• 1 Post
  • 171 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: August 15th, 2023

help-circle



  • I agree with you and I think she was taken somewhat out of context, though it’s not exactly fake or making things up either. My interpretation is that she is agreeing with specific parts of Sec. Burgum’s statements. The headline of the article (calls Trump admin’s climate denialism “fantastic”) is sensationalization. They do link to the source video though and to Google’s whitepaper.

    Her remarks are at around 9hr 5m. She says “fantastic” and then talks specifically about nuclear, grid permitting & modernization. She focuses on the “AI arms race” and the need to act quickly on energy policy. She does not make any statement on Burgum’s climate denialism.

    Most of what she is saying is in line with what’s in the whitepaper (of which she is an author). And in my view, the whitepaper outlines an energy policy that both achievable in the current administration and reduces emissions. It is certainly not perfect, and I wish the conversation was different, but there’s some good stuff in there.

    I have been a volunteer advocating for climate policies at the federal level for the past few years, and we have had a lot of conversations around nuclear, geothermal, clean energy tax credits, permitting reform (NEPA exemptions, transmission). I was happy to see mention of the Energy Permitting Reform Act of 2024 in Google’s whitepaper – we lobbied pretty hard for that. It definitely would have reduced emissions.

    I don’t personally like that Google is advocating for natural gas, even if they talk about carbon sequestration and satellite based emissions monitoring in the same breath. Natural gas is definitely part of the current state of climate / energy policy conversation, and we’d rather have natural gas than coal. In my advocacy work, I don’t demonize natural gas, but I try to shift towards talking more about geothermal and nuclear to cover base load power needs.

    Burgum’s comments are around 47m and there is definitely a lot of denialism in there. But he also talks about decarbonization, sequestration, cleaner sources of base load power (hydro). A few years ago, Republicans were not using any of this sort of language, and we’ve been part of helping to change that. Our strategy has included a strong focus on common ground around energy, and side-stepping the climate change debate entirely.

    If the end result is a reduction in emissions then personally I don’t really care as much about ideological purity. The article to me seems more focused on purity and less on the full context.




  • That is so cool!! I am a home barista and recently started learning latte art. I really love the tulip stacks as well. A few weeks ago I couldn’t even do a heart, but I bought some cheapo beans and milk from Costco and spent a bunch of evenings spending time just practicing. Now I can do a bunch of stacks.



  • What was the shooting for?

    No idea

    Was that guy confirmed to be the same shooter?

    Not confirmed, but from what I can tell several eyewitnesses noticed something fishy with his backpack. The OP of the video has been posting on Reddit /r/saltlakecity and /r/publicfreakout, and there’s another video just beforehand where people are talking about the backpack.

    The events are very chaotic. What I can tell from eyewitnesses statements: the perp shot somebody (supposedly in the head), and someone in a yellow vest (yellow vests were either cops or security who was with the organizers) immediately drew a gun and shot the perp back (would explain why in some photos it looks like he’s bleeding, and cops / EMS are rendering medical aid). Eyewitnesses said after that, a plainclothes cop who was among the protesters also drew a gun too, but by then the perp had ran off.

    Meanwhile (can see from security footage posted by the news), police swarm in maybe a minute? after the shooting.

    Supposedly someone maybe saw the perp putting the rifle in his backpack, and when he went to hide among other protestors, the guy in the video grabbed his backpack to get it away from it, opened it, found the rifle, and called police over and pointed out the long hair guy. Pretty sure several people in the area the video was taken were also interviewed by police, and it was enough to arrest him.

    All we know now is that police have 3 people in custody and have been asking for more photos / videos of the incident.

    I was about a block away and I didn’t hear anything as I was focused on something else, but my coworker standing next to me heard at least one shot. Shortly after we saw a dozen people running, and then a couple dozen more and people yelled “active shooter”, and then we were running too. I ran a block, and shortly after that saw an unmarked cruiser fly in, and then a couple minutes later saw a van with riot police pull up back to the main area of the march. Riot police got out and just stood there basically, and eventually got the rest of the marching protestors moving away from the area with the shooting, and then got everyone to disperse. There was no violence between protestors and cops. After the shooting everyone seemed happy to disperse. Riot cops were really just helping to direct everyone away at that point.

    My speculation: I think the shooting was politically motivated, and the shooter intended to shoot many more people, but did not expect such a quick response to his actions. The people responding including yellow vest guy, and the guy who grabbed the backpack probably saved many lives.

    Edit: I saw there is now what looks like security cam footage of yellow vest guy shooting the perp

    Edit: News story just published corroborates some of what I saw eyewitnesses say. Unfortunately it’s confirmed that the victim died. Police are saying the victim was essentially collateral damage, shot by a yellow vest who was attempting to stop the man with the rifle and the backpack. Really sad all around.

    https://www.sltrib.com/news/2025/06/15/marcher-wounded-no-kings-protest/





  • Thank you for this. My wife left about a week ago. It blindsided me, but I’m hindsight I could have seen it. She’s been throwing herself into her work for the last 4 years. I felt the lack of love, but never had the tools to express my needs. Whenever we talked about it, we ended up fighting.

    In hindsight, if someone is not feeling love in a marriage, why would they stay?

    Like you, we also always thought we had the tools to work things out.

    I’ve learned now that in our relationship she has been anxiously attached – it makes sense now why I could never have the “rational” kind of conversation I wanted with her.

    Meanwhile I have been avoidant or possibly fearful-avoidant. What I thought of as “taking a break in an argument when things get heated” to go independently deal with my emotions must have been painful for her, and she would then chase me. End result: neither of us was able to regulate our emotions.

    I’ve was open to ENM in our relationship, but she was against it, so we never persued it. So it stings even more seeing signs that she’s been cheating on me. Though I guess, even in ENM, why would you keep seeing a partner whom you feel no love for anymore?

    In the last week I have been cramming attachment theory, Gottman, NVC, trying to have some idea of what the hell happened. Now I realize that if I don’t work on myself, I will bring all of my problems to any future relationship. I’m only at the very start of the journey, and every day is still painful – our relationship lasted 15 years, and that can’t be unwound quickly.