I'd expect politicians who want to restrict a basic right like freedom of religion to communicate what they want to do and why instead of throwing out a slogan that requires interpretation. Besides, when they did give a reasoning they kept using the word "burqa". It was pretty clear that they neither knew nor cared about any details.

The whole thing was an exercise in thinly veiled xenophobia (keeping foreign looking people off the street under the guise of helping women) and thankfully didn't get very far.

(Also, "defund the police" was a pretty bad choice for a slogan and allowed the opposition to paint the movement as hardcore anarchists.)

And even you are probably not taking about the garment you're thinking of. A burqa is specifically the one with the grille on front of the eyes and is mostly worn in Afghanistan. The internationally much more common face veil with the eye slit is called a niqab.

I learned this after five minutes of research back when conservative politicians called for a "burqa ban" in my country. That they didn't even know what kind of garment they wanted to ban or that there's more than one type of face veil told me a lot about how much thought they must've given the matter.

Ja klar, bin dabei. Man könnte zum Beispiel die VW AG wieder verstaatlichen und den Unternehmensauftrag von der Erwirtschaftung maximaler Profite auf die Bereitstellung zuverlässiger und bürgerfreundlicher Automobilität ändern. Gewisse Dinge wie millionenschwere Managergehälter müssen dann vielleicht dran glauben, aber das ist ein Opfer, das zu bringen ich bereit bin.

There's also a lot of stuff that's not meant to be taken literally. The text is full of similes and metaphors that are a lot less clear today than they were at time of writing. For example, many numbers in there are just used to convey a vague serve sense of size. Sometimes concrete numbers just mean "many", which was well-understood back then.

On top of that we have later edits for various reasons and assorted other sources of imprecision. The Bible makes a lot more sense as a book that's not meant to be taken literally in it's entirety. Of course figuring out what's really meant isn't very easy all this time later.

Plus what you pointed out. That's also in there, probably especially by means of edits.

You'd think that notifying an app that it's being interrupted due to a phone call would be basic functionality on a phone. The kind of thing an app doesn't need permissions for because it's core OS functionality that exposes no information to the app other than that it's being sent to the background for a moment.

I have no idea how Google thought that this is advanced functionality equivalent to making phone calls.

Have you ever talked to one? They're already digital sycophants, by design.

I don't think capsaicin is that much of an insecticide. AFAIK its primary purpose is to deter consumption by mammals since the seeds are more likely to survive if eaten by birds (who are immune to capsaicin).

Of course that makes it extra amusing that we're specifically after this stuff.

You mean at 30 fps frame-genned to 120 fps that still play like 30 but with more visual artifacts. Because that's what modern hardware gets you and that's what the next three generations of hardware will get you.

Right down to brightly colored parts so you can see which player it belongs to.

It's not as if most people care. Nintendo's hyper-litigiousness also hasn't hurt their image of the wholesome games company run by people whose main goal is to give the market good games.

The truth is that by and large nobody gives a shit about fraudulent DMCA claims, not even the DMCA provision that outlaws them.

Yes, absolutely. Antisemitism is pretty much the classical case for an entire group of people getting lumped together, othered, and loaded with all sorts of negative stereotypes that are then used as justification for actions against them.

The point I wanted to contribute is that the state of Israel and its various advocacy groups have contributed significantly to this by continually arguing in bad faith that any criticism of their behavior is equivalent to antisemitism. This has established in the public conscience the incorrect notion that Israel represents all jews and that their actions reflect upon all of them.

That was bad enough when Israel was locked in a morally complex struggle with the Palestinians. Plenty of shit happened then that many jews didn't agree with and weren't happy to be associated with via Israel's rhetoric. But now the conflict has escalated to a point where Israel's behavior goes well past any notion of acceptability.

And the rhetoric that any criticism of this is antisemitic persists. Advocacy groups spend big money to convince the world that opposing the genocide in Gaza is equivalent to hating jews. Combine that with the onslaught of right-wing propaganda on social media and yeah, it's no wonder antisemitism is on the rise.

Mind you, this has been actively promoted by Israel and several major NGOs who have been arguing (incorrectly) for decades that Israel and Judaism are essentially identical.

That doesn't make it true but it's still a meme (in the sociological sense) that has been well established for quite some time.