549
submitted 7 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

JK Rowling has challenged Scotland's new hate crime law in a series of social media posts - inviting police to arrest her if they believe she has committed an offence.

The Harry Potter author, who lives in Edinburgh, described several transgender women as men, including convicted prisoners, trans activists and other public figures.

She said "freedom of speech and belief" was at an end if accurate description of biological sex was outlawed.

Earlier, Scotland's first minister Humza Yousaf said the new law would deal with a "rising tide of hatred".

The Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Act 2021 creates a new crime of "stirring up hatred" relating to age, disability, religion, sexual orientation, transgender identity or being intersex.

Ms Rowling, who has long been a critic of some trans activism, posted on X on the day the new legislation came into force.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] otp@sh.itjust.works 80 points 7 months ago

Bill Gates started a charity.

Steve Jobs killed himself because he thought he knew better than his doctors. Well, that's wacked out too, but at least it's not being a Nazi...

[-] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 60 points 7 months ago
[-] Sabata11792@kbin.social 18 points 7 months ago
[-] ObviouslyNotBanana@lemmy.world 11 points 7 months ago

McAfee is not worth cracking

[-] ogmios@sh.itjust.works 6 points 7 months ago

That dude's videos are extraordinary.

[-] SatansMaggotyCumFart@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago

John McAfee’s poop hammock is perhaps the best story about him.

[-] sagrotan@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago

At last this guy was entertaining, not only disgusting like these modern "billionaires". Pff.

[-] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 32 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Bill gates didn’t start the charity as a midlife crisis.

It’s a tax dodge and a lot of other ways of protecting his money while also doing a little reputation washing/ morality banking

[-] otp@sh.itjust.works 14 points 7 months ago

Wasn't he 45 when he started the charity? That sounds like a perfect candidate to be a midlife crisis, haha

[-] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 17 points 7 months ago

Just because it was midlife doesn’t mean it’s a crisis.

He started the charity as a shelter for his obscene wealth. That is all.

[-] otp@sh.itjust.works 14 points 7 months ago

I'm not obscenely wealthy, so I don't have the experience...but it seems plausible that a billionaire midlife crisis could be "Where am I going to put this ridiculous amount of money that I've earned through less-than-ethical means?"

[-] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 8 points 7 months ago
[-] TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee 13 points 7 months ago

I mean, the main motivator for the endowment was always Malinda Gates. I'm sure it functions as a tax shelter, but I doubt that was really the main motivator. He's already given over several times what his tax burden would have been, and if we compare it to other NGOs whose sole purpose is truly preserving or raising money, they really aren't comparable.

I'm in agreement that no one should have hundreds of millions of dollars, let alone billions. We can discuss the validity of NGO as a concept, but as far as NGO go, the gates foundation has done more actual aid work for 3rd world countries than most governments.

[-] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world -1 points 7 months ago

We can discuss the validity of NGO as a concept, but as far as NGO go, the gates foundation has done more actual aid work for 3rd world countries than most governments.

most governments don’t have nearly the same revenue. This is like saying corporations have done more to help homeless people than homeless shelters (to whom the corpos donate money.)

The reality is that a lot of the way things are, are caused by people like- and including- bill gates.

While there are many NGOs that exist to do good things- and are very good at aid- the gates foundation is not one of those.

I think you’ve bought into the reputation washing the foundation has done for the Gates, and severely underestimate just ho sociopathic they are…. And just how profitable the foundation is for them personally.

[-] TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee 1 points 7 months ago

most* governments don’t have nearly the same revenue. This is like saying corporations have done more to help homeless people than homeless shelters (to whom the corpos donate money.)

In this hypothetical, the shelters are still necessary for the investment to do any actual good, therefore the input of the investment could never exceed the input of the shelter.

One of the things that makes the gates foundation an actual working NGO is that they employ their own aid workers, and set up the logistics systems that support their mission.

The reality is that a lot of the way things are, are caused by people like- and including- bill gates.

I agree, my claim isn't that bill gates deserves his wealth, or that his NGO validates his earnings, or even the economic system that allowed it. My claim is simply that the gates foundation is about as good of an NGO we could ever expect to have within our current economic system.

think you’ve bought into the reputation washing the foundation has done for the Gates, and severely underestimate just ho sociopathic they are…. And just how profitable the foundation is for them personally.

I think that the vast majority of those impacted by the "sociopathy" you speak of are/were other wealthy silicon valley types, and the rest of the 1rst world in general. Was he a monopolistic technocrat who personally slowed the march of technology for personal gain? Yes, but to be honest so did other corporations like apple. The thing apple hasn't done is save +30 million lives from preventable diseases.

As far as how profitable the foundation is...... I don't really think you understand how tax write offs work. They aren't an infinite supply of free tax credits that you can deduct from your personal income. There is a point where the amount you give exceeds your personal tax burden.

If it were truly about making money, he would just do the same thing musk is, keeping his investments in unrealized gains, and then using those assets as collateral for tax free loans.

Also, Id hardly claim the gates foundation has been a success at reputation washing. I mean just in the last couple years he's been accused of everything from drinking baby's blood for adrenochrome, injecting people with the 5g, and even creating COVID. I think he's a difficult person to have a nuanced opinion over. People tend to not criticize them for the things he's actually done, and tend to focus instead on some hidden insidiousness.

[-] otp@sh.itjust.works 1 points 7 months ago

I didn't say that

[-] gmtom@lemmy.world 6 points 7 months ago

It’s a tax dodge

Have you ever worked with the Gates foundation? Because calling it a "tax dodge" like that is completely baseless, they're a really reallyngood charity, like honestly one of the best in the world, and also that's very ignorant of how taxes work.

[-] Empricorn@feddit.nl -3 points 7 months ago

They do good work and help people? That's great! They do the best work out of all charities worldwide? That's even better!

Still a tax dodge. You really want to help the world, donate. The money being out of their control is kind of the point...

[-] gmtom@lemmy.world 0 points 7 months ago

How is the money being out of their control the point?

The point is to save lives and help people, which the Gates foundation does incredibly well.

And it's not a tax dodge, he's literally just not selling his Microsoft shares for cash, getting taxed, and then giving the money to the foundation and instead just giving the foundation the shares directly.

[-] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world -3 points 7 months ago

and also that’s very ignorant of how taxes work.

You could just google it and alleviate your own ignorance of all the scummy ways both the foundation and the trust are used to avoid taxes (and other expenses.) here's a forbe's article with the stuff they're actually allowed to talk about. The "good work" you're so keen to point out... is part of the grift.

Specifically so schmucks like you pounce whenever some schmuck like me says "they're not that nice." That's the part about "reputation washing". he gives some money - literal pocket change for somebody that makes nearly 11 million per day.

you don't get that fucking rich by being "nice" or "decent" or even human, really. this is about Bezos, but it puts their wealth into perspective. Decent humans, with that kind of wealth could solve global housing. Or they could solve the food shortage. he hasn't even come close to that. No. The foundation isn't a force for good, even if it occasionally does good shit.

for example, the Rich Douche exploited the pandemic to make money, by investing in vaccine companies. And refusing to release the IP on the Vaccine. Because that would hurt ~~his~~ the foundation's profits.

[-] gmtom@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

My dude, I have worked with the foundation to help create diagnostic tools for deseases that would otherwise gone unnoticed in developing countries.

The work we have done has saved thousands and thousands of peoples lives. So you can take your.

The "good work" you're so keen to point out... is part of the grift.

And shove it right up your arse. If saving peoples lives is a "grift" to you because bill Gates didn't sell his shares in Microsost before he gave them to his trust, because obviously the shares will keep increasing in price, then honestly I don't fucking care.

And yes I know Bill Gates did shitty things and screwed a lot of people over in his early carrier to become so rich and I'm not excusing that. But the Gates foundation isn't part of that and has done way too much good for humanity as a whole for some ignorant chucklefuck with no first hand experience of what they do to dismiss it as a "grift".

[-] Hobbes@startrek.website 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

All that may be true, but it does a lot of good too.

[-] vividspecter@lemm.ee 10 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Steve Jobs killed himself because he thought he knew better than his doctors. Well, that’s wacked out too, but at least it’s not being a Nazi…

Steve Jobs was always a piece of shit, and he had that diet well before he got cancer. But yeah the fact he continued to double down in the face of death shows how much of a narcissist he was.

this post was submitted on 01 Apr 2024
549 points (94.6% liked)

News

23265 readers
3543 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS