27
submitted 21 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago) by pebbles@sh.itjust.works to c/casualconversation@lemm.ee

I never really understood, but now that that house bill passed that may end up blocking AI regulation from individual States. I get it. I don't like knowing that even if everyone in my state wanted to stop companies from using AI for hiring decisions, we couldn't.

Texans, I feel you.

Edit: I'm learning a lot about Texas in this thread. Thanks for all the context folks.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] ZDL@ttrpg.network 1 points 12 hours ago

What proportion of Texan's incarcerated population is forced to labour for next to no salary again? There's at least one US state—Virginia (312)—whose official title for prisoners is "Slave of the State". Do you think the other southern states are much more progressive in their attitudes?

Hint: no. Alabama (390), Arkansas (574), Florida (377), Georgia (435), Mississippi (661), South Carolina (302), and Texas (452) also have de facto slavery of their prisoners: defined as mandatory labour for negligible to no wage, with strict penalties for non-participation.

So what are those numbers I've put after all the state names? Those are the incarceration rates per 100,000. Compare and contrast these with the US national average (which, remember, includes the high-rate states): 355. Isn't it mysterious that of the eight states with de facto incarcerated slavery six are over the national average, and three (Mississippi, Arkansas, and Texas) have the highest incarceration rates in the country?

Slavery is alive and well in the USA, and Texas is one of its largest users thereof now. So yes, I think the average modern Texan secessionist would be pro-slavery … because they already are.

this post was submitted on 23 May 2025
27 points (76.5% liked)

Casual Conversation

3308 readers
352 users here now

Share a story, ask a question, or start a conversation about (almost) anything you desire. Maybe you'll make some friends in the process.


RULES (updated 01/22/25)

  1. Be respectful: no harassment, hate speech, bigotry, and/or trolling. To be concise, disrespect is defined by escalation.
  2. Encourage conversation in your OP. This means including heavily implicative subject matter when you can and also engaging in your thread when possible. You won't be punished for trying.
  3. Avoid controversial topics (politics or societal debates come to mind, though we are not saying not to talk about anything that resembles these). There's a guide in the protocol book offered as a mod model that can be used for that; it's vague until you realize it was made for things like the rule in question. At least four purple answers must apply to a "controversial" message for it to be allowed.
  4. Keep it clean and SFW: No illegal content or anything gross and inappropriate. A rule of thumb is if a recording of a conversation put on another platform would get someone a COPPA violation response, that exact exchange should be avoided when possible.
  5. No solicitation such as ads, promotional content, spam, surveys etc. The chart redirected to above applies to spam material as well, which is one of the reasons its wording is vague, as it applies to a few things. Again, a "spammy" message must be applicable to four purple answers before it's allowed.
  6. Respect privacy as well as truth: Don’t ask for or share any personal information or slander anyone. A rule of thumb is if something is enough info to go by that it "would be a copyright violation if the info was art" as another group put it, or that it alone can be used to narrow someone down to 150 physical humans (Dunbar's Number) or less, it's considered an excess breach of privacy. Slander is defined by intentional utilitarian misguidance at the expense (positive or negative) of a sentient entity. This often links back to or mixes with rule one, which implies, for example, that even something that is true can still amount to what slander is trying to achieve, and that will be looked down upon.

Casual conversation communities:

Related discussion-focused communities

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS