im not rolling them out dude, im saying that slavery was the primary issue even if those talking points had any ounce of truth to them. i only brought it up because I expected you to try and deploy that shitty argument and wanted to get ahead of it.
underisk
joined 1 year ago
i do not think its historical revisionism to say that the South was the Bad Side in the american civil war. there may have been other motivations beyond slavery for either side but the primary disagreement was over that one pretty specific issue! i feel pretty confident saying that slavery is unequivocally bad, even if people who technically could be considered my political predecessors did it!
and i used the example of liberal regimes specifically because I know there's hundreds of examples of it being true, it wasn't an attempt to paint what you said as false. it was an attempt to highlight the weird, almost non-sequitur defensive nature of the response. like someone saying that pie is good and then posting a response about how apples are actually a source of CYANIDE!!!!
tell me something man, if you pointed out that the south was in favor of slavery because some shithead was accusing someone of being a confederate soldier for opposing slavery, then I came along and started saying OHOHOHO DID YOU KNOW THAT ACTUALLY PLENTY OF LIBERAL REGIMES PARTICIPATED IN HISTORICAL SLAVERY SCHEMES THAT DID UNTOLD GENERATIONAL DAMAGE, what would you think of me, as a person?
that you felt the need to post "but the communists!" after someone points out that Nazi's did the same thing the people who created this ad would do is extremely telling.
You have ten years to do something you’ve known needed to be done for over twenty. My bet is in ten years they will be given another ten year “deadline”, if whatever mechanism Biden established to enforce this even exists at that point. Same dance they do with climate regs.
You can explain that to people but it still won't convince them to spend any amount of time doing math in a grocery store unless they're so desperate for cash that the problem is well beyond the scope of pricing schemes.
Great, now I can more accurately compare how all the brands are shrinking at roughly the same rate. The problem isn’t consumer education, it’s implicit market collusion. Coke shrinks and doesn’t lose profit so Pepsi shrinks so Coke shrinks so Pepsi shrinks, etc - a race to the bottom feedback loop.
Unit pricing is good, but I don’t really think it solves this particular issue. Every time I see unit price even listed it’s in tiny, near illegible font under the massive bold item price, and every time I’ve point d the out to people they don’t give a shit because they aren’t going to spend 5 minutes comparing the prices of soda bottles so they can squeeze out less than a dime’s worth of savings.
Then run it in a container under a better distribution if you desperately need to put neofetch on your HTPC. Or run the other distro in a container under libreelec since I’m pretty sure it supports them.
It tracks anonymous statistics, without my express consent, for the benefit of a third party. I do not care if it exists to replace cookies, because I’m not even convinced that cookies need to exist at all anymore. What utility do they provide to the actual person using the browser that can’t be accomplished through some other more modern API? If the only functionality left to replace is tracking people then maybe just deprecate them and move on.
Telegram had credibility. It was being used by journalists to protect sources.
You can extend trust to individuals but do not apply that to companies or organizations if you care at all about what they’re doing with what you give them. Not everyone has some mythical tech privacy wizard on call to give them perfect advice every time they open an account on an app or website.
Even client side encryption is not infallible. The algorithm you use will eventually be crackable and probably sooner than you think. Nothing lasts forever.
The most foolproof way to ensure something remains private is to not put it on the internet at all.
If you can read and understand the code, sure. Otherwise you’re still just extending trust to someone perhaps less reputable than even the corporations who are dying to sell you out. For example, the back door some mysterious contributor slipped into xz recently.
My recommendation is to live life as if privacy on the internet did not exist, because it doesn’t.
if you're going to risk federal charges i think you should probably do it in service of something a little more substantial than a lukewarm voting drive. especially when everyone you convince to participate is ostensibly on "your side" and they will also be risking federal charges.
too many people praising this think clever wording and specific language is like iron-clad armor against a judge saying "no fuck you, your intent was clearly to break or circumvent the law. go to jail/pay this fine". that only works for the rich.