Who decides what goes on that list? How do you ensure measurement/enforcement of these rules is accurate and fair? How do you prevent takeover of whatever body manages/enforces this list by people with bad intentions?

I would love it if people who disagreed with my fundamental beliefs weren't allowed to vote too, but I think it's the wrong level to attack the problem. You have to have a political debate and bring people on side instead. Otherwise, why do we have a democracy anyway?

I thought it was a good race. The period while the leaders were stuck behind Hadjar (and lapping backmarkers, if I remember rightly?) was pretty tense. The Piastri collision was such a shame, it would've been great for the race if he'd have been ahead and Norris would've had to overtake on track.

I was shouting at my TV a couple of times. One when Piastri had the collision with the Williams in the picture-in-picture and it didn't get picked up on commentary until the replay. The other was that fact that they showed the coming out of the pits / safety car line before playing the team radio, so the commentators were treating it as "ohh, that was really close!" before realising it was in reference to a possible infringement. Not major things really, but it's a shame when it feels like I know what's going on more than the commentators for a brief period.

I actually want that. Not so I can chat to the AI, but so that everyone else who is forced into the office so that they can be on a call with their teammates in other regions don't distract me, and vice versa. I have noise cancelling headphones, but even they aren't enough.

goodbye

Wow! Thanks for such a great reply!

I used to have stomach issues in uni when I was eating a lot more bread. I never really did anything about it, but it seems to have died down now as my diet naturally changed. I'd never heard of an elimination diet before so that makes sense to narrow down exactly what's causing it.

It's really fascinating how the same combinations of food can affect people in such different ways.

Do you have any tips for handling both stomach and exit pain? I always find that to be the tricky part.

Prosody for me. I set it up over 2 years ago, and the only time I touched it was when updating to the latest Debian stable and enabling some new features in the config files. It's been rock-solid and just worked without complaint.

I'm pretty good at Mario Kart. I hadn't played it for about 10 years, but I beat all my friends when I played Mario Kart World for the first time with them recently.

I'll represent the Linux contingent of Lemmy with my Librem 5, running Mobian

The main part is the party's support for so-called "remigration", which is

ethnic cleansing[1] via mass deportation of non-white minority populations, especially immigrants and sometimes including native-born citizens, to their place of racial ancestry

About the immigration policy of the party:

Markus Allard initiated heavy debate in 2025 by claiming that Sweden is "the land for/belongs to the Swedes" and that the Örebro party favors a large scale remigration policy. He also criticized the Sweden Democrats for, according to him, allowing too many immigrants into the country under their watch as confidence and supply to the Kristersson cabinet.

In 2026 ÖP party leader Markus Allard sparked controversy on several occasions. In a debate hosted by Studio3 with Liberal member of parliament Martin Melin, Allard asked: "why won't the Liberals push for deporting 100 000 social welfare-Somalis?" and in the same debate said that "Sweden belongs to the Swedes. We have to make sure that we take care of our own damn people and we must deport these damn parasites who sit and live at our expense." [45]

In a podcast segment about immigration and deportations Allard stated his opinion and said that "They will also be forced to leave, even if they are born in Sweden, because they have no natural connection to Sweden. They are not Swedish." [46]

About the foreign policy of the party:

In a podcast in May 2026 Allard clarifies some positions that his party holds and among other things made clear that leaving the EU and NATO were on the table for ÖP. Regarding NATO Allard claimed that Sweden cannot trust or rely on NATO and that the country should instead seek to massively increase its weapons production and also become a major arms exporter, arguing it would benefit the Swedish economy.[47][48]

Seconding this. For anyone interested in wider discussion of the difference in attitude between whether it was a mistake at the time, vs what we should do now, this was discussed in more detail on the opinion brief podcast by the polling org more in common.

Direct podcast link. Brexit discussion starts at 34:31 and ends at 1:01:43.

Some notes:

• Support for the status quo when it comes to our relationship with the EU is highly correlated with how the economy is doing
  • When we were in the EU, support for membership was high when the economy was doing well, and low when the economy was doing badly
  • Now that we are out, it's flipped: support for membership is lower when the economy is doing better, and higher when the economy is doing badly
• There's a similar correlation between how insecure the world feels / how scared the public feels and our positive attitudes towards membership of the EU
• Rejoin / stay out is ~2:1 in favour of rejoin. However, this probably wouldn't be robust if another referendum actually happened:
  • "applicant status is supplicant status". By rejoining, EU would give a list of requirements and then say "call us once these are done".
  • It's very one-sided, would make the leaving process look like a battle between equals in comparison
  • This would be quite politically toxic. So, public opinion would likely shift in a sceptical direction in any debate.
  • This eurosceptic shift is seen in most countries that join the EU, so you need a massive level of support to begin with
• Although the UK could use the same Euro trick as Poland and Sweden, where they say: "yes, we'll definitely take the Euro at some point, just not for the forseeable future", this argument could only come after the negotiations - everyone would have to pretend that we're really serious about taking the Euro while negotiating, which would be politically toxic
• No politician is going to start negotiations with the EU. Negotiations take 5+ years - any significant economic benefits would come after 10+ years. In the meantime you cost yourself significant political capital pushing it through

Some other interesting discussions:

• Rise in populist parties is because UK politicians no longer have an easy group to blame whatever goes wrong on. UK voters are voting against the status quo as a protest vote because they're still unhappy
• Leave campaign's success came from tying membership in the EU (which no-one really cared about) to immigration (which many voters cared about). Now, that same tying of immigration to a relatively settled topic on the right is happening with the ECHR
  • If we leave the ECHR, we effectively get a no deal brexit. The EU would be at liberty to rip up all our trading agreements, because they're contingent on membership of the ECHR
• The Remain campaign really badly interpreted the results from the Scottish referendum. Yes, they won the referendum, but during the process, support for leaving the UK went from 25% to 45%. Euroscepticism started almost neck-and-neck before the referendum campaigning began

Hi, I'm choosing this comment to reply to everyone at once, since there's a lot of overlap in the comments.

I'm sorry for not following the etiquette of the community. I've updated the post to contain a blurb to explain why I liked the article. I hope it's ok but if there are any problems I'm happy to amend it or change the focus of the blurb.

I was careful to check the rules before posting, and in all other communities I actively participate in, link-only posts are completely fine, so I didn't even stop to think it could be a problem. I now appreciate that this is not the followed norm of this community though. I can see that it could be easily misinterpreted as self-promotion, since I didn't state I wasn't the authour of the post. I have subscribed to this community for a while and made a couple of comments, but this is my first post here and with the posts mixed in the rest of the feed, I guess I didn't build a good sense of the unwritten norms of the community.

I am not the authour of the blog post. This is the personal blog post of someone who works for the Sovereign Tech Agency. I appreciate their posts because they took a very thoughtful approach to why they are self-hosting certain things. Their technical approach is an extension of the "why" they are doing it and this is very clearly and explicitly laid out. This is something I quite like, and at least in the blogs I follow, relatively unique.

I am based in the UK. I always catch up on my RSS feeds before i go to bed, and if I see something interesting, I tend to share it on lemmy. I only woke up again now because of the heatwave here! Another lesson learned, if posting to this community again, do it while I'm available for the next few hours.