Laurel Lance, Fucking Nerd

1968 words, gen, rated PG-13 for swearing, warnings for mentions of alcoholism and drug addiction. Written because Katie Cassidy said in an interview once that she thinks Laurel watches Felicity so she can learn and use all the computer systems. Also because she’s back and I love her so have her nerdy story, told in four parts.

1. Money

“How did you afford this place?” Thea asks one day when she’s bringing in the mail. It’s something that never occurred to her, but really, Laurel’s place—Laurel’s and her place now—is actually really nice. And Thea might have turned Verdant mostly successful, but that was publicity and manipulation, not necessarily money smarts. But Laurel bought this place when she was working at CNRI and making a pittance and it’s a really nice apartment if you ignore the multiple crowbar marks around the front door.

And come to think of it, she always has really nice clothes, too.

“Hmm?” Laurel asks, not looking up from the files she’s got spread out over the dining room table. She even has reading glasses perched on her nose like some kind of sexy librarian.

“This condo. It’s pretty sweet. How’d you afford it?”

“Payoff from Sara,” Laurel says, and Thea’s stomach twists. “Well, partially. I used that to pay for law school since your mother insisted I take it.”

“Where’d the rest of it come from? Your dad?”

“Dad’s not great with money. I set up a stock portfolio, played some odds, diversified it before the market dropped so I only took a minor hit. The rest I bundled away.” Laurel scribbles something on a legal pad.

“You…played the stock market and made enough to buy yourself a condo.”

“It’s not difficult. Patterns and research.” Now Laurel does look up. “Are you looking for tips? I could set up some things for you. It would be good to have a rainy day fund, at the very least since I know being a campaign assistant doesn’t pay that well.”

Keep reading

More and more women now refuse to put up with being lied to, beaten and betrayed by the fathers of their children. The truth behind the so-called decline in family values is that the illusion of stable family life was built on the silence of suffering women, who lived on whatever their husbands thought fit to give them, did menial work for a pittance to buy the necessities that their husbands would not pay for, put up with their husbands’ drinking and their bit on the side, blamed themselves for their husbands’ violence towards them, and endured abuse silently because of the children.
—  Germaine Greer, The Whole Woman
Do not support Punjammies, it's racist colonialist carceral trash

They arrest sex workers and force them to work in sweatshops producing that overpriced crap for the white liberal market in the west, while the “rescued”/arrested women make a pittance.

So apparently Alexander Hamilton had TWO brother. James Hamilton, who I knew about, was Alexander’s full brother, and apparently took after their father. Whatevs.

BUT, apparently they had an older half-brother, their mom’s legitimate son. Who took all of their inheritance from Mom, when he died couldn’t even remember James’s name and left his half brothers both a pittance, but also lived in South Carolina. And owned a plantation there.

You know who else owned a plantation in South Carolina? Henry Laurens.

Basically I’m asking where ANY FIC is that acknowledges the exisistence Peter Lavien, especially where he and John Laurens know each other.

what really gets me about snily vs jily discourse is the idea that either James or snape has to deserve Lily, like??? It always comes back to people saying james was a bully or some shit and therefore didnt deserve lily. Discarding the fact that james definitely Grew up from age fifteen (to the point that he gave up his life to buy his wife and child pittance as a chance to escape), who is to say he had to grow up and deserve Lily at all? Lily isnt some prize james or snape gets as a reward for not being shit. James couldve still been an idiot and Lily could still  have gotten together with him because she wanted to. It is the dignity of her Choice that Snily shippers ignore. 

Revenge worth a few million dollars.

This story is about how a my employer (a national company) tried to f*ck me over and I f*cked back, harder. They overcharge customers for everything and treat employees like sh*t. The turnover rate is in the 80% range so employees were more concerned trying not to get fired.

I quit school to work at this company because of the good opportunity I was sold on. I rose the ranks quickly to manage my own store. In retrospect, it was a throne of sh*t. The world is bigger now thanks to how all this went down.

One of the things you quickly learn about working there is that your social life disappears. So does your health, but it seemed worth it at the time for a paycheck. As a manager, it’s even worse. I worked 12 hour shifts 6 times a week and rarely enjoyed my free time - all for $50K a year, a pittance. I spent my free Sundays thinking about how the boss was going to be pissed on Monday during our weekly regional conference calls. I was in charge of making sure numbers were met, but meeting them was a tremendous task.

Numbers included sales and credit collection. We did both in house and it was miserable. If you ever wondered what it’s like collecting from people that f*cked their credit up, work at a place like that. We didn’t check credit for this reason so it would make sense why collections would be very difficult, but that didn’t matter. We had to meet weekly numbers regardless. This created a stressful environment that repeated on a weekly basis. There was no rest because Sundays were spent dreading Monday when the cycle would repeat.

Sounds like a sh*tty place to work, but the paycheck was consistent so I stayed - for 5 years. Then one day, the company decides to install a satellite branch offsite. The national office wanted to test the viability of this before expanding further. Lucky me. The place would sell stuff but wouldn’t have to worry about collections. Since the revenues of these sales were mine, my branch would oversee the collections aspect of the accounts. They got credit for making the sale, but didn’t have to deal with the next step. Lucky them. This didn’t exactly create an incentive for them to verify an application, leading to collection nightmares for me and my employees.

During this exact time time, all managers in California got a paycut. We were made hourly employees from salary, which used to afford us the liberty to take an early day to resist burnout. Unfortunately, this change meant we had to work more for the same pay so we kissed the little rest we had goodbye. This little bit is important to the story so keep it in mind.

Back to it - after these accounts began to consistently disrupt my ability to collect, the stress was beginning to build. I aired grievances to my boss regarding the offsite accounts and was told to go f*ck myself. I was reprimanded anyway. Constantly. I was being punished and knew my boss would be making a move against me soon. There was only so much I was willing to take so I decided to be proactive.

I collected the faxes my boss sent, often berating employees and telling us we’re going to be replaced. This was common so I had a lot of them. I also recorded conference calls where he said the same and I printed financial reports with business detailing. I took these all home to collect leverage. I was ready. His “surprise” visit came so he can audit my store. He asked for files “I lost”. His hand was forced and he made an expedited move. He fell for the bait and bit. I was fired. I called the next day to tell my assistant to retrieve the files in the back office. I guess I did remember where they were. The pieces were set in place.

I immediately filed for unemployment. A thing this company does is deny unemployment to everyone. They fight it and fight it hard. They never lost a case while I was there. I knew the game already and was a few steps ahead of the process as I anticipated their denial. Like clockwork, the letter in the mail came and I promptly filed the appeal. A few weeks later, I met with an arbitrator to face my ex-boss and a corporate lawyer at the courthouse. First, I was questioned by their lawyer to make a case for misconduct (a reason to deny unemployment). Nonsense. I had paperwork to prove otherwise because I prepped ahead of time. I was then given an opportunity to counter with my questioning. It was fun to grill my boss with questions as I made him dismiss all the claims the lawyer made. I produced paperwork they didn’t know I had. Surprise motherf*cker ! I’ll never forget the faces they made when they realized their plan was f*cked.

I won the case. Thanks old boss! I collected unemployment for two years while I went to school, however, the pay was not a lot ($800 or so every two weeks). Better than nothing I suppose.

Walking out, my boss walked alongside of me and tried psyche me out. He said that I made a chicken sh*t move at the hearing and I would regret it. I responded slyly that he may be talking to a mirror and that I look forward to replacing their sh*tty counsel should they ever need a new one (because I just made her look silly). It was all bark but I wanted to bask in my victory with passive aggressive sh*t talking. The best part was that I boasted about my next move, which went over his head. This would be the blaze of glory.

The blaze of glory, you ask? What I didn’t mention was the real payday. Remember that thing about the changing manager classification? I forgot to also mention that they did this due to a previous lawsuit against the company regarding how they classified my position and how they treated it in reality. It cost them near $30 million dollars to settle, which prompted them to have us sign weekly paperwork that made us acknowledge we didn’t spend more than 50% of our time doing non-managerial duties. All bullshit, but we signed because we needed the weekly paycheck.

Well, it turns out that in between the time they got sued and the time we changed our classification to hourly, there was a two year gap in California stores where nothing changed. That means that the violations they were sued for were not rectified for two years! This is where all those papers I was collecting came in handy. I took note of this discrepancy and began the search for a firm to take my case after I was disillusioned with their treatment of us. I shopped and found one a little before being fired.

The case took off months after when I received word that the company would settle for $15 million. Easy money. When the class-action letters began to reach people, my ex-boss found out it was me and called me to yell and curse. He wanted the last word but I never allowed him to have it because I hung up. The rage was good. I got a good portion of the payout and bought a car with it. I saved the rest to pay for school.

The other case I filed against them was not a class-action suit. It was directed at my old boss with me being the sole plaintiff. This case dealt with the toxic environment he created with all those faxes and phone calls. They settled for this one too and I took home another chunk of their profits. This was not in the millions, but it was still a good amount. Unfortunately, he never called me. His angry voice would have been music to my ears. I later found out from ex-coworkers that his wife left him and he got dumped by the company too. Can’t escape that 80% turnover, eh?

I almost felt sorry for him, but I can’t say it wasn’t well-deserved. I felt like a white-collar viking warrior conquering my enemies and then f*cking their women.

One of the key points about The Abominable Bride: Sherlock realizes what a shitty, mean misogynist he’s been all along. His subconscious forces  him to accept it.

In season 1, he used Molly’s feelings for him against her for information. 

In season 2, he just couldn’t let Irene win and walk away victorious. (Hey, she was asking, for what? A few million pounds? £100 million? What does the first-world, incredibly wealthy British government care about such a pittance? It’s nothing to them.) But his ego wouldn’t allow it. He had to sabotage it. 

In season 3: He manipulated Janine, proposed, then indicated to John he wasn’t particularly bothered if she lost her job and her life got ruined because of him.

The thing about TAB is Sherlock eventually understanding: “Wait, I’m a mean  sexist prick, aren’t I?” 

'He Had A Great Eye For A Story'
NPR's Philip Reeves remembers Zabihullah Tamanna, a brave Afghan journalist who brought compassion to his work. Tamanna was killed along with NPR photojournalist David Gilkey in Afghanistan on Sunday.

A few months back, I asked a favor of my friend and NPR colleague, Zabihullah Tamanna. We’d just spent a busy day going from interview to interview in Kabul. I had some urgent writing to do. Would he mind going out onto the streets and taking some photographs?

For those who live and work in conflict zones and war zones, it’s easy to become somewhat numb. Violence and danger can corrode your sense of humanity. But the pictures that Zabihullah took that day were the work of a journalist whose compassion was entirely intact.

Zabi spent more than an hour with a group of boys who earn a pittance by wandering from car to car waving tin cans containing smoldering seeds. (Some Afghans believe the smoke from these seeds wards off evil). He returned, handed me the camera, and quietly remarked that he thought he’d captured some “nice images.”

He was right.

Zabi, who was killed in Afghanistan on Sunday along with NPR photojournalist David Gilkey, was far more than just a “translator-fixer” for NPR. He was one of a group of Afghan journalists who carry on their crucial work despite great and constant personal risk. They have extraordinary courage.

I had some years of definite frustration. Auditioning and not working as much as I would have liked to, or working and being paid a pittance, and sort of scrounging by in New York and sleeping on a chair that folded out into a bed. Ive always had sort of a guiding passion, which has been acting, since I was a kid, which Britta doesnt have, but I definitely had that struggle: ‘Am I gonna pay my rent? Am I going to be able to have this as a career?’ I relate to that. And I relate to having this idea of yourself, the person that you want to be, and falling short of it. So all of that, I can relate to.

Donald Trump’s white fascist brigade: His rallies are now a safe space for racism
By Chauncey DeVega

In their current state of outrage about anti-racism protests at America’s colleges and universities, “political correctness,” and Black Lives Matter activism, movement conservatives are refighting the Culture Wars of the 1960s and 1980s. Once more, the university is their enemy both because of the American right’s deeply rooted anti-intellectualism, as well as how it is one of the few spaces where women, gays and lesbians, and people of color are (incorrectly) imagined as having a voice and some pittance of power.

Because conservatives exhibit a high degree of social dominance behavior, any threat to what they view as “the natural order of things” is met with fear, a sense of victimization, and feelings of hostility. This dynamic helps to explain the right-wing’s current obsession with “political correctness” and “safe spaces.” It also reveals the glaring difference between how movement conservatives and liberally minded people understand the world, and the language they use to describe it.

An activist is beaten and taunted with racial slurs at a Trump rally in Alabama. This is just the beginning.

Dear YouTube: An open letter from Irving Azoff
"You have built a business that works really well for you and for Google, but it doesn’t work well for artists," says the legendary artists' manager.
By Irving Azoff

Dear YouTube,

Your attempt at “Setting the Record Straight” through a post on your “creator blog” last month did exactly the opposite: It was obfuscation to divert artists’ attention from the fact that YouTube hides behind the DMCA’s “safe harbor” provision and pays artists a pittance.

You say that music matters to YouTube. There is an old adage about actions and words. If YouTube valued music, then it would allow artists to have the same control which YouTube grants to itself. YouTube has created original programming. Those programs sit behind a “paid wall” and are not accessible for free unless YouTube decides to make them available that way. If a fan wants to watch the YouTube series “Sister-Zoned,” that fan has to subscribe to YouTube Red for $9.99 a month. But the same does not apply to music.

When the artist sends a “take down,” it should be a “stay down.

If music matters to YouTube, then why not give musicians the same choice you give yourselves? Taylor Swift should be able to decide which of her songs are available for free, and which are part of a paid subscription service. Or she should be able to opt out of YouTube if you won’t give her this choice.

But artists can’t opt out of YouTube. Because of the outdated Digital Millennium Copyright Act, the only way for an artist to keep a song off YouTube is for that artist to send YouTube a notice every time that song is uploaded by a different user. It is impossible. The Content ID system that you flaunt is meaningless when YouTube continues to hide behind the “safe harbor” provisions of the DMCA. If YouTube cares about copyright management then join the music business in its efforts to reform the DMCA. Or, better yet, you could really prove your love for music by not allowing music on to YouTube unless you ask the creators of that song for permission.

I know realistically you won’t voluntarily agree to take on the task of asking artists for their permission. So, if you are going to continue to force artists to notify you when an infringing song is on YouTube, once an artist tells you that she wants her song taken off YouTube, you should keep it off. When the artist sends a “take down,” it should be a “stay down.”

Before you tell me that you can’t control what is uploaded to YouTube, let me say it seems clear that YouTube can control the content on its platform when it wants to do so: It controls its own series programming, and it limits offensive content like pornography. It certainly monitors what people are listening to on YouTube and provides that information to advertisers.

If an ad-supported streaming service doesn’t generate enough revenue for YouTube to pay artists at rates which are comparable to Spotify or Apple, then maybe it isn’t a good business?

But when it comes to music, YouTube claims it has no control, and can’t keep a song off its platform. You exercise control over content when it is good for your business. But the truth is that, from the beginning, free music consumption drove YouTube’s business, and so YouTube chose not to give artists control over how their music reaches their fans.

You state with apparent pride that you have licenses with labels, publishers and PROs. But don’t confuse deals made out of desperation with marketplace deals made by willing participants. YouTube has benefitted from the unfair advantage which safe harbors gives you: Labels can take the deals you offer or engage in an impossible, expensive game of “whack a mole,” while the music they control is still being exploited without any compensation. Spotify and Apple don’t have that advantage, and this is why they are better partners to music creators.

In your post, you say it isn’t fair for an artist to compare what they make from Spotify to what they make on YouTube because they are different services. From a fan and artist perspective, they provide the same service — on-demand, streaming music. It is true that YouTube has a different business model, but that was not the artist’s decision. It was YouTube that decided to to invest in an ad-supported platform. If an ad-supported streaming service doesn’t generate enough revenue for YouTube to pay artists at rates which are comparable to Spotify or Apple, then maybe it isn’t a good business?

If you want YouTube to be compared to terrestrial radio, then you have to be a good partner to artists like radio is. Radio works with artists so they can present music to their fans in the way they intended. Radio does not provide unlimited, on-demand access to music which can be shared. Radio doesn’t leak music, and it doesn’t make unfinished or poor-quality live recordings available. It’s about creative control.

You have built a business that works really well for you and for Google, but it doesn’t work well for artists.

You say you want transparency, and I agree that labels and publishers have not traditionally been the best at that. Two wrongs don’t make a right. You need to be transparent, too. Be transparent about your ability to keep illegal music off your platform.Be transparent about your ability to keep your own content behind a paid wall. Be transparent about your revenue and, when paying artists, include all the revenue that is generated by music including advertising on YouTube’s home page.If you do this, I pledge to you that, I will pressure the labels and publishers to pass on that transparency and increased revenue to the artists.

YouTube, ask yourself this question: If you are paying so well and providing such a great service to artists, then why is there discord between you and the creative community? You can blame the labels and publishers — or the “middle men,” as you call them. I know how easy it is to take shots at record companies and publishers — I have been doing it for years. But the root of the problem here is you: You have built a business that works really well for you and for Google, but it doesn’t work well for artists. If you think it is just the labels and publishers who are complaining, you are wrong. The music community is traditionally a very fractured one, but on this we are united.

— Irving Azoff

  • capitalism-apologist: marx's entire concept of the proletariat working class and the bourgeois ruling class has never been shown to exist anywhere; you're just making it all about class, class baiter.
  • capitalism-apologist: *types on an iphone that was manufactured by sweatshop laborers for pittance wages while the apple ceo accrues the vast majority of value through their ownership over the means of production, a situation that is found in basically every country in the world following the globalization of capital*
Report: Local Cat Jobs Being Outsourced at Alarming Rate

Labor activists say feline employment is declining at an accelerating rate due to outsourcing. A report out today from Cat Workers United tells the story of Brighton Beach in Brooklyn, NY where over 40% of the cat labor force has been laid off over the past five years.

“This stretch of Brighton Beach,” said Tom Fouts, communications director for CWU on a recent walking tour of the neighborhood, “was a thriving area for cats. Almost every business was cat-owned.”

But that all changed in the mid-2000s, when the recession hit the area particularly hard.

“You had these big landlords from Manhattan come in and buy up a lot of the property for a pittance, push out the cats who’d been here for years,” he said. “Now look at this block. Only a few cats still work here, and the rest of the jobs are outsourced to companies that bring in these cheap cat facsimiles.”

The group is pushing for a legislative package that would give incentives to local businesses for hiring more cats.

Via breakno.