesses that move stuff by the lorryload aren't bothered by the borders. (e.g. "Amazon.de" has a distribution centre in Poland, and offers free delivery to Czechia, Denmark, Sweden etc if you spend €39, rather than the €29 for free delivery in Germany. Can an American business in California offer flat-rate delivery to the whole USA? I see e.g. UPS does, but I don't know if there are alternatives that undercut them for in-state or next-state delivery.)
I would guess a sizable fraction is regional policy, legal and marketing teams. The whole point of Uber is to operate everywhere and you simply can't run all of that in Silicon Valley without access to local knowledge. Not to mention the incredible bloat that comes from building in market-specific features across the whole planet.
I was lucky to be in your position only months before the pandemic (though I never went to college), so I built up a reasonable set of friends before WFH (both at work and outside of work).
The biggest factor in your decision should be ease of meeting new people, imo. Cities were already bad for this in the first place, but I view them as the "least worst" option. Try leverage your existing network if you know anybody where you're moving to, because they're going to be in the same position. Hacker meetups, game jams, industry conferences or other hobbies work really well too -- though you might want to avoid being in the tech bubble because I'm totally stuck inside it.
Once you've got a few friends, you can leverage their social network to meet new people and explore new hobbies and stuff.
WFH does mean you can more easily keep in touch with college friends. Me and a few buddies have a Discord server where we co-work and we also have something similar within my company (where it's easier to not worry about leaking secret stuff). This has been one of the few things that's kept me sane over the last year.
Edit: Happy to share more if you've got something specific in mind.
