You live in a different universe where talk matters more than actions and individual voters have more power than the systems and people that consistently screw them over.

That's not a gap I can bridge.

If all of the people who stayed home would have been kamala voters then it sounds like she failed to inspire them to vote. It sounds like she lost an election.

Yes, if an unprecedented, impossible turnout occurred then dems might've won, but that's not actually a strategy, that's fantasy. Assuming there isn't some level of divine intervention, then people are right that their vote doesn't matter, because this is the real world where we already know a plurality of people don't vote.

It's almost like voter disenfranchisement works.

I don't know why liberals can't get this basic concept: if electoralism is meaningful at all, then the electorate cannot be wrong.

If the electorate voted "wrong" then your democracy doesn't do what it claims to, it does not represent the people. <- this is actually the correct answer btw

Blaming the electorate achieves nothing.

The electorate didn't fail the dems, the dems failed the electorate.

Iran getting nuclear weapons would be an immense boon to peace and stability in the Middle East.

I think you just put your finger on exactly why the US doesn't want that to ever happen.

That was me, actually, and I didn't run out, it is still valid. You are denying that we should criticise the dems for their genocide, and you haven't gone back on that. That is a kind of genocide denial.

Your entire point in calling me a pedophile was that you literally could not substantiate it. You were talking out of your ass. You were done with any sort of argument.

It's amazing that you don't see what that says about you, just like you don't seem to see what an absolute repudiation of the democrats it is to say that it is useless to accuse them of genocide because the choices in your "democracy" cannot exclude genocide.

And you wonder why so many people stayed home.

It was already turbo genocide, and the idea that what's happening now is somehow worse is just your fantasy.

I just want to point out that you've given up trying to make an argument and are now simply calling the other person a pedophile. That's about the biggest admission you can make that you have nothing to say.

Not just invidious, they've just de facto blocked video embedding:

If you're wondering how a viable competitor could arise, other companies needing a video hosting solution that they can rely on to run their storefronts is a perfect use case. This is the Humble Bundle storefront, and they could pretty easily spin up a peertube instance. If that became commonplace, it could be one way for peertube to become ubiquitous.

EDIT: This is related to my VPN I believe, but storefronts still aren't going to be happy if they can't rely on their storefronts working for everyone.

No he's right that it's unsolved. Humans aren't great at reliably knowing truth from fiction too. If you've ever been in a highly active comment section you'll notice certain "hallucinations" developing, usually because someone came along and sounded confident and everyone just believed them.

We don't even know how to get full people to do this, so how does a fancy markov chain do it? It can't. I don't think you solve this problem without AGI, and that's something AI evangelists don't want to think about because then the conversation changes significantly. They're in this for the hype bubble, not the ethical implications.

EDIT: I should've read the article, but I'm taking the L and leaving this up with a strikethrough. The phrasing "after" in the headline definitely creates the wrong impression here. As for what this says about people, I guess we'll have to see if the other ten whistleblowers still testify.

And if you think it's too much to assume Boeing killed these two people, that's the wrong question. It matters more whether as a fellow whistleblower it's reasonable to worry about whether Boeing killed them, and I think it is.

Also Boeing definitely killed the first guy at least. "If I die, it's not suicide." - man who "committed suicide". WTAF.

~~If you ever hear anyone talking about how humans suck and we're all terrible and will definitely destroy ourselves, just think about the fact that killing whistleblowers was quickly followed by more whistleblowers. Not just lone heros, but ten fucking people said, "hey, fuck you, are you really gonna kill me too?" knowing that the answer could well be "yes".~~

He did all that to support his gay son, that is a real ally.

“We respect when you and your communities take action to highlight the things you need, including, at times, going private,” he said.

They respect it so much they forcibly remove mods to make them public again. That's so respectful.

"...offers to give participation medal back because she's being targeted by transphobes and just wants the harrassment to stop."

I mean, I assume that's the reason, right? Why else would you give back a participation medal? It wouldn't be out of principle because it's a ridiculous thing to expect anyone to do.

I searched up this story after making the above guess and it was roughly right because these people are so damn predictable. Only the worst outlets are reporting on it, and they're misquoting her horrendously. She didn't "offer", she said if the organisers want it back she'll give it back. It was an acknowledgement that it's the organisers' decision, not hers.

She's maintined the whole time that she'll follow whatever rules are in place, including running as a man when the organisation requires it. Of course transphobes are using that as "proof" that she's a man.

She's also quoted in headlines as saying "I'm not a woman," but it was sarcasm. She said, "I get it... I'm not a woman, I don't have a womb." She was characterising the hateful remarks she's received and they twisted that and said it came from her mouth and even called it an "admission".

This is the original article as far as I can tell: https://nypost.com/2023/04/26/trans-marathoner-glenique-frank-offers-to-give-back-medal/

It has the same shameless "14,000" fact-twisting in the headline, but unlike other articles piggybacking on it, at least it tells some of her side and doesn't constantly misgender her.

She also says she won't apologise because she didn't do anything wrong, which she didn't. She's running for no prize and she's raising money for charity, but the culture war needs victims I guess, so she's fair game to these people.

Wasn't like... a huge deal made about how the Teslas are so waterproof they could double as a boat? I mean they can in fact ford much deeper than ICE cars because they don't need air, but also there's definitely tweets about this.

Edit: he said it about both the cybertruck - loads of stories about this - and the model S: https://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/hybrid-electric/a21421/elon-musk-model-s-boat/

This is entirely separate of course from the much more basic issue that a car that breaks because of some fucking precipitation is not fit for purpose and this damage report would be indefensible just about anywhere in the world. Precedent for manufacturers taking responsibility for bad products was first established in Britain centuries ago.