Mnemnosyne

If someone works for you and does things in your name, you are responsible for those things and they can be fairly attributed to you.

It's completely fair to reject anything they propose until it is clearly shown not to be bad. It is also fair not to examine everything in great detail and assume it will be bad until shown otherwise, because the track record is so strong.

It doesn't mean being unwilling to listen to evidence, but it does mean not being willing to put in the effort to check it over without a strong reason to think that it might actually be different this time. Because they can and will put out a torrential deluge of crap just to exhaust people's ability to critically analyze all of it.

Incest porn that was actually labeled as such was pretty common about 15 years ago. By which I mean pretend incest, the performers were not really related but were pretending to be.

But there was some case where a woman was posting porn of herself and her son that got really well known. After that, I'm not sure whether because of some new legislation or because of just covering asses, they started calling it step-incest instead of pretending it was real.

In my totally anecdotal experience, incest was getting pretty popular before that time, then it dropped off for a while, and is now picking up steam again. I'm even starting to see slightly more stuff that pretends to be real incest again instead of the stupid step-incest.

It would be nice if it was easier to filter out what you don't like though.

Wasn't 64 bit adoption largely driven by Microsoft deciding they weren't making a 32 bit version of their next Windows at one point? It seems it might take something similar.

If someone makes it so I can stream all the shows and all the movies and such in one convenient place, without having to find them myself, hunt down the right versions, etc, I'm good with paying them for that.

It'd be better if it was from a legal service, but as long as exclusives are allowed that can't happen. If the owners of the content were required to allow anyone who wants to distribute it to do so, at the same cost with no special deals for one distributor over another, then every streaming service could have everything, if they choose. They could then compete on quality of service and which content they choose to have, not on what content they can lock down for themselves alone.

So there's actually two things there that sound good to me, that I immediately doubt because if Republicans were in favor of it I have to assume there's something horrible about it...

What's bad about a national sales tax, and banning earmarks? Those kinda sound like good things to me.