home

Add language identifier to activism template

Author
Maarten Vangeneugden
Date
Sept. 13, 2020, 4:47 p.m.
Hash
ef8183c8dadeb2aac2303d9724d435516ef17c04
Parent
118d7cbbdfaab28cc78d00ecd4613f412358b6bf
Modified file
templates/about/activism.djhtml

templates/about/activism.djhtml

1 addition and 0 deletions.

View changes Hide changes
1
1
{% load i18n %}
2
2
{% load static %}
3
3
+
4
4
5
{% block title %}{% trans "Activism" %}{% endblock title %}
5
6
{% block description %}{% blocktrans %}For the greater good. Find out about some interesting things to better the world as we all know and love it.{% endblocktrans %}
6
7
{% endblock description %}
7
8
{% block main %}
8
9
<section class="emphasis">
9
10
<h3 id="ĉirkaǔ">{% trans "Activism?" %}</h3>
10
11
<p>{% blocktrans %}You see, the world gets better all the time. Mostly, this is
11
12
    thanks to people who believe in something, and actively strive to better the
12
13
    world. They come in all sizes and types, but they're collectively named "activists".
13
14
    Now, I know that most people reading this don't think about themselves as
14
15
    being an activist; most likely you're studying, or working a career, taking
15
16
    care of friends and/or family. You don't have time for activism. At best,
16
17
    you might donate to a cause you believe in, or buy a sticker. Maybe even
17
18
    just because it's a small tax writeoff.{% endblocktrans %}
18
19
</p>
19
20
<p>
20
21
    {% blocktrans %}And you know what? <strong>That's perfectly fine.</strong>
21
22
        This page is not to tell you about how you're not doing <em>enough</em>
22
23
        or why it would matter more than what you're currently doing. There are
23
24
        enough other people that profess that already, and I personally don't
24
25
        think it helps activism a lot. Besides, lots of people already do things
25
26
        because they assume it helps. Look at recycling, blood donations, organ
26
27
        transplants (especially altruistic donations), child adoption, and so on.
27
28
        I know it's not often regarded as activism, but I do want to look at it
28
29
        in different ways than the stereotypical spreading of pamphlets and
29
30
        asking for signatures on market squares.{% endblocktrans %}
30
31
</p>
31
32
<p>
32
33
    {% blocktrans %}That's why I made this page for activism: I think a lot of
33
34
        people really want to make a change, but don't see it as viable for their
34
35
        life. Or they're not sure what to do. Here, I present a list of causes
35
36
        and activities I believe can make the world a better place for everyone.
36
37
        It's also important to remember that nobody can do everything, plenty of
37
38
        valid reasons why that's the case. Maybe you think that organic farming
38
39
        is better for the environment, but you still buy non-organic food because
39
40
        you can't afford the higher price. But that doesn't mean that partaking
40
41
        in activism is hypocritical by default (which is a reasoning that somebody actually
41
42
        used in a discussion about activism with me). On this page, you find causes
42
43
        I believe in, that you can donate to, or small things you can do in your
43
44
        daily life that help that. You won't find the general calls to action here
44
45
        like "You should vote" and "Recycle as much as possible",
45
46
        I assume most people already see those often enough. I target more specific and
46
47
        fewer mentioned points. For some things, I propose certain replacements
47
48
        to "ease" taking on an cause without disrupting your life radically.
48
49
        (Like vegetarianism; it's a good thing, really, but replacing ⅓ of most
49
50
        people's daily diets is too radical for most people to do anyway.)
50
51
        I hope it allows you to partake more in activism.{% endblocktrans %}
51
52
</p>
52
53
<p>
53
54
	{% blocktrans %}I want to end this with a nice citation,
54
55
		<a href="https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Frederick_Douglass#West_India_Emancipation_.281857.29"
55
56
		   target="_blank">accredited to Frederick Douglass</a>:{% endblocktrans %}
56
57
	<blockquote>{% blocktrans %}If there is no struggle, there is no progress.
57
58
		Those who profess to favor freedom, and yet depreciate agitation,
58
59
		are men who want crops without plowing up the ground.
59
60
		They want rain without thunder and lightning. They want the ocean
60
61
		without the awful roar of its many waters. This struggle may be a
61
62
		moral one; or it may be a physical one; or it may be both moral and
62
63
		physical; but it must be a struggle. Power concedes nothing without
63
64
		a demand. It never did and it never will.{% endblocktrans %}</blockquote>
64
65
</p>
65
66
66
67
</section>
67
68
<section>
68
69
69
70
<h3 id="procreation">{% trans "Urgent: Do NOT procreate" %}</h3>
70
71
<p>
71
72
    {% blocktrans %}I know this sounds pretty radical, but
72
73
        allow me to explain in detail. I'm sure you'll understand.<br />
73
74
        The scientific consensus is clear: Humans are the main cause of the
74
75
        climate mayhem, period. Collectively, we are ruining the planet's ecosphere.
75
76
        It's also clear that there's a direct correlation between the earth's
76
77
        temperature, and the amount of humans that are on it:
77
78
        <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:World-Population-1800-2100.svg"
78
79
		   target="_blank">This graph</a>
79
80
        shows the rise of the global population, and
80
81
        <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Major_greenhouse_gas_trends.png"
81
82
		   target="_blank">these graphs</a>
82
83
        show the increase of greenhouse gases during that same timespan.{% endblocktrans %}
83
84
</p>
84
85
<p>
85
86
    {% blocktrans %}I'm not the first one to state that having no children is the
86
87
best thing you can do:
87
88
        <a href="http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aa7541/pdf"
88
89
		   target="_blank">A study</a>
89
90
        calculated that living a <em>completely</em> car-free life reduces your carbon footprint by 2.4 tonnes of CO₂(-equivalent emissions) per year,
90
91
        while having just one <strong>(just one!) fewer child reduces it by 58.6 tonnes of CO₂. Per. Year.</strong>
91
92
        It goes without saying that having one fewer child is <em>way</em> easier than living without a car for the
92
93
        rest of your life.<br />
93
94
        You can see why it strikes me as very odd that lots of people are calling for
94
95
        small solutions like electrical cars, or a vegetarian diet, while
95
96
        at the same time omitting what might be the easiest and most effective
96
97
        solution to make a truly great impact on the world. Sure, the other things
97
98
        help, but not nearly as much as having no/fewer children.{% endblocktrans %}
98
99
<p>
99
100
    {% blocktrans %}From that (again: scientifically proven) point, the inference is thus:
100
101
        Every ecological problem caused by humans gets larger and more destructing
101
102
        with every new human. The easiest and best solution to this problem, is to do as
102
103
        I do, and have no children. By not creating more humans, you are saving the planet
103
104
        from probably 4-10 people in the following decades.{% endblocktrans %}
104
105
</p>
105
106
<p>
106
107
    {% blocktrans %}Having no children allowed me to study whatever I want,
107
108
        and might be the biggest contribution to planet Earth I'll ever make. At the same time,
108
109
        I've seen a member of my family give up a possible job as police inspector because she
109
110
        got pregnant. These are just personal anecdotes, but I doubt I'd have to look very
110
111
        far for other examples where somebody had to stash per dreams because of an oncoming child.
111
112
        (If that person even gets to see that child very much: My parents got divorced, which
112
113
        is not only bad for the children of said parents, but in my case, my father
113
114
        didn't get to see me very often when I was a minor.)
114
115
    {% endblocktrans %}
115
116
</p>
116
117
<p>
117
118
	{% blocktrans %}Some people suggest that not the amount of people living is
118
119
	the problem, but that the way they live is bad. So solving the climate
119
120
	mayhem can also happen with a more sustainable lifestyle.<br />
120
121
	Let's ignore the fact that saying seven billion people is "not too
121
122
	much" is (at least) remarkable. First, for a lot of people, a more
122
123
	"sustainable" lifestyle is simply too hard to accomplish. The more
123
124
	people there are, the less resources are available for everyone. Lowering
124
125
	the population directly implies that everyone's lifestyle becomes
125
126
	automatically more sustainable, and requires practically no difficult
126
127
	intervention.<br />
127
128
	Also, this statement prepositions that there's enough resources for
128
129
	everyone. This is ignorant; if everyone lived in a decent way, we'd need
129
130
	at least 2.5 Earths just to keep up. Currently, the disgusting way
130
131
	people in third world countries have to live can't even offset a way of
131
132
	living humanely.<br />
132
133
	Finally, the climate mayhem has already started, and its consequences are
133
134
	already happening. Even assuming that 7 billion people is not too much,
134
135
	getting them all to live sustainable will take way longer than simply
135
136
	reducing the population, and we can't afford any delay.<br />
136
137
	Oh, and before I forget: Having no children and a sustainable lifestyle
137
138
	are not mutually exclusive. We can (and must) do both.{% endblocktrans %}
138
139
</p>
139
140
<p>
140
141
{% blocktrans %}Some people tout the economy as a reason why this is a bad
141
142
	suggestion.<br />
142
143
	First, simply making this statement implies that economical progress is an
143
144
    argument that's worth
144
145
	taking into consideration with the current direction we're heading, which is
145
146
	one where the economy will be the least of our problems.<br />
146
147
	Secondly, many economists say that a constant growth is economically
147
148
	necessary, and since the economy grows with more people, reducing the birth
148
149
	rate is bad. This argument dismisses discussion out of hand ("It goes
149
150
	against our current system, therefore this will be bad"). It also assumes
150
151
	that we should always work towards "economic growth", which could work if
151
152
	the planet would also grow infinitely. Since it doesn't, economic growth is
152
153
	finitely bound, and since
153
154
	<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth_Overshoot_Day" target="_blank">
154
155
		we're currenty using more of the Earth than it can possibly
155
156
		replenish</a>, we've exceeded that limit. Thus, our current economic
156
157
	situation is incompatible with the planet we all live on. One of the two
157
158
	must change, and we're stuck on Earth, so the economy must change.<br />
158
159
	While we're on the subject of economics:
159
160
	A reduction in the world population has also secondary economical benefits:
160
161
	It's easier for a government to pay for healthcare and education if there are fewer
161
162
	students/patients to pay for in the first place. These funds can then easily be divested
162
163
    to paying pensions for the elderly, or other problems that need funding.
163
164
    Also, jobs that have struggle with constant shortage of workforce (like school teachers)
164
165
    will see this problem gradually disappear.
165
166
    Of course, global heating already puts economies across the planet
166
167
in jeopardy because of all the problems it causes, that then need fixing. It
167
168
also causes so-called climate refugees, who also need to be granted asylum, and
168
169
all the costs that come with it.{% endblocktrans %}
169
170
</p>
170
171
<p>
171
172
    {% blocktrans %}Governments ought to teach children in school about this matter,
172
173
    and spread information about (working) anticonception measures. An increase in
173
174
    abortion rights will also help, and is also beneficial to the rights of women, another
174
175
	important problem. It goes without saying that I am pro abortion rights.<br />
175
176
	Of course, many of these measures directly contradict religious teachings
176
177
	(including the thought that women must give birth as much as possible,
177
178
	<a href="https://www.vrt.be/vrtnws/nl/2018/01/05/vlaams-belang-wil-dat-vlamingen-meer-kinderen-krijgen---nieuwkom/" target="_blank">
178
179
	ideas that are also often espoused by extremist groups, like
179
180
    Vlaams-Belachelijk and AfD<!--Albernheit für Deutschland?--></a>),
180
181
	but we mustn't listen to that; they're fundamentally irrational, and
181
182
	their preachers would rather condemn people to parenthood against their will,
182
183
	rather than allow abortions, which are medically speaking less dangerous
183
184
	procedures than giving birth. Forcing people to risk maternal death against
184
185
	their will because of a flawed reasoning is reprehensible, that's why they
185
186
	should be called the
186
187
	<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/jan/22/abortion-lets-call-the-pro-lifers-what-they-are-pro-death">
187
188
		<strong>pro-death</strong> movement</a>; because of these people, the US
188
189
	now has
189
190
	<a href="https://www.npr.org/2017/05/12/528098789/u-s-has-the-worst-rate-of-maternal-deaths-in-the-developed-world">
190
191
	the highest number of maternal deaths in the developed nations.</a>{% endblocktrans %}
191
192
</p>
192
193
<p>
193
194
	{% blocktrans %}While I don't want humanity to disappear, I don't have to worry
194
195
	that my call to not have children will cause that; there is no way I'd ever become
195
196
	so influential that I would cause that to happen. Therefore, any change that
196
197
    I might cause is all to the good.<br />
197
198
    I also don't want governmentally issued laws that limit procreation; that is
198
199
    very unlikely to work anyway, and since lower income households have more
199
200
    children on average than higher income, the burden of such a law would fall
200
201
    on those people that have enough problems already. It would also fuel the idea
201
202
		that wanting a family should be a misdemeanour, which is ridiculous.
202
203
    (To continue on that: The government should focus especially on immigrants
203
204
    and lower income households, because these groups have statistically the
204
205
    largest families. Reducing the birthrate with them will have more effect
205
206
    than with other types of households.)
206
207
    Also, children that are born, deserve/need all the
207
208
    help to develop themselves, and laws need to be put in place that supports
208
209
    families, such as school and child subsidies, to name a few.{% endblocktrans %}
209
210
</p>
210
211
<p>
211
212
{% blocktrans %}Additionally, the time that would otherwise need to be invested
212
213
in child care, is then completely up to you to use for other things. You
213
214
can go on a very long vacation, you can devote yourself to a cause, make a
214
215
lucrative career, study, ...{% endblocktrans %}
215
216
</p>
216
217
<p>
217
218
    {% blocktrans %}But perhaps you still want to have a family. And that's no problem whatsoever:
218
219
        Thousands of orphans are waiting for a family as you're reading this,
219
220
        and studies show that adoption does wonders for a child's development.
220
221
        By adoption (or fostering), you can build a family, without increasing
221
222
        the climate mayhem. It's a great way to devote yourself to a better world,
222
223
        and be a parent to somebody who desperately needs it.{% endblocktrans %}
223
224
</p>
224
225
</section>
225
226
<section>
226
227
<h3 id="glossary">{% trans "(Anti-)Glossary" %}</h3>
227
228
<p>
228
229
    {% blocktrans %}Words mean things. Like, a lot. We use them to communicate
229
230
    our thoughts, how we perceive the world and how we organize that. The way we
230
231
    speak impacts what people think of us, and influences how they might think
231
232
    about stuff.<br />
232
233
    All that to say that another form of activism can come from using a
233
234
    vocabulary that differs from the "mainstream". By thinking about what you
234
235
    say, you can have a clear thinking process, and avoid giving other people
235
236
    the wrong ideas. This is why I put up a glossary here that you can use to
236
237
    avoid misconceptions in your daily conversation.<br />
237
238
    For a glossary related to informatics, I urge you to read
238
239
    <a target="_blank" href="https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html">
239
240
    the GNU project glossary</a> which
240
241
    handles that off already. My glossary here is a personal one, and tackles
241
242
    more diverse topics. Most of them are mine, but if I did not coin a term, I
242
243
    will put a link to where I found it.{% endblocktrans %}
243
244
</p>
244
245
<dl>
245
246
    {% if lang="nl" %}
246
247
    <dt id="vlaams-belang"><s>Vlaams Belang</s> Vlaams-Belachelijk</s></dt>
247
248
    <dd>Vlaams-Belachelijk is een politieke partij die belachelijk, gevaarlijk
248
249
        en soms zelfs neonazistisch gedachtegoed
249
250
        probeert te verspreiden over Vlaanderen, met ronduit achterlijke
250
251
        ideeën. Een korte opsomming van de meest achterlijke acties en standpunten:
251
252
    <ul>
252
253
        <li>Een soevereine Republiek Vlaanderen oprichten, zonder een uitgewerkt
253
254
            plan over hoe dat zou moeten gebeuren</li>
254
255
        <li>Het lukraak arresteren en deporteren van allochtonen</li>
255
256
        <li><a href="https://www.hbvl.be/cnt/dmf20180105_03281734/vlaams-belang-start-opvallende-campagne-nieuwkomers-die-maken-we-zelf" target="_blank">
256
257
            Vlaamse vrouwen aanzetten zoveel mogelijk kinderen te baren, om een
257
258
            zogenaamd "onevenwicht door allochtone zwangerschappen" recht te
258
259
            zetten</a></li>
259
260
        <li><a href="https://www.vrt.be/vrtnws/nl/2019/08/21/parket-start-onderzoek-naar-bericht-vlaams-belang-over-burgemees/" target="_blank">
260
261
            Andere politici belasteren met leugens over dat ze zouden rijden
261
262
            onder invloed van alcohol</a></li>
262
263
        <li><a href="https://www.vrt.be/vrtnws/nl/2020/01/24/krant-van-west-vlaanderen-eist-excuses-en-schadevergoeding-na-ma/" target="_blank">
263
264
            Manipulatie van beelden om onwaarheden te kunnen verspreiden die hun
264
265
            gedachtegoed zouden moeten bevestigen</a></li>
265
266
        <li><a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20190604141847/https://www.vlaamsbelang.org/vrt-promoot-homohuwelijk/" target="_blank">
266
267
            Afkeuren van gelijke rechten voor holebi's, en in het algemeen elk
267
268
            niet-heterofiel gedrag afkeuren</a></li>
268
269
        <li><a href="https://www.vrt.be/vrtnws/nl/2019/11/28/vlaams-belang-verkoopt-vlaamse-identiteitskaarten-voor-warmste/" target="_blank">
269
270
            Misbruik van goede doelen om eigen identitaire propaganda te
270
271
            verspreiden</a></li>
271
272
        <li><a href="https://www.vrt.be/vrtnws/nl/2019/12/18/incident-op-antwerpse-gemeenteraad-je-zit-niet-in-marokko-dus/" target="_blank">
272
273
            Discriminerend taalgebruik in een gemeenteraad tegen politicus die
273
274
            polarisatie van Vlaams-Belachelijk aankaart</a></li>
274
275
        <li><a href="https://www.demorgen.be/politiek/vlaams-belang-wil-kindergeld-van-criminele-minderjarigen-intrekken~b267a78e/" target="_blank">
275
276
            Schrappen van kindergeld voor minderjarigen die een misdaad begaan</a></li>
276
277
        <li><a href="https://www.hbvl.be/cnt/dmf20200111_04801588/dries-van-langenhove-gastspreker-op-racistisch-amerikaans-congres" target="_blank">
277
278
            Neonazi Dries Van Langenhove laten spreken voor rascisten met zegen
278
279
            van Vlaams-Belachelijk (het artikel gebruikt de term "nieuw-rechts",
279
280
            lees hiervoor "neonazisme")</a></li>
280
281
        <li><a href="https://www.hbvl.be/cnt/dmf20190823_04572955/vlaams-belang-pompt-nog-eens-100-000-euro-in-online-propaganda" target="_blank">
281
282
            Vlaams-Belachelijk pompt tienduizenden euro's in online
282
283
            propaganda</a></li>
283
284
        <li><a href="https://www.vrt.be/vrtnws/nl/2019/08/27/vlaams-belang-lid-neemt-ontslag-na-racistische-en-seksistische-b/" target="_blank">
284
285
            Vlaams-Belachelijke ontmenselijkt personen met een zwarte
285
286
            huidskleur, gevolgd door ontmenselijken van vrouwen, die "objecten"
286
287
            zouden zijn</a></li>
287
288
        <li><a href="https://www.hbvl.be/cnt/dmf20190411_04316129/dries-van-langenhove-lanceert-zelfgemaakt-opsporingsbericht-maar-dat-zint-niet-iedereen-werkt-hij-tegenwoordig-voor-de-politie" target="_blank">
288
289
            Zonder politionele opdracht zelf een opsporingsbericht verspreiden
289
290
            om angst onder de bevolking te zaaien als politieke strategie</a></li>
290
291
        <li><a href="https://www.hbvl.be/cnt/dmf20150401_01609705/dewinter-en-annemans-in-clinch-over-racisme" target="_blank">
291
292
            "Ik ben racist en daar ben ik fier op." ~ Filip Dewinter, gewezen
292
293
            voorzitter en boegbeeld
293
294
            van Vlaams-Belachelijk</a></li>
294
295
        <li>...</li>
295
296
    </ul>
296
297
    <p>
297
298
    De lijst zou ik kunnen blijven aanvullen, maar ik denk dat ik mijn
298
299
    beschuldiging wel voldoende heb kunnen staven. Je kunt zelf ook op zoek gaan
299
300
    op het internet naar nog meer vuiligheid van VB.<br />
300
301
    
301
302
    Ze onderhouden ook goede banden met andere
302
303
    schadelijke zusterpartijen zoals AfD. Ze zeggen dat ze dit doen in het
303
304
    belang van de Vlaming, maar in werkelijkheid maken ze zich compleet
304
305
    belachelijk en zijn hun ideeën simpelweg dom en schadelijk op de lange termijn
305
306
    voor heel België. Als klap op de vuurpijl heeft de partijtop de ontmaskerde
306
307
    neonazi Dries Van Langenhove als lijsttrekker opgegeven om hem (met succes) in het Vlaams
307
308
    parlement te kunnen krijgen. En als je niet weet wie dat is, wel... Kijk
308
309
    zeker dan eens de volgende reportage als je tijd hebt:
309
310
    <!-- PANO -->
310
311
    <cite>
311
312
    Om onze radicale ideeën te verwezenlijken, moeten we gematigd
312
313
    communiceren.
313
314
    </cite>
314
315
    Als Vlaams-Belachelijk dit soort mensen vrijwillig uitnodigt als
315
316
    <em>lijsttrekker</em>, trek dan zelf uw conclusies over wat deze partij
316
317
    werkelijk voor ogen heeft.
317
318
</p>
318
319
<p>
319
320
    Het is ook belangrijk om verder te kijken dan de leugens die de partij zelf
320
321
    verspreidt. Zelf zullen de partijleden niet toegeven dat ze racistisch
321
322
    zijn, dat ze fascisme wel zien zitten, of dat neonazi's toch wel plaats
322
323
    hebben in de partij. Dat is natuurlijk een techniek om mensen voor hun
323
324
    partij te winnen: Geen weldenkend mens zal stemmen voor een partij die
324
325
    openlijk toegeeft aan neonazisme. De technieken worden mooi uiteengezet in
325
326
    deze video van
326
327
    <a href="https://www.patreon.com/contrapoints" target="_blank">Natalie Wynn</a>:
327
328
    <!--HOW TO RECOGNIZE FASCISM-->
328
329
329
330
    Natuurlijk kent elke politieke partij haar uitschuivers en fouten. Maar de
330
331
    hoeveelheid die Vlaams-Belachelijk maakt is gewoon niet te vergelijken met
331
332
    andere partijen. Met de regelmaat van de klok komen
332
333
    <a href="https://www.hbvl.be/cnt/dmf20181002_03801720/vijftien-nazisympathisanten-kandidaat-voor-vlaams-belang" target="_blank">
333
334
        partijleden in het nieuws omdat het neonazi's blijken te zijn.</a>
334
335
    Daarom noem ik deze partij Vlaams-Belachelijk, en vraag ik bij deze
335
336
    aan iedereen om nooit, maar dan ook <strong>nooit</strong> voor deze partij
336
337
    te stemmen.
337
338
</p>
338
339
339
340
    <dt id="auteursrechten"><s>Auteursrechten</s> Kopieerrechten</s></dt>
340
341
    <dd>Dit is een letterlijke vertaling van het Engelse woord
341
342
    <em>copyright</em>, de verzamelnaam voor wetgeving inzake het kopiëren van
342
343
    creatieve werken. In het Nederlands worden dit foutief "auteursrechten"
343
344
    genoemd. Ik vraag aan iedereen om deze term te vermijden, en wel om deze
344
345
    redenen:
345
346
    <ul>
346
347
        <li>Deze rechten draaien om het recht om bepaalde dingen te kopiëren,
347
348
        in naam van het algemeen belang die creatieve werken vormen voor het
348
349
        uitbouwen van onze cultuur. Ze bestaan voor het goed van het volk, niet
349
350
        om een exclusief recht aan auteurs toe te kennen. De benaming moet
350
351
        dit reflecteren, en "kopieerrechten" doet dat perfect.</li>
351
352
        <li>Kopieerrechten "auteursrechten" noemen doet vermoeden dat elke keer
352
353
        dat iemand oproept tot het inperken van kopieerwetgeving, dat dit een
353
354
        directe aanval is op de rechten van auteurs, maar niets is minder
354
355
        waar: de huidige kopieerwetgeving in praktisch de hele wereld
355
356
        laat het exclusieve kopieerrecht
356
357
        duren tot minstens 50 jaar na de dood van de auteur. Wie heeft daar nu
357
358
        enig nut aan, behalve bedrijven die het gebruiken om creativiteit en
358
359
        delen van onze cultuur zo lang mogelijk financieel uit te melken? Hoe
359
360
        durft Nintendo bijvoorbeeld te claimen dat niemand een spelletje mag maken met Mario
360
361
        in, ook al is dit idee gekend door honderden miljoenen mensen? Dit heeft
361
362
        niets, maar dan ook absoluut <strong>niets</strong> te maken met de
362
363
        rechten van auteurs, maar met kopiëren, en het systematisch tegenwerken
363
364
        van creativiteit onder de bevolking.</li>
364
365
        <li>Het idee dat kopieerrechten altijd toekomen aan de auteurs (en dat
365
366
        daarom auteursrechten ook een redelijke benaming zou zijn) is ook fout:
366
367
        Veel programmeurs zijn in dienst van bedrijven waar zij software
367
368
        programmeren. De kopieerrechten van die software komen dan wel toe aan
368
369
        het bedrijf, maar niet aan de auteurs. En daar bedrijven geen
369
370
        natuurlijke personen zijn (en dus ook geen auteur kunnen zijn), is de
370
371
        enige juiste benaming "kopieerrechten" (die wel door een bepaald bedrijf
371
372
        in bezit kunnen zijn).</li>
372
373
    </ul></dd>
373
374
    {% endif %}
374
375
375
376
    {% comment %}TODO Albernheit, Affigkeit?
376
377
		<dt id="afd"><s>Alternative für Deutschland</s> Albernheit für Deutschland</dt>
377
378
	<dd>{% blocktrans %}This is a German political party that has repeatedly
378
379
	espoused racist and discriminating ideas, with the usual bullshit sauce of
379
380
	"traditional family values" as a shield. Following the same reasoning for
380
381
	calling the "Alt-right" neonazism, I call this party "Albernheit für
381
382
	Deutschland", because "Albernheit" {% endblocktrans %}{% endcomment %}
382
383
    <dt id="alt-right"><s>{% trans "Alt-right" %}</s> {% trans "Neonazism" %}</dt>
383
384
    <dd>{% blocktrans %}What is usually referred to in mainstream media as the
384
385
    "alt-right" movement is a collection of groups that espouse nazi ideology,
385
386
    that spread hatred amongst society, and propose blanket discrimination and
386
387
    racism to the fullest extent possible, with the eventual goal of destabilizing
387
388
    everyone and everything, just for the sake of destabilization.
388
389
    They call themselves "alt-right", which is a
389
390
    portmanteau of "alternative right". This wording is used to describe their
390
391
    views as an "alternative" to other right-wing views, but what they're
391
392
    standing for (neonazism) is <em>in no possible way an alternative
392
393
    political stream for which support can reasonably be defended.</em>
393
394
    Calling it alt-right fails to indicate the
394
395
    imminent danger these people pose, and hides the fact that they are
395
396
    neonazis. Calling things by their actual name removes this mask of being
396
397
    "alternative".{% endblocktrans %}</dd>
397
398
	{% comment %}
398
399
	<dt id="{% trans "winning-elections" %}"><s>{% trans "Winning elections" %}</s></dt>
399
400
    <dd>{% blocktrans %}All media <em>love</em> to talk about so-called
400
401
    "winners" and "losers" with every election, what parties are "winning",
401
402
    and so on. What this does is diminish the vital
402
403
    importance of a democratic election to the idea of a stupid match, as if the
403
404
    goal is to be "the best" and "win" or whatever the fuck that means. This
404
405
    inspires the idea that votes are something you should win over from others,
405
406
    and nothing else; consequences be damned, as long as you win.
406
407
    It also causes people to restrain from voting for smaller
407
408
    parties that align more with their thoughts, because "they won't win anyway
408
409
    so I might as well vote for a party that might become big enough". America
409
410
    is a prime example of how bad the idea of making elections a contest can
410
411
    damage the entire nation, where the elections are a downright insult to
411
412
    democracy (do note that America is not a democracy, but a <em>plutocracy with
412
413
    a democratic façade</em>). The simple solution is to <strong>not</strong>
413
414
    talk about winners and losers. Instead, talk about who got the most votes,
414
415
    who got less votes, and so on, but avoid contest lingo at all costs.{% endblocktrans %}</dd>
415
416
	{% endcomment %}
416
417
417
418
    <dt id="pro-life"><s>Pro-life</s>{% trans "Pro-death" %}</dt>
418
419
    <dd>{% blocktrans %}People that fight against abortion rights see this as
419
420
    some kind of moral crusade that they are pro-life, as if to say that people
420
421
    who propose abortion rights are anti-life. This is dangerous spin: Not only
421
422
    do abortions allow many people a path out of poverty (which would also
422
423
    impoverise
423
424
    any offspring they get), abortions are medically speaking less dangerous to
424
425
    the pregnant woman than carrying the foetus to term. America now has the
425
426
    highest amount of maternal deaths in the developed world because of these
426
427
    people. Thus, they are responsible for the deaths of many people, and since
427
428
    they see no problem with their views, they are pro-death people.<br />
428
429
    <a target="_blank"
429
430
       href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/jan/22/abortion-lets-call-the-pro-lifers-what-they-are-pro-death">
430
431
    I did not coin this term.</a>{% endblocktrans %}</dd>
431
432
</dl>
432
433
    
433
434
    <dt id="pro-choice"><s>pro-choice</s> {% trans "Pro abortion rights" %}</dt>
434
435
    <dd>{% blocktrans %}Pro-choice is used by people that propose extension of
435
436
    abortion rights, but don't want to stress people with their
436
437
    views. As such they state this is a matter of choice, while omitting the
437
438
    challenge of condemnation of abortion rights.<br />
438
439
    Let me be clear that no person in their right mind would say having an
439
440
    abortion is a pleasant thing.
440
441
    And in a world where women don't ever have a
441
442
    risk of getting pregnant if they don't want to, abortion probably wouldn't
442
443
    be so necessary. But in this world, it happens. And when it does, these people deserve
443
444
    all the help they can get. Abortion rights make that legally possible.<br />
444
445
    People who do undergo abortion do this <em>because they have no choice left
445
446
    anymore</em>, so saying that this is about choice is wrong.
446
447
    It is about the right to have an abortion when necessary, an
447
448
    essential right for humans. If that rubs anyone the wrong way, so be
448
449
    it.<br />
449
450
    <a target="_blank" href="https://stallman.org/antiglossary.html#pro-choice">
450
451
    I did not coin this term.</a>{% endblocktrans %}</dd>
451
452
    </dd>
452
453
453
454
454
455
455
456
    <dt id="stem"><s>STEM</s> {% trans "Literally just the name of the study" %}</dt>
456
457
    <dd>{% blocktrans %}A lot of studies have been labeled STEM in recent
457
458
    years, because some people suggest that we need a lot of people with
458
459
    knowledge in those fields for the future.<br />
459
460
    I'm under the impression that it's now being regarded as something that puts
460
461
    "STEM studies" on a better level of regard than other studies. "STEM label
461
462
    or it's not a study worth pursuing", if you will.<br />
462
463
    I find that ridiculous; lots of non-STEM-studies bring forth people that we
463
464
    desperately need, also in this ever more connected world; interpreters are
464
465
    needed for translation, lawyers are required to give citizens legal
465
466
    representation and guidance, sociologists give us a scientifically based
466
467
    idea of how humans
467
468
    interact, and so on. I've studied informatics and I'd like people to call me
468
469
    what I am: a student of informatics, not a "STEM undergraduate".{%
469
470
    endblocktrans %}</dd>
470
471
471
472
    <dt id="computer-science"><s>{% trans "Computer science" %}</s> {% trans "Informatics" %}</dt>
472
473
    <dd>{% blocktrans %}In English (and sometimes also in Dutch), my study at the university is often referred to as merely
473
474
    "Computer science", as if the only thing I learned about is just
474
475
    "computers". That is degrading to my study and to my abilities, as well as
475
476
    to other students of informatics.<br />
476
477
    Informatics is the study of information: In more practical terms, that means
477
478
    a student-informatician learns about how information is retrieved, the
478
479
    nature of information itself, how we can store information, how we infer
479
480
    new information from data. The focus is really, <em>information</em>, not
480
481
    computers.<br />
481
482
    This means that an informatician wields a toolbelt of various skills: Per
482
483
    must learn about:
483
484
    <ul>
484
485
        <li>Statistics; the mathematical principles to interpret and collect
485
486
            information, as well as inferring conclusions from that
486
487
            information.</li>
487
488
        <li>Discrete mathematics; the theories behind sets, tuples, graphs,
488
489
            algorithms, and so on.</li>
489
490
        <li>Logic; this teaches about collections, making sound proofs, and
490
491
            computational complexity of algorithms.</li>
491
492
        <li>Human interactions; how do people communicate with technology, how
492
493
            can we take their data and present them with understandable
493
494
            services, how do we deal with visually impaired, ...</li>
494
495
        <li>Software engineering; what are crucial steps in developing software
495
496
            that can serve as a long-term solution, how to maintain it, how do
496
497
            you talk to clients and learn their wishes?</li>
497
498
        <li>Telecommunication; what are the ways that we can transmit data, how
498
499
            do imperfections occur and can we fix them, can we perfectly
499
500
            reconstruct an analog, continuous signal with a digital, discrete
500
501
            one, ...</li>
501
502
        <li>Cryptography; how do we secure information, transmit it without
502
503
            eavesdropping, can we safeguard vital communications?</li>
503
504
        <li>And so on...</li>
504
505
    </ul>
505
506
    Informatics is a very broad study, and computer science is a part of that,
506
507
    true. But just calling it that does disservice to what it's really about. It
507
508
    also makes it sound as if there's not really that much to it, who doesn't
508
509
    work with computers?
509
510
    The reason that it's so often called that, is because informatics is
510
511
    thorougly linked to computers, and computers are actually incredibly handy
511
512
    tools for our study. But they're not the sole focus (at least not at the
512
513
    universities I studied them), and they shouldn't be. In fact, if a wizard
513
514
    would destroy all computers overnight, lots of fields in informatics could
514
515
    still exist on their own merits. Studying a science is
515
516
    all about learning the how, the why, the fundamentals, of your field, not just the
516
517
    tools you use, that's what college is for.<br />
517
518
    Calling informatics just "computer science" is akin to calling mathematics "number science";
518
519
    it is true that
519
520
    mathematics has undoubtedly close connections with digits and numbers, but
520
521
    calling the whole study by that name does not take into account all the
521
522
    other fields that mathematics encompasses, most of which don't even really
522
523
    need numbers at all to exist. We understand that and call it by its proper
523
524
    name, so as to avoid reducing it to a portion of it that's very visible in
524
525
    our daily lives. Please treat informatics with the same
525
526
    reasoning, and don't call it "computer science".{% endblocktrans %}</dd>
526
527
</dl>
527
528
528
529
529
530
<h3 id="diamonds">{% trans "Don't buy diamonds" %}</h3>
530
531
<p>
531
532
    {% blocktrans %}Diamonds are often mined in inhumane circumstances. The
532
533
    profits fuel cruel wars, which cause havoc on the local population and
533
534
    finance terrorism on the African people, as well as enslavement.<br />
534
535
    They're also worthless; Diamond is a very abundant material, and can easily
535
536
    be made in laboratories. The price is artificially inflated by the monopoly
536
537
    on diamond distribution by the De Beers corporation. Buying a diamond
537
538
    automatically means you're being scammed.{% endblocktrans %}
538
539
</p>
539
540
<p>
540
541
    {% blocktrans %}If you want to buy an engagement ring (which is a ritual
541
542
    also fueled by a De Beers advertising campaign), look out for
542
543
    (cubic) zirconia or moissanite rings. They're a ton cheaper, and look
543
544
    exactly like diamonds. The latter was even mistaken for
544
545
    diamond by the person who discovered it for the first time!{% endblocktrans %}
545
546
</p>
546
547
547
548
<h3 id="facebook">{% trans "Get/Stay off Facebook" %}</h3>
548
549
<p>
549
550
	{% blocktrans %}Facebook is an immense threat to our civil rights and
550
551
		liberties. I cannot possibly overstate how important it is that we
551
552
		collectively act to make this company rot away.<br />
552
553
		The useds of Facebook have their lives completely tracked and monitored,
553
554
		everything. It's a flagrant privacy violation.<br />
554
555
555
556
		Believe me, <strong>I KNOW</strong> that leaving Facebook is a hard pill
556
557
		to swallow. Facebook facilitates communcation with acquintances and
557
558
		friends, and humans are social creatures, we long for connection with
558
559
		other people. When you've been used by Facebook, it's hard to get its
559
560
		hooks off. We cannot refer to this as an addiction, because that would
560
561
		be like calling eating an addiction to food.
561
562
562
563
		Saying "I have nothing to hide" is not what this is about. It's
563
564
		erroneous to say privacy and secrecy are the same thing. I don't hide
564
565
		from my friends that I take a bath to clean myself but I'd never allow
565
566
		them to watch me do so. I love my parents but I don't allow them to come
566
567
		inside my place without my permission. I'm not ashamed to buy orange
567
568
		juice but I pay cash because I don't want to be recorded doing so (which
568
569
		happens when you use debit/credit cards).
569
570
		I'm sure you can imagine more examples like these.<br />
570
571
		Also, even if you were a person that doesn't care about privacy, there
571
572
		are people that do, and <strong>need</strong> privacy. Facebook makes it
572
573
		harder to call upon that right, because its mere existence changes the
573
574
		<em>status quo</em> from privacy being a human right, to privacy being
574
575
		something that requires justification: "Surely if thát many people are
575
576
		on Facebook, maybe privacy isn't that important to have as a right?"
576
577
577
578
		For people that I manage to convince to leave, but just need a final
578
579
		argument to take the definitive step: I ask you to not only do
579
580
		this for yourself, but for everyone else as well: Every person being
580
581
		used by Facebook increases the power it has, but the reverse is also
581
582
		true: Every person that decides to take off the shackles, makes it
582
583
		easier for others to do as well. By not being on Facebook, you help
583
584
		everyone else with not being there either.
584
585
		{% endblocktrans %}</p>
585
586
586
587
		<!--<h3 id="gender-prenouns">{% trans "Gender neutral prenouns" %}</h3>
587
588
        Ja ik ga toch eerst al de rest afschrijven anders blijf ik bezig-->
588
589
{% comment %}
589
590
<h3 id="human-rights">{% trans "Moral provision for civil actions" %}</h3>
590
591
<p>{% blocktrans %}
591
592
	I want to make a general call to activism that is less a matter
592
593
	me to guard your human rights more effectively, and to stand up against
593
594
	those that seek to violate it, be it by democratic voting, civil
594
595
	disobedience, or even violence to stop an immediate threat.
595
596
	I've thought about this a lot, in a philosophical way: About how to
596
597
	justify not following laws, why we do so, when it can be morally
597
598
	justified, accountability, ...
598
599
	
599
600
	I haven't studied jurisprudence, but I don't think that makes my reasoning
600
601
	automatically worthless. It might be that some things seem out of the
601
602
	ordinary. I do know I am not crazy, and I can assure you I didn't think of
602
603
	this on one louzy afternoon.
603
604
	Eventually, I have created a general rule I named: "The protection of human
604
605
	rights and the moral integrity of their limitations". In full detail,
605
606
	the rule is as follows:
606
607
		<quote>
607
608
			All humans are entitled to human rights at every point in their
608
609
			lives, in all contexts.
609
610
			Being rights, they do not require justification to exercise
610
611
			them, and can be applied in the broadest terms possible.
611
612
			Should there be an entity looking to restrict those rights, the
612
613
			burden of justification falls on that entity; it must provide a
613
614
			valid reasoning as to why a restriction needs to be put in
614
615
			place. The people that the restriction applies to (and <em>ónly</em>
615
616
			those people) shall decide on the validity, not the
616
617
			entity arguing in favour of it. Should said entity fail to provide
617
618
			valid justification, the restrictions that follow (for 
618
619
			example: laws or contract terms) are implicitely
619
620
			<em>void ab initio</em>, because their existence lacks any ground to
620
621
		    be morally enforceable. It follows that every violation of, and
621
622
			resistance against said
622
623
			restrictions is (by default) morally justified. The entity
623
624
			responsible for putting the restriction in place, <em>ánd</em> those
624
625
			that enforce these restrictions, remain guilty of a human rights
625
626
			violation and must be prosecuted as if the restriction didn't exist.
626
627
			Because of the moral void, it cannot escape prosecution by invoking
627
628
			<em>nulla poena sine lege</em> (i.e. "It wasn't prohibited to do
628
629
			so"). The burden of providing compensation for the damage inflicted
629
630
			by humans violating the restrictions falls on the imposing entity.
630
631
			Should the entity not be a natural person (for example: a company or
631
632
			authoritative body like a government), the people responsible of
632
633
			that entity are accountable. Whether others that served that entity
633
634
			(or were conscripted in doing so) handled in bad faith is to be
634
635
			decided on a per-case basis.
635
636
		</quote>
636
637
		The rule has vast implications that secure our integrity as humans, and
637
638
		the rights that come with being on this planet. It pardons Edward
638
639
		Snowden. It makes politicians that deny climate mayhem responsible for the
639
640
		damage. It opens a path to prosecute Apple for violating our digital
640
641
		rights. In general: <strong>It stops using legislature as an excuse for
641
642
		moral accountability.</strong>
642
643
643
644
		The lack of strictness is key; cultures and people change, and so do our
644
645
		morals. Building a coal plant during the industrial revolution was
645
646
		understandable, but today it conflicts with our right to live because we
646
647
		know coal plants accelerate the climate mayhem. Sabotaging the
647
648
		construction is now morally right, it wasn't in 1800. This is just an
648
649
		example, but there are many more.
649
650
650
651
		I don't seek for everyone to use my rule as a justification for total
651
652
		anarchy. I do want to provide a reasoning that allows us to
652
653
		My rule doesn't discredit the existence of a state with laws and justice
653
654
		system, rather, it works with it. It also strengthens their power where
654
655
		it should, and diminishes the extent to which power can be abused,
655
656
		because my rule functions as a deterrent to do so (for example: If
656
657
		there's a law allowing you to kill homosexuals on sight, and you try to
657
658
		do so, you can expect people trying to shoot you to defend that
658
659
		homosexual's right to live).
659
660
660
661
		I think humanity is ready for more democratic oversight and
661
662
		transparency, especially in the European Union.
662
663
663
664
		You might argue that you could infer a validation for absolute
664
665
		anarchy from this
665
666
		rule, but that's not right. What it does, is give the power to the
666
667
		democracy to decide whether doing
667
668
		something is right or wrong, holding others accountable for the powers
668
669
		they have, without being able to abuse legislature to escape moral
669
670
		accountability.
670
671
{% endcomment %}
671
672
672
673
</section>
673
674
<section>
674
675
675
676
{% comment %}
676
677
<h3 id="pay-cash">{% trans "Stay safe, and only pay cash" %}</h3>
677
678
<p>{% blocktrans %}
678
679
    I've written about this in a blog post, but I have to put it here as well,
679
680
    in detail:
680
681
    One form of activism is to refuse to pay with payment cards. Always insist
681
682
    on being able to pay with cash!</p>
682
683
<p> Banks love to talk about the convenience and safety of paying digitally,
683
684
    without really delving into what those points are for <em>us</em>, the
684
685
    client. I'll be going over some points to convince you to stop using the
685
686
    digital payments, and pay the actually safe way.{% endblocktrans %}</p>
686
687
<h4>{% trans "The safety myth debunked" %}</h4>
687
688
<p>{% blocktrans %}
688
689
    So what's about digital payments being "safe"? When probing further, you'll
689
690
    often get the same two answers:<p>
690
691
    <ul><li>You won't lose much money when you get pickpocketed.</li>
691
692
        <li>You don't risk accepting counterfeit money.</li>
692
693
    </ul>
693
694
694
695
695
696
    <p>The risk of EVER accepting a counterfeit note is so small it's almost
696
697
        ridiculous to even mention it. The ECB made a video with all security
697
698
        features for the bank notes:
698
699
        {% comment %}
699
700
        Consider all these security marks (for €
700
701
        bank notes) that
701
702
        would have to pass:</p>
702
703
    <ul><li>Optical changing ink when you tilt a bank note</li>
703
704
        <li>Paper created from cotton fiber, which has a distinct feeling</li>
704
705
        <li>Watermark on every note, clearly visible with some light</li>
705
706
        <li>Safety wire straight through the middle of the note</li>
706
707
        <li>Foil with hologram over each note</li>
707
708
        <li>Raised printing to give each note a relief</li>
708
709
        <li>The logo in the hologram is transparent</li></ul>
709
710
    <p>And those are just the safety features you can directly see! Consider
710
711
        these <strong>extra security features</strong> that you can also check
711
712
        with enough detail (or a checking device):</p>
712
713
    <ul><li>All notes have microprinting that becomes unreadable with any normal
713
714
            printer, but can easily be read by looking closely..</li>
714
715
        <li>Shining UV light on the note will make certain parts light up, like
715
716
            the stars and circles. This also happens on the back, where green
716
717
            and red light will be emitted.</li>
717
718
        <li>With infrared light, the emerald number, the right side of the main
718
719
            image, and the silvery stript become visible. But only on the front;
719
720
            on the back, only the denomination and the horizontal number are visible.</li>
720
721
        <li>With special UV-C light (yes, that's a thing), the same parts light
721
722
            up, but in distinct green and red colours. Also, the € sign becomes
722
723
            visible in the main image, but is hidden in normal UV light.</li>
723
724
        <li>The serial code on every note is a checksum, meaning that you can
724
725
            check the code itself to see if the note is valid or not.</li></ul>
725
726
    <p>And all those were just the security features of the bank notes
726
727
        themselves! Here are some extras to convince you of the safety of using
727
728
        euros as cash:</p>
728
729
        <ul><li>Reproducing a note with a normal printer is often blocked by 
729
730
            printer firmware.</li>
730
731
            <li>Any reproduced note (for example in movies) needs to obey strict
731
732
                rules, that they render each "legal" counterfeit note completely
732
733
                useless for monetization.</li>
733
734
            <li>The European Union has so much trust in the security of its
734
735
                currency that you
735
736
                can download images of euro bank notes directly from their own
736
737
                website<insert link!>. For high resolution ones, you can send a
737
738
                letter, and after some security and confidentiality checks you
738
739
                can get those as well.</li></ul>
739
740
    {% endcomment %}
740
741
    <p>But maybe you think that all this is just peanuts for real
741
742
        counterfeiters (it isn't), or you're just thát paranoid. Okay, let's
742
743
        assume your level of paranoia is justified. In that case, I have a
743
744
        really interesting argument that will surely convince you to switch to
744
745
        cash forever:{% endblocktrans %}</p>
745
746
    <h4>{% trans "Digital payments infringe on your privacy" %}</h4>
746
747
    <p>{% blocktrans %}Oh and that's not just me saying that, that's your credit
747
748
        card supplier actually doing just that: <Link naar mastercard dat met
748
749
                                                      facebook onderhandelt</lin>
749
750
        Yeah, turns out that "safety" is not so much a myth after all, but is
750
751
        related to the bank's safety by keeping your money from you, and making
751
752
        bank on it in the process.
752
753
753
754
    <h4>{% trans "Why is this activism?" %}</h4>
754
755
        <Schrijf over de constante rush voor digitalisatie van iets wat goed
755
756
        werkt en hoe dit onze privacyrechten aantast></schrijf>
756
757
        
757
758
{% endcomment %}
758
759
       
759
760
760
761
        
761
762
762
763
{% comment %}
763
764
<h3 id="sharing-explained">{% trans "Get/Stay off Facebook" %}</h3>
764
765
<p>
765
766
	{% blocktrans %}Facebook is an immense threat to our civil rights and
766
767
767
768
    <dt id="sharing-economy"><s>{% trans "Sharing economy / Gig economy" %}</s>
768
769
    {% trans "<GOEDE NAAM VERZINNEN>" %}</dt>
769
770
    <dd>{% blocktrans %}Too often, the media (and the companies that are often
770
771
    associated with the term) use the term "sharing economy" or "gig economy" to
771
772
    describe this "new" type of providing a certain type of service, where the
772
773
    companies don't actually hire their "employees". They say they're
773
774
    "subcontractors", and make them use their own resources (like their car) to
774
775
    do the work. These companies malicously portray this as "sharing", and
775
776
    proclaim they're just the facilitators, thus making them part of the
776
777
    "sharing economy". This is spin.<br />
777
778
    First, "sharing" is something you do in a personal setting, without any
778
779
    commercial interests. People do this because it's in our nature to share
779
780
        resources between each other, it's a good thing to do. A well known
780
781
        example is carpooling, where different people share the same car.<br />
781
782
        This is <strong>not</strong> the same as 
782
783
{% endcomment %}
783
784
</section>
784
785
{% endblock main %}
785
786