Suppose an employer asked homosexual or transgender applicants to tick a box on its application form. The employer then had someone else redact any information that could be used to discern sex. The resulting applications would disclose which individuals are homosexual or transgender without revealing whether they also happen to be men or women. Doesn’t that possibility indicate that the employer’s discrimination against homosexual or transgender persons cannot be sex discrimination?
In much the same way, today’s employers might describe their actions as motivated by their employees’ homosexuality or transgender status. But just as labels and additional intentions or motivations didn’t make a difference in Manhart or Phillips, they cannot make a difference here. When an employer fires an employee for being homosexual or transgender, it necessarily and intentionally discriminates against that individual in part because of sex.
First, it’s irrelevant what an employer might call its discriminatory practice, how others might label it, or what else might motivate it. In Manhart, the employer called its rule requiring women to pay more into the pension fund a “life expectancy” adjustment necessary to achieve sex equality.In Phillips, the employer could have accurately spoken of its policy as one based on “motherhood.”
Consider, for example, an employer with two employees, both of whom are attracted to men. The two individuals are, to the employer’s mind, materially identical in all respects, except that one is a man and the other a woman. If the employer fires the male employee for no reason other than the fact he is attracted to men, the employer discriminates against him for traits or actions it tolerates in his female colleague.
Bandcamp is donating their share of sales to the NAACP this Friday:
"This Friday, June 19th (from midnight to midnight Pacific Time), we’re donating 100% of our share of sales to the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, a racial justice organization with a long history of effectively enacting change through litigation, advocacy, and public education. Please read our statement here:
Wow, you can have a _complete_ set of digital computing devices for less than $500 USD with @PINE64 stuff.
* PineBook Pro: 199.99
* PineTab+keyboard: 119.98 (pre-order)
* PinePhone: 149.99 (uBPorts ed.)
* PineTime: 24.99 (dev kit)
= Total: $494.95 USD
They're all designed with FOSS in mind and schematics are provided. That's awesome.
Physicists announce a #Strike4BlackLives next Wednesday:
This northern mockingbird flew across the street and landed on a lawn. While I got the camera out, it flew up to a rooftop, then flew across the street again to land on a signpost, where it stretched its wings briefly (as seen here).
Fun fact: mockingbirds are able to recognize individual humans, and their ability to mimic sounds extends beyond birds to cats, dogs, and even car alarms. https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/14886-Mimus-polyglottos
re: fedi dev meta, moderation
my goal in moderation tech is *information privacy* and *distributed immunity*.
information privacy so that when you block someone, they can't access you anymore. they can't see you, the server rejects their interactions, etc. proactively, a server could prevent strangers from seeing you without some pre-existing point of contact, like a mutual follow or a thread interaction.
distributed immunity means when your friends take moderation action, you can see it and act on it -- like #FediBlock, but outside of the timeline. this ensures that known vectors of abuse become known, and that discussion of vectors retains discretion. in particular i'm evaluating a web of trust architecture that allows moderation actions to propagate, so that you can automatically and manually build up allow- and block-lists, and retain documentation for each action.
it's important that this effort produce standards and not only tools or applications. decentralization means we aren't hostage to corporate opinions, or even to particular SDKs, but can distribute and iterate on best practices and robust implementations as determined by our communities. SSB, Cabal, ActivityPub -- all of them can benefit from a moderation overlay. we don't need to wait on BDFLs to get it to protect and support ourselves and each other.
There were 3 cop cars on my street this afternoon. As far as I could tell, they pulled over a kid with no license plates. It turned out the kid was driving without a license, and the car's title was in question too. The kid was being an absolute punk - screaming vulgarities, asking "are you going to kneel on my neck" - but the 3 cop cars for a missing license plate is too much. It's pre-emptive escalation on the part of the police and undermines any sense of trust they might have hoped to build.
These are websites that open TCP connections to you when you visit them: https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/list-of-well-known-web-sites-that-port-scan-their-visitors/
I bet their scanners aren’t very well tested or fuzzed, compared to their websites.
I wonder what they do with payloads you send them.
I bet it would be really freaking hard to prosecute anything bad (from their POV) that came from it. “It sounds like you went out of your way to connect to the defendant’s computer and ask it to send you data. How’s it their fault that your scanner was broken?”
So that, dear reader, is the story of how I eradicated an ant colony out of the door frame of my car one Saturday afternoon.
At least, I hope I did. They had better be gone next time I go out there.
With that finished, we could finally go drive to the park like we had planned originally. While I was settling into the car, I noticed one more dead insect on the passenger seat. It resembled the ants in shape and color, but it was too long, and it had wings. I didn't give it any thought at the time, but later I looked them up. I'm pretty sure that one was the queen.