secretlyaddictedtolinux

@secretlyaddictedtolinux@lemmy.world

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. For a complete list of posts, browse on the original instance.

secretlyaddictedtolinux ,

the right to bear arms exists to protect people from tyrants

the whole premise of this right is that we can't trust the government to keep our liberty safe because they could become the tyrants. if one day some religious idiot comes into power who doesn't want women learning math, you may end up glad that conservatives have made it easier for women to fight for their liberty by refusing to allow these rights to be eroded

secretlyaddictedtolinux ,

this is exactly why i use linux

secretlyaddictedtolinux ,

Wait...

Everyone morning I wake up and think "don't think about dicks, don't think about dicks, don't think about dicks..."

YOU MEAN EVERYONE ISN'T DOING THIS????

secretlyaddictedtolinux ,

climate scientists have already lit themselves on fire trying to warn people and it didn’t actually do anything

people are too religious to believe in science

secretlyaddictedtolinux ,

Do you think preparing for collapse now in a remote location is really the sensible thing to do? I sometimes wonder myself how fast it will happen. I think the planet will be uninhabitable within 300 years and chaos will ensue within 30 but i'm not sure the chaos will be without warning unless we hit an environmental tipping point and there's sudden major temperature change (like earth becoming 20 degrees warmer or cooler within a week), which could happen.

secretlyaddictedtolinux ,

sigma...

secretlyaddictedtolinux ,

group support?

:-(

that sounds hard to find

secretlyaddictedtolinux ,

This is lunacy. You're saying "let's stop blaming the wrong people and have a calm rational discussion"

Religious idiots refuse to believe in global warming, scientists are lighting themselves on fire to warn people and no one cares because of religion (which is the only reason people doubt this), and it's too late and we're going to all die.

Calmly coming up with sensible solutions to be angry at the right people is ridiculous. Companies are also still just people. There is a reason why people allow global warming, don't believe the environment could be destroyed, and vote for corrupt idiots who tell them fantasies: the reason is religion. People are corrupt and stupid and believe religion and until all of the religious fantasy pushers are destroyed, this trajectory will continue.

The only problem is there is no stopping this trajectory. We are all in a large house, we've lit in on fire, the entire structure is ablaze, and you're saying "let's talk about who is really to blame..."

Instead, we should philosophically make peace with our own doom, however that's done. Everyone religious is to blame and should feel bad. The religious all enabled ignoring the problem by encouraging illogical stupid thinking.

secretlyaddictedtolinux ,

what? it's too late for that.

we are all actually going to die. changing a zoning rule? you think that's going to help?

if there's an avalanche that is seconds away from enveloping you in snow and killing you, do you suggest walking a few steps to the side? it won't do anything. the math is too much at this point to change with recycling a can or planting a tree. the only thing that will get the world to finally believe in math is massive amounts of death

make peace with death, it's coming for us all

secretlyaddictedtolinux ,

that could have changed the trajectory 50 years ago

if people had been scientifically literate and recognized the problem

it's too late now

this will happen when the pain of reality (regular temperatures in the 100s) overcomes the stupidity of religion, but there won't be any going back

secretlyaddictedtolinux ,

platitudes will not save us from math

secretlyaddictedtolinux ,

if a group of people are in a burning building and about to die, panic would actually help them get out

in this case, however, it's unlikely anyone is going to get out of this building, and it's too late to change things, so perhaps you are right

we should just find ways to make peace with the destruction of much of life on earth

secretlyaddictedtolinux ,

that's not true. in a burning building, freaking out and getting the fuck out of the building is smart and why it's instinctual

sitting around and debating the best way to proceed is stupid AF

secretlyaddictedtolinux ,

small gestures that make us feel good will not have a meaningful impact on the exponential changes in the chemical composition of the atmosphere that will result in the destruction of the biosphere and are counter-productive because they create an illusion of safety and control, like like putting your seat belt on just before you slam into a wall while speeding at 300 mph.

better?

secretlyaddictedtolinux , (edited )

It is absolutely the religious people who have caused the destruction of the global ecosystem and will lead to its collapse.

If you ask 100 atheists if environmental catastrophe is upon us, nearly all will say yes.

It is only the delusion that magical sky god and his special friends jesus and mohamud and budah look over the planet and are testing our morality that allows dipshits to believe the earth can't be destroyed by sufficiently altering the chemical composition of its atmosphere and by generating sufficient waste byproducts.

These people ARE the problem.

Religion allows the political problems to exist because philosophically people view existence and reality in a distorted fairy tale manner.

secretlyaddictedtolinux ,

They say that when there are large number of people and a risk of people being trampled or when there are young students and teachers need to keep count to make sure everyone gets out.

At this point, the risk of every person on earth dying due to inaction or calmly discussing small ways to change is much higher than if everyone panics. People should have panicked 50 years ago when they looked at data.

But go ahead, have calm rational discussions about policy decisions that can reduce exponential growth of destructive forces by 30 percent. Because nothing stops exponential growth like mild decreases in the rate of change.

secretlyaddictedtolinux ,

There are many stupid people who realize they are stupid and look to the intelligent for answers.

Stupidity is not a flaw in and of itself.

The problem is religion enables people to easily have these moronic beliefs that make no sense and still fit in and be normal, and puts them in a position in which they are obliged to defend this stupidity as non-stupid to show loyalty to the sky god.

And although we can agree that Apple is terrible in every way, and that all Apple users have similar intellectual abilities to that of a flat-earther praising the sky god, that doesn't negate that religion is the cause of all problems in society and if all the religious proselytizers and preachers were put on a large boat that headed to Antarctica that mysterious "sank" just before making landfall, literally every problem in the world would be solved.

Carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere are surging "faster than ever" to beyond anything humans ever experienced, officials say ( www.cbsnews.com )

One of the major drivers of the exceptional heat building within Earth's atmosphere has reached levels beyond anything humans have ever experienced, officials announced on Thursday. Carbon dioxide, the gas that accounts for the majority of global warming caused by human activities, is accumulating "faster than ever,"...

secretlyaddictedtolinux ,

Climate scientists should have lit themselves on fire in public places to warn us.

It's their fault!

secretlyaddictedtolinux , (edited )

I like reading your posts because you are highly intelligent and include sources in them.

However, I am not sure if these documents mean that they wouldn't destroy Israel if they could. If all the Jewish adults and children of Israel were on an Island and each Hamas leader had a button that would destroy the island and everyone on it if pressed, I think all the Hamas leaders would probably press their buttons.

I am also still scared of Sharia law because I am part of the LGBT community and that makes me scared of Muslims because sometimes when they get a majority, Sharia law ensues. I am scared enough that I can't have rational views on this topic.

In all honesty, you are one of the smartest and most knowledgeable people posting on here. Have you ever thought of creating a post just putting forward what you personally think should happen in this situation, with specific ideas for the various government leaders to follow, like an actual specific plan for multiple countries to follow that would be politically feasible? And possibly address concerns that people could have and just reply to them in advance so it would be politically feasible?

Perhaps other people have done this, I don't know. I'm still too biased to feel like I can have an accurate opinion on this. I know your posts have been more critical that offering suggestions, but I think you are so smart you could actually craft a suggestion on how to solve this whole mess in a politically feasible way that would perhaps appeal to people, laying out specific solutions, time-tables, etc, keeping in mind political feasibility (and addressing concerns of LGBT people and women if you want).

You seem so smart. Are you a journalist or have a doctorate? I can sense your intelligence is formidable. I am not joking when I am saying that, you seem brilliant to me in the little I've read, which doesn't mean I agree with your positions. A hard part of change is not just convincing people but also political feasibility. I am still very scared of a Muslim or more Muslim word. I don't honestly think as a LGBT person my rights will be preserved if Muslims become a larger percent of the population. It shouldn't affect discussions like this, people should have rights no matter what, but it's hard to sympathize with a group of people who would potentially drop me off a building.

secretlyaddictedtolinux ,

I don't think conservative Christians want to throw gay people off roofs, so although both hate gay people, I don't think they are equivalent

You stated your position, but I have no idea if it's politically viable

I am asking if there a path to have people stop fighting that is politically feasible, not just something that is right according to various beliefs.

I don't really see a plan here on how to change things, just a position. Is your position politically feasible? Would anyone agree to it?

I have a hard time reading books because get bored with facts and reading stuff that's long and don't like history. I am sure that Palestinian civilians are enduring horrors I can't totally fathom. I have read enough at this point to know how bad it has been for many civilians there. I believe you are very knowledgeable and you keep supporting your positions with data so you've gained enough credibility with me that I take a lot of what you are saying as having a historical basis.

secretlyaddictedtolinux ,

so, i do think christians hate gay people, i guess i just don't see them doing the whole throwing gays off the rooftops. even if it's just the "availability heuristic" affecting my views and not based on the number of gays thrown off roofs, i just have only seen Muslims do that

I believe a lot of what you are saying at this point, that it probably technically is genocide

even if i believe you, i lack political power to do anything

i am barely getting by in this world at times

i don't know if i think land should be owned by certain governments or people, i really think people should be able to go anywhere and live there if they want to. the problem is people have different cultural views and these views aren't compatible. like conservative iraqi people probably wouldn't want a large number of liberal gays moving there and demanding change just like liberal cities in the US wouldn't want a bunch of conservative muslims moving to the area and demanding change. muslim countries sometimes treat women terribly. the countries in which women can't learn math are mostly muslim. right now there are females who are intelligent enough to be computer scientists or mathematicians who are wearing burkas they can't remove in public and who aren't allowed to read math books and are literally slaves due to an absence of rights. i can't imagine the horror of being an intelligent woman in that situation. people of different cultures sometimes have different birth rates too so in democratic societies if people with conservative or misogynistic values and higher birth rates move to the area, there's a risk that eventually women won't be able to learn math and gays won't be able to marry or even live without fear of state execution for their orientation if the population changes and it results in cultural shifts.

in many ways, this is completely irrelevant because even if i am scared of conservative muslim culture, it doesn't make genocide okay. i am not sure if Palestinians are even that conservative, they probably aren't. i just don't know if believe that muslim culture will gradually become more tolerant. i tend to believe that once muslims become a majority, they tend to become more openly conservative and there's a higher risk of them demanding sharia law and successfully getting it passed. if sharia law passes, i die, that's what it means for me, so i am fearful of muslim cultural spreading as a result. i also don't see that many liberal muslims being tolerant of gays. instead, i recall that when canada had a lot of muslim refugees, many muslims were are a large part of a conservative coalition that did not want certain LGBT rights.

i really believe in freedom of religion, and i am anti-genocide, but what is the resolution? when cultures are so different, you have to have different political systems in different areas.

certain land being randomly apportioned to certain cultural and religious beliefs seems so arbitrary to me already

i am not sure audiobooks would help. i find history sort of boring. i believe you that brutality is taking place and it's wrong.

much in the same way i can do nothing with the ukraine and russia situation, i don't think there's anything i can do in this situation either

even if you are right and the two state solution should happen, why hasn't it happened already? if it hasn't happened, it must be difficult politically.

I am very ignorant in many ways. The most I know about Palestinian culture is from Bella Hadid. She takes beautiful photos and I think she seems really cool. She's part Palestinian and seems really nice from the little I know of her. The only other thing I know about Palestinians is they had really hard lives even prior to this and had really restricted movements and limited options. I heard someone say it was like an open air prison. I think that sometimes people in power create cruel situations and then when people rebel after being treated horribly, they use acts of rebellion as evidence that harsher treatment is necessary, and it's not taking into account a broader view of problems and using power to ignore the entirety of a situation. I don't think that the attacks that happened on October 7th happened in a vacuum, but I still don't know how bad the situation in Palestine was before things got worse.

You have a stem background right?

I have a random idea. It is probably a stupid idea. What about having some sort of sign up to get small groups of Palestinians and Israeli people and other International Citizens all sharing perspectives in small groups? Like meetings for cultural understanding?

Perhaps if there were little groups of 4 to 8 people discussing their views and experiences, including experiences of loss and tragedy, without political views of what should happened, but just like to create dialogue about what experiences are like, perhaps there would be more understanding of the frustrations both sides feel. Every group would have to have at least 1 palestinian and 1 jewish person and it would be just be sharing different emotional experiences. I doubt people would be interested. If you have a stem background in computers you could possibly set up some sort of website to do that? I am not a great programmer. Or perhaps another programmer would help? I like the idea but wouldn't know where to begin. It may be a stupid idea, I don't know. It would probably difficult due to languages barriers, but perhaps AI could somehow translate everything in real time so people could understand each other. Perhaps if more people talked to each other, there would be more willingness to have options that both groups would like.

You just seem so smart and seem to care about this a lot. I hope you end up finding a way to have even more of an impact. I can sense your intelligence. You're very smart. What sort of STEM did you study?

I don't think my islamophobia means that what is happening to civilians is somehow okay. i'm just mentioning my fears as someone within the LGBT community and how it makes me fearful. i am biased in my perspective and i think it's better for me to acknowledge my bias than pretend it's not there. i am also scared of christianity too.

Perhaps if small groups of people could somehow talk and have conversations, then people would have a better understanding.

Why is the 2 state solution rejected or hasn't happened so far?

Did you lose anyone in this conflict?

Lemmy.ml tankie censorship problem

I feel like we need to talk about Lemmy's massive tankie censorship problem. A lot of popular lemmy communities are hosted on lemmy.ml. It's been well known for a while that the admins/mods of that instance have, let's say, rather extremist and onesided political views. In short, they're what's colloquially referred to as...

secretlyaddictedtolinux ,

Thanks for posting this.

I read the article you posted also.

I think the article is likely entirely true. One of the difficulties I have, as a regular reader not highly educated in Asian politics and history, is that I know Western governments do lie in order to protect their interests. Not only that, many of their rules allow them to lie. There are gag orders, and levels of secret classifications, and ps-ops and we all know that exists.

I am pro free speech and pro protest rights. I think since China does not allow free speech it's likely the entire post is completely true. I really wish I could believe it completely. One thing that many Western pro-free speech countries don't understand is that lying frequently, even if it's sanctioned by the government and justified somehow, means they lose moral credibility with the truth of anything they say. Is it the truth this time... or is this one of the lies?

I still want to live in a world of free speech and women and LGBT people having rights and Western governments seem to be the best at doing this, but I just wish I could believe the article you linked without any doubt at all.

If it's really that bad on lemmy.ml, couldn't all the communities be replicated? I use lemmy.world and don't know if there's an option for me to block lemmy.ml unless I change federations. The plight of the poor and concentration of wealth among the upper classes has become very bad, and environmental problems will likely kill us all within 300 years (capitalism and democracy have environmentally failed) but I don't want to be a part of something in which mere discussion of different views results in banning and deletion of comments, even if I have very pro-poor people views.

secretlyaddictedtolinux ,

Would there be able to be some sort of online meeting for the different instances with someone mediating to try to find a way to fragment less but also not ban certain views?

Or could there be a settings option to let readers view all deleted posts on certain instances that would make everyone happy?

It's a good point you're making about fragmentation and the problems it could create.

This stuff about the price reductions after 4 years of blatant gouging is really freaking me out

I mean, that’s 4 years of our lives taken! 4 years of opportunities that were more challenging because they wanted a number on a computer to go up! 4 years of feeling worse than necessary about my finances and management of them and general personhood because i felt like i couldn’t afford anything because everything was...

secretlyaddictedtolinux ,

The problem is that we have 2 groups of people who experience this problem: the easily deluded religious people, who will fall for moral wedge issues based on religion, and the people who realize things should be different and will vote in their interests.

The second problem is many of the people who want to change things will try to implement strategies that don't adhere to classical economics and will create market distortions, so if more "liberal" people are voted in, they may do more harm than good for poor people if they ignore economic principles.

The third problem is that there are way more stupid religious idiots that are easily manipulated than people who vote their interests.

It's infuriating

secretlyaddictedtolinux ,

I remember all the large chains I used to like who I feel have fucked me over and hold a grudge against them.

Arizona Ice Tea is an example of a brand that really has not fucked me over as prices have gone higher and I keep rewarding them with more purchases. It's not just that they have a good value, it's also that they haven't tried to exploit me.

We need to ignore the coupons, new catchy deals, and other bullshit that these large corporations are trying to use to lure people back. Corporations should feel lost profits for decades when they tarnish their brand by fucking over customers and we need to vote with our wallets to show their greed also showcases a lack of business acumen.

secretlyaddictedtolinux ,

This is more of a failure of government rather than a failure of capitalism.

In democracies, people can vote to tax the wealthy corporations and give food vouchers to the middle and lower classes.

The problem with a marketplace with too few unique sellers is they don't have to agree to raise prices, they just know no one is going to lower them to try to gain market share.

The government should have done something or broken up larger companies and it did nothing. Capitalism isn't the problem, weak governments and terrible leaders are the problem.

Biden could have spearheaded hauling the leaders of every supermarket into a congressional hearing to ask questions that would have resulted in downward price movement. Congress could have passed "increased profit taxes" so that if corporations selling inelastic goods had profit increases over 10% and price increases over 10% on the top 5 of their best selling goods, then a large tax would kick in. Price gouging taxes could have taxed the profits on any store that raised prices by over 20% per quarter. Any of these things would have reduced the problem. I am surprised Elizabeth Warren didn't get anything passed because despite all of her past problems (rising in academia though misrepresentation), she's incredibly smart with policy, she just doesn't know how to scream and yell at people to get her point across.

But most government leaders are feckless and lazy and stupid. That's the sad reality.

If a democrat got on TikTok screaming about these policies and yelling that Republicans are being selfish and fucking over the middle class, they would have been passed. I have thought about going on TikTok myself and ranting and raving but I have a complex past and I'm not sure how people would respond and I am concerned about TikTok's collection of data.

There's not been actual LEGISLATION that could be effective.

The lazy ineffective government controlling even more of society through Marxism is not the answer. Better people need to run for office.

Ultimately, what is going to happen is somehow the Democrats are going to get Newsom into office to try to be Bill Clinton II and he'll enact mediocre policies that will be slightly better than the shit that's been going on and he'll be praised for being slightly less than mediocre. But the downward spiral of society will continue because ultimately, the math of global warming will kill us all, so none of this will matter. Newsom isn't smart enough to veer away from the cliff of doom the world is barreling towards, but he'll make some meaningless gestures and look good with great hair and be self-aggrandizing and people will feel better prior to everyone dying.

secretlyaddictedtolinux ,

It's a very funny commentary on how we're all about to die!

Why didn't the scientists warn us that pollution was bad?
Where were the scientists lighting themselves on fire in protest?

This is all science's fault!

secretlyaddictedtolinux , (edited )

Pollution leads to a decline in the bug population. Pollution = human byproducts (including byproducts of imprisoned animals) causing global warming and climate change affecting habitat; pollution = pesticides and chemicals which make it harder for insects to reproduce; pollution = plastics, trash, and environmental contamination; pollution = human changes that are functionally useful for humans (like roads and farms with pesticides and cities) but may be not helpful for insects.

The joke is that at first, having fewer bugs is nicer because a lot of bugs are annoying.

The joke is also that while it's convenient at first, in another few decades it means EVERYTHING will die, so it's not actually a good thing.

The joke is also the obliviousness of the human driver, who is relieved to be dealing with fewer bugs, not realizing that they are missing for the same reason he's about to become extinct.

There are decreases in pretty much all types of animals that are neither human nor domesticated by humans, and for bugs there are decreases of bees, and there's been discussion that the world is experiencing and extinction event.

Wynn Bruce set himself on fire and died trying to alert people that these trends pose a problem for humankind and no one cared. David Buckel also set himself on fire trying to warn people. It doesn't matter at this point.

The problem is religion. People are stupid and believe in imaginary bullshit that doesn't exist and society accepts this as normal thinking. Psychiatry says bizarre religious thinking is a symptom of schizophrenia, but normal religious thinking is acceptable if enough people believe it (in an unscientific capitulation to popular opinion in a "scientific" field that is hardly ruled by scientific rules). Religion is always illogical and it's dooming us all.

People believe god would never create a planet that could be destroyed and don't understand math or how to analyze scientific data. On top of that, greed caused by capitalism means that for most poor people, they are just struggling to get by and really can't contemplate next year much less 100 years from now.

Most pollution is caused by not only poor resource management and not correctly taking into account externalities of pollution into the markplace in creating government rules (and conservative economic theory means making rules to deal with externalities) but also caused by just too many people. It's sad, but likely some horrible virus like bird flu killing most of the population is the only way in which the planet remains habitable. The fact that only Communist China has successfully been able to reduce their population through non-economic policy declarations (as opposed to restricting resources) is a sad commentary on some of the problems of democracy when so many people just can't understand math and instead embrace religion. (China also is a large contributor to pollution and this is not meant as exculpation of the Chinese Communist Party, but rather a brutal look at how religion has played a large role in decimating the environment.)

If people weren't religious, they could understand these problems. But instead religious idiots take pleasure in making fun of Greta Thunberg as woke because they are literally too stupid to analyze graphs and intelligently assess data. That's okay, if humankind lacks the intelligence to deal with this problem, then war famine and plagues will perhaps succeed since human reasoning has failed. Religion allows these people the comforts and safety of their delusions as a cocoon away from the anxiety and fear caused by dealing with reality, which can be harsh. Unfortunately, people in this delusional cocoon make really stupid decisions so we're probably all going to die.

Often when bacterial populations with limited space and infinite glucose supplies are left to their own, they pollute and pollute and population grows exponentially until suddenly the pollution is too much and nearly all of them die. Glucose = oil; petri dish = earth; colony collapse in a petri dish = 7.99 billion people suddenly dying.

If some horrible disease like bird flu suddenly killed 4 billion people, perhaps AI could swoop down from the metaphorical cloud and help humanity manage resources in time to stop us from all dying, but probably it's too late for even that.

(When you hear Elon Musk say people need to populate the planet even more, I think he knows what is about to happen and is taking the rational position that fleeing earth is the best option for survival and it will be hard to flee earth is everyone is so scared of death they stop working. So his message of "everything is fine, let's increase the population and also thereby pollution even more" is dishonest, but highly rational. I don't know if this is actually what he thinks. His hostility towards trans people also seems strange so I suppose it's possible he is that illogical, but his response to that may be a result of a lack of empathy caused by severe autism, whereas telling people to keep increasing their numbers may be a rational lie so he can increase the likelihood of fleeing earth prior to planetary collapse.)

A certain subset of people have given up on trying to convince people of anything or do anything, figuring it's like arguing with the sun rising and setting and that planetary biosphere collapse is just an inevitable part of nature. Others set themselves on fire to warn people, some people hold cardboard signs and gather and chant and think that will change capitalist societies and wake people up from the delusions of religions, deprogramming people through signs held up by large numbers of people. A lot of people are aware on some level, but don't like to feel existential dread and so they just sort of ignore it.

secretlyaddictedtolinux ,

The problem is the scientists didn't warn us!

If only they had protested and lit themselves on fire and tried to tell me my Hummer H2 was bad!

Well, whatever. Time for me to drive my Hummer to church so I can get another hit of truth.

secretlyaddictedtolinux ,

The government can't really force a company to accept certain customers for free without micromanaging their business. It could also be illegal .

They should just create a tax on the wealthier internet users to be able to afford to do this. The only way to do this would be to have a lowest-class free tier, a middle class discount tier, and then anyone else pays a lot tier. It would be too hard to make the wealthy verify income just for internet access. Also, middle class people who didn't need the discount wouldn't apply for it or verify income. This would have the same effect and would likely not be illegal.

secretlyaddictedtolinux ,

This is awful. Someone should create a letter-writing campaign to implement the idea I mentioned above. No one should have only 4 GB of data ever, especially when there are hardly any marginal costs from having additional users use the service.

secretlyaddictedtolinux ,

If the government tells a company "you're going to take these customers, like it or not" it may result in expensive and time consuming legal challenges that the government may lose. There are checks and balances in the US at least.

secretlyaddictedtolinux ,

it just may not end up being constitutional that way. it would be easier to just do vouchers for people who need it and implement more taxes causing them to raise prices. lots of laws get struck down and these big ISPs have many attorneys

secretlyaddictedtolinux ,

You're probably right about this if you are certain I am wrong. I haven't researched any laws on this, so perhaps there wouldn't be long expensive annoying legal challenges that could be bypassed by crafting the law differently and it would be easier to be more direct.

secretlyaddictedtolinux ,

if the court rules are that both sides are supposed to talk to determine what is reasonable to discuss and not discuss, and the prosecutor just totally ignored that because "who cares" and Trump is clearly out of line, then the prosecutor still ignored the court rules. good for that judge for asserting that prosecutors can't just do whatever they want. i thought her words were actually funny and clever. she's pointing out that the rules specify it's really supposed to be a meaningful attempt, not just faking it or ignoring it or trivially trying to say they tried. A gag order is a big limit to free speech, I wish they were never even allowed, but she's at least being sensible with this and rejecting it on a limited basis based on procedural reasons

secretlyaddictedtolinux ,

Even if you don't like Trump, procedural fairness is important. You aren't supposed to just ignore procedure when it comes to a defendant being criminally prosecuted. There has been a trend of more and more procedural fairness being ignored because prosecutors know they can get away with it and it will be meaningless on appeal. The judge had to rule this way and if she hadn't she would have been a horrible judge. What is sad is that it actually had to be appealed to get to the level of normal procedural fairness. Even very awful people are supposed to get fair procedure in the US. The time procedure and fairness matter most is when someone is being deprived of liberty, that's when you want the rules to be fair, not broken. What would have been a better ruling? If she said "Eh, it's fine, the prosecutors can do whatever and it won't matter on appeal anyway because of the harmless error rule." Gag orders should also be illegal. The First Amendment was not supposed to be some weak idea that occasionally let's people speak their views. It's supposed to protect people like Trump who many people think have detestable speech.

Also, I hate Trump's views on Trans people and his treatment towards those who are different or he perceives as different. I have never voted for Trump. Give this judge a break, that was a good ruling.

secretlyaddictedtolinux ,

She probably would not have denied it had the prosecutors had a 3-7 minute conversation with Trump's defense and had determined they couldn't have come to an agreement. Prosecutorial arrogance allowed them to just ignore procedure and they figured they could get away with it.

Also, if the prosecutors have such good evidence, maybe instead of worrying so much about what Trump is speechifying on X, the platform formerly known as Twitter, they could just prosecute him? Are they really afraid that a jury is so stupid that they are going to be persuaded by Trump ranting tweets or Xes or whatever they are called now on that enshitified platform? Either they have weak evidence or this is just a power play to try to control Trump's ability to say what he wants (and ignore the court rules) and they thought they could get away with it.

secretlyaddictedtolinux ,

she sounds like a really cool person and it's awful that happened to her son

this joke isn't making fun of her or saying she's a bad person. people can like porn like this without being bad or racist people.

but i'm glad you told us a bit about who she is. porn stars and sex workers do something really kind, in a way, because they are providing something people really want, but may not otherwise get, which is also a fundamental human need. i hope one day society changes and we glorify sex workers for being valuable members of society and i hope one day being a porn star is completely a choice and doesn't have to be disentangled from "late stage capitalism" or extremely unequal wealth distribution or whatever you want to call our current era. People who star in pornography, if not forced to star in it due to poverty, choose to become slightly public figures, in a strange way, and should expect possible jokes like this. this joke is not making fun of her, it's making fun of the play on words. it sucks she was trolled for a gofundme, however, and perhaps this joke should be seen in that context as therefore being unfair.

did the boyfriend get convicted? is she doing alright now? i hope she's doing well too. there are between 3-6 parents out there who owe everything to her right now and always will.

secretlyaddictedtolinux ,

Does anyone have an opinion as to how likely this is to eventually turn into a pandemic?

Majority of Americans wrongly believe US is in recession – and most blame Biden ( www.theguardian.com )

Nearly three in five Americans wrongly believe the US is in an economic recession, and the majority blame the Biden administration, according to a Harris poll conducted exclusively for the Guardian. The survey found persistent pessimism about the economy as election day draws closer....

secretlyaddictedtolinux , (edited )

This really misses the big problem. For many people, the costs that are most inelastic (like food and housing) are the ones with the most inflation. For people in financial situations that aren't great, there aren't easy ways to lower costs.

Inflation statistics like the CPI also grossly inaccurately measure what an accurate basket of good is by including many things that are frivolous and so it totally misses how people are feeling. Did the price of a large television go down slightly decreasing the overall inflation a bit? Yes, but I still need to buy incredibly expensive food. I don't need to buy a TV. That makes me worried. I can't cut down on food.

This leads to having to consider things like: should I try to move to an even smaller place (since my tiny place is incredibly expensive), which results in moving costs? Should I look for a better paying job and is it likely I will find that and what happens if my employer finds out and fires me because I am searching for a new job?

There are also large feelings of uncertainty about the economy and about inflation. For those who own property and purchased it a lower cost than the market rate, things are fine. For everyone else, it's terrible.

Biden is doing a horrible job of being realistic about how people feel about these things. He is looking at ivory tower economic statistics and either he doesn't get it or isn't acknowledge it. The message from him is that he's doing a good job and things are improving. That isn't reassuring. It feels like a "let them eat cake" mentality. I'd much rather have him say "yes, certain things in the economy are problematic" and then either say how they will be improved or just bluntly say the best option is to not do anything because doing things (like market interference) is potentially worse.

I support the rights of trans people, and I like some of Biden's ideas, however for most lower middle class people who are completely stressed out, Biden seems like a terrible option. Even for lower middle class people who dislike Trump, they at least view him as a realist. I am left not knowing if Biden is ignorant of how people who don't own homes are feeling or if Biden is being so defensive with his record that he seems out of touch, but either way, he will definitely lose at his current trajectory.

He keeps not addressing this problem and it's a big problem for many voters, probably over half of all swing voters are affected by this. I wish I could advise Biden on what to say and do to improve his poll numbers, because many of the problems that bother large segments of the voters are things that could be easily resolved through the executive office without new laws while adhering to classical economic theory, but he's not going to make the needed changes, I have no way of suggesting things except sending a letter that will not be read but instead will just be summarized as a view (like "letter received, opinion is inflation is bad").

He is going to keep relying on ivory tower economic statistics because fundamentally he's a career politician, he believes his bureaucrats or lacks the ability to understand the real experiences behind the data, and Trump is going to swoop right in and pluck every disaffected swing voter or disaffected Democrat he doesn't reach. The fact that Biden is also doing cool or nice or interesting things in terms of other policy choices doesn't somehow make up for this major weakness in ignoring this.

The fact that The Guardian is referring to the public's "misconceptions" highlights how journalists and also politicians just regurgitate erudite statistics without reflecting on their real world implication, as though regular voters were just wrong or stupid. This is also a problem of Democrats at large who don't know how to take academic research and information and look to the real-world meaning of it and then communicate effectively with regular people or implement practical policies based on this data.

So yeah, Biden will definitely lose. Trans people should figure out how to organize now for possible fascism, which sucks. They should figure out how to technologically, emotionally, and organizationally prepare for a worse case scenario. I can't fathom Biden would win.

secretlyaddictedtolinux , (edited )

Trump lies constantly but he's also very blunt and realistic about problems (as long as he can disclaim responsibility for their cause). Do you think Trump will avoid talking about this as it gets closer to election time? No, he's going to be blunt and realistic and pragmatic sounding and Biden will come off as out of touch to the incredibly large base of quiet regular lower middle class and middle class people affected by this. Probably 40% of the vote will be won based on how people are feeling about this and Biden is responding to that by saying "Actually, you're feelings about the economy are invalid because according to my policy wonks, the economic data is good." It's insulting and enraging to the people who are struggling. Many lower middle class and middle class people don't care that much about abortion or trans issues or whether Trump is a pathological liar being paid by a foreign country to destabilize America. They just want to be able to pay their bills and not be so damned stressed out. Biden absolutely does not get it. This is also the fault of the officials surrounding Biden who should be doing a better job of addressing these problems. Biden is very old and generously ran against Trump out of kindness because he knew he'd be more likely to win. The people around him should be addressing this, the DC insiders and people he took with him into office, and no one addresses the problem or crafts policy. This is an easy win for Trump and he knows it, Trump is not stupid contrary to what many want to imply, he's enormously intelligent and just mean at times and cruel towards many minorities, but Trump needs to do barely anything to win at this point. You don't get into Wharton as an idiot, even if you come from money, so liberals who want to claim he's stupid are doing themselves a disservice by underestimating Trump. Trump is greedy and corrupt and cruel and incredibly intelligent, and if you don't get the fourth part you miss the threat. Trump also at times has good intentions and people sense that, which is also a threat because he doesn't seem completely disingenuous. Biden's campaign is like the Titanic in a field of icebergs and all Trump has to do is just wait. For Biden to win, he'd have to make a lot of changes which he should have done over a year ago, and based on the team around him that hasn't dealt with the problems correctly, he's probably not going to make the right choices on this. If he makes superficial meaningless gestures on this issues in a last minute hail mary pass, it's not going to matter. Voters aren't stupid. I wish I could write Biden or his team and tell them what they should do, but I'm some nobody. No one would care.

secretlyaddictedtolinux ,

this exactly describes the truth of what is going on

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • random
  • test
  • worldmews
  • mews
  • All magazines
    •