Louis Farrakhan smiles, because his personal flavor of race-baiting social media use will continue undisturbed. Likewise with anti-Semitic posts from US congressional representatives, and the usual anti-the-other-guy screeds from untold numbers of tribal grievance groups. But as long as this one type of post is suppressed, we're good. Jussie Smullet and his supporters can continue to spew race-bating nonsense about a fictional event with no consequence, FB will guarantee that.
Yeah there is. There's money laundering, tax evasion, extortion, all sorts of cool stuff.
Which of those things are you saying that Trump did, and that Mueller found but was prevented by the Russians from mentioning, even though he had a team of Trump-hostile attorneys working with him? Please be specific. And mention which action, in advance of a proceeding, Trump took to obstruct that proceeding? Because that's the standard.
Right, the AG quoted Mueller as Mueller took a lazy parting shot with that language.
Regardless, it doesn't matter. It's not indictable. There's never going to be an obstruction case (which requires intent, in connection with a crime) when there's no underlying crime in the first place.
Some students will get to go to visit SpaceX, and will be selected based on merit? What? There is no merit! Your bitter clinging to that racist trope is just pure Jordan Peterson Nazi Misogyny! In fact, the only students who should be allowed to go visit SpaceX are those the least capable and interested in anything that would come out of it, thus making society more fair. Or something.
I'm not sure how playing the music DURING the test is an indicator of anything whatsoever. "Desensitizing," to the extent that has occurred in anyone who is desensitize-able in this way, happens over time. Not on the spot, because of what music is playing. That said, having to listen to Pharrell Williams's "Happy" would indeed bring out in me a joyous lust for violence. Not sure how that would weigh on the stats.
Note that Trump's budget released yesterday calls for a cut in education funding. This affects the working class.
It's the faucet-like availability of government-backed loans and too-easy education money that is directly responsible for driving tuition prices through the roof in the first place. The "working class" can learn remedial algebra and gain the ability to write a complete English sentence finally taught to them at a very reasonably priced local community college just as easily as the rich kid can get it taught to her at an elite school her parents can afford. "The masses" are dumber because the culture is rotting, not because community colleges and state schools are inherently less able to teach critical thinking skills than is a college with $20k/year dorm rooms and a gluten-free menu in every sorority kitchen.
We need a new internet because there were some election results he didn't like? Seriously?
Yup. He's mad because the web isn't structured in a way that directly and permanently empowers leftist politics while suppressing everyone else. So, it clearly needs a reboot into a more authoritarian version that will control people to his liking. In the name of freedom, of course.
You really don't understand that pointing out the endless parade of left-leaning media outlets that engage in nothing but non-stop virtue signaling and receive praise from their audiences for it... is important in the context of a very left-leaning publication complaining about that sort of thing? If you're not seeing why that's worth noting, then you are their perfect audience/consumer, that's for sure.
I've spent decades working in and around brick and mortar, mail order, and internet sales operations. You're pretending you can't read, and then (before resorting to lazy ad hominem), trotting out a flimsy straw man to fight. Lazy.
Amazon right now controls roughly half the online retailing in the US and had been driving local retailers out of business...
No. My local retailers are losing my business because they don't and never have had Amazon's breadth of inventory or willingness to make it appear as quickly. They have limited hours, little parking, witless employees, clumsy return policies, don't keep track of my previous purchases for easy compatibility and follow-up sales, and no ability for me to check out products via reviews and other reading. That's not Amazon driving them out of business, that's ME starving them of my business because they've failed to offer an experience even close to what online retailers are providing. Elizabeth Warren is here representing the Buggy Whip Maker's Guild, and looking to cripple Ford Motors because they're driving the buggy industry out of business.
This from the politicians in the main city of a state where the governor is extorting financial institutions into denying services like insurance and banking to non-profits that don't sit on their approved side of politics. NY politicians have absolutely ZERO room to complain that a company which finds setting up shop there to be distasteful is somehow "abusing" them. Nonsense.
Having to support a criminal by being forced to spend some of YOUR working day to buy him food is slavery. Except you're the slave. Having the criminal work to offset the cost of feeding himself isn't slavery, it's him working to feed himself just like YOU have to.
Forcing someone to work is illegal. You might want to ask a Black person about it.
Or anyone from any other cultural background, since slavery has been around in every culture, forever. If you're in the US, the only black person you can ask about contemporary slavery is someone who has escaped from the spots in the world that still practice it. Regardless... your point is meaningless. Being kidnapped by slave traders and then sold into a lifetime of slavery, or being born to those who have been, is NOT the same as choosing to commit a long series of crimes and having to suffer the consequences. Why are you pretending you don't get that?
But the problem is that the high rate of mostly gang-related murder in these small, concentrated areas, is used as an excuse to strip constitutional rights away from the 300,000,00 or so people who have nothing to do with it. Places like Chicago and Baltimore are allowing their local dystopias to damage the entire rest of the country.
Right, because only traitors think nuclear power is an important source of electricity, while patriotic socialist heroes who say we should shut them all down have a totally sane grasp on our actual energy needs. Gotcha. Thanks for your insightful contribution, especially the way you addressed the substance of the matter.
You think the mayor of Chicago would be more concerned with the city's murder rate right now, instead of energy generation.
The reason they have such a murder rate in Chicago is because of their sophisticated gang member recycling program. Arrest them, and then put them right back out on the street so they can commit more crime. It's super efficient!
Or... someone could have spent 30 seconds in Photoshop with half a dozen normal face shots of different people, and produced exactly what you're talking about while setting up some fake journo profiles. That's been done for years. And is not the same as an AI-ish thing synthesizing faces.
So when you change the subject to a non-scientific area, the definition of the word changes?
No, but the overwhelmingly common use of the word does. Which you know. Stop pretending you don't. When a Hollywood celebrity says that you should change what you buy or how you medicate your family because of consensus, you know exactly what I mean.
Consensus in science has nothing to do with popularity.
But it has everything to do with contemporary politics over which country should kill its economy while other countries are let off the hook, over low-information blog hysteria about GMOs, scaring parents away from using vaccines, and countless other topics that result in know-nothing celebrities tell us what to believe because of "the consensus" in the way that essentially everyone else now (ab)uses that word. Regardless, even the "do it a bunch of times" science types are the same crowd that all too often end up retracting their bogus white papers or changing their tune as soon as the source of their grant money changes.
The Scientific Method is literally built on consensus.
That is exactly the opposite of the scientific method.
The validity of a theory is tested by demonstrating its predictive powers. Repeated results. NOT by counting how many people you can get to say they like what you say. Consensus is people singing the same song. Science pursues actual understanding of reality and the ability to test what it finds, even when people - even a majority of them - don't like it. Pick the right people and you can accurately say there's a consensus in the room that the earth is flat.
You have no idea what you're blathering about. Petitions become ballot measures become law all the time. Why would you advertise how little you know about this without researching it?
Is it physically painful to be so obtuse? Which part of your brain is damaged to the point where you can't include the contemplation of any sort of context when cranking out your juvenile response?
The murder statistics are nonsense. Saying "Mexicans murder people in America, therefore we should have a wall", is as silly as saying "Californians murder people in Nevada, therefore we should have a wall".
No, it's not silly. Because Californians living legally in the US are different than people who we should be preventing from being here when they cheat to do so. If we can reduce some of the tens of thousands of crimes committed in the US by those who are illegally present, that's tens of thousands of crimes fewer we have to deal with. People who end up alive, instead of dead.
Let me guess. You're going to say that there are simply a fixed number of crimes, and if the illegals who commit thousands and thousands of violent felonies every year weren't in the country, then law-abiding citizens would step up and commit those crimes instead? Do you realize how absurd your position on this actually is? How about we just use that old liberal/progressive staple: "If we can save just one life by [banning/regulating/taking-away-liberty-in-some-way], then it's worth doing." So, if we can prevent thousands of violent felonies from being committed by people, many of whom have been repeatedly deported and who simply walk back across the border because there's nothing stopping them or even slowing them down, doesn't that more than qualify for a Progressive "Think Of The Children" blessing for whatever method contributes to that end? No? I see.
Slashdot Mirror
Louis Farrakhan smiles, because his personal flavor of race-baiting social media use will continue undisturbed. Likewise with anti-Semitic posts from US congressional representatives, and the usual anti-the-other-guy screeds from untold numbers of tribal grievance groups. But as long as this one type of post is suppressed, we're good. Jussie Smullet and his supporters can continue to spew race-bating nonsense about a fictional event with no consequence, FB will guarantee that.
Yeah there is. There's money laundering, tax evasion, extortion, all sorts of cool stuff.
Which of those things are you saying that Trump did, and that Mueller found but was prevented by the Russians from mentioning, even though he had a team of Trump-hostile attorneys working with him? Please be specific. And mention which action, in advance of a proceeding, Trump took to obstruct that proceeding? Because that's the standard.
Right, the AG quoted Mueller as Mueller took a lazy parting shot with that language. Regardless, it doesn't matter. It's not indictable. There's never going to be an obstruction case (which requires intent, in connection with a crime) when there's no underlying crime in the first place.
Some students will get to go to visit SpaceX, and will be selected based on merit? What? There is no merit! Your bitter clinging to that racist trope is just pure Jordan Peterson Nazi Misogyny! In fact, the only students who should be allowed to go visit SpaceX are those the least capable and interested in anything that would come out of it, thus making society more fair. Or something.
I'm not sure how playing the music DURING the test is an indicator of anything whatsoever. "Desensitizing," to the extent that has occurred in anyone who is desensitize-able in this way, happens over time. Not on the spot, because of what music is playing. That said, having to listen to Pharrell Williams's "Happy" would indeed bring out in me a joyous lust for violence. Not sure how that would weigh on the stats.
Note that Trump's budget released yesterday calls for a cut in education funding. This affects the working class.
It's the faucet-like availability of government-backed loans and too-easy education money that is directly responsible for driving tuition prices through the roof in the first place. The "working class" can learn remedial algebra and gain the ability to write a complete English sentence finally taught to them at a very reasonably priced local community college just as easily as the rich kid can get it taught to her at an elite school her parents can afford. "The masses" are dumber because the culture is rotting, not because community colleges and state schools are inherently less able to teach critical thinking skills than is a college with $20k/year dorm rooms and a gluten-free menu in every sorority kitchen.
We need a new internet because there were some election results he didn't like? Seriously?
Yup. He's mad because the web isn't structured in a way that directly and permanently empowers leftist politics while suppressing everyone else. So, it clearly needs a reboot into a more authoritarian version that will control people to his liking. In the name of freedom, of course.
You really don't understand that pointing out the endless parade of left-leaning media outlets that engage in nothing but non-stop virtue signaling and receive praise from their audiences for it ... is important in the context of a very left-leaning publication complaining about that sort of thing? If you're not seeing why that's worth noting, then you are their perfect audience/consumer, that's for sure.
Of course, if a bunch of Democrats get together and put together a biased newspaper, then it's okay?
It's not just OK, it's virtuous! The dems might as well just go ahead an launch a newspaper actually called The Virtue Signal.
I've spent decades working in and around brick and mortar, mail order, and internet sales operations. You're pretending you can't read, and then (before resorting to lazy ad hominem), trotting out a flimsy straw man to fight. Lazy.
Amazon right now controls roughly half the online retailing in the US and had been driving local retailers out of business...
No. My local retailers are losing my business because they don't and never have had Amazon's breadth of inventory or willingness to make it appear as quickly. They have limited hours, little parking, witless employees, clumsy return policies, don't keep track of my previous purchases for easy compatibility and follow-up sales, and no ability for me to check out products via reviews and other reading. That's not Amazon driving them out of business, that's ME starving them of my business because they've failed to offer an experience even close to what online retailers are providing. Elizabeth Warren is here representing the Buggy Whip Maker's Guild, and looking to cripple Ford Motors because they're driving the buggy industry out of business.
This from the politicians in the main city of a state where the governor is extorting financial institutions into denying services like insurance and banking to non-profits that don't sit on their approved side of politics. NY politicians have absolutely ZERO room to complain that a company which finds setting up shop there to be distasteful is somehow "abusing" them. Nonsense.
Having to support a criminal by being forced to spend some of YOUR working day to buy him food is slavery. Except you're the slave. Having the criminal work to offset the cost of feeding himself isn't slavery, it's him working to feed himself just like YOU have to.
Forcing someone to work is illegal. You might want to ask a Black person about it.
Or anyone from any other cultural background, since slavery has been around in every culture, forever. If you're in the US, the only black person you can ask about contemporary slavery is someone who has escaped from the spots in the world that still practice it. Regardless... your point is meaningless. Being kidnapped by slave traders and then sold into a lifetime of slavery, or being born to those who have been, is NOT the same as choosing to commit a long series of crimes and having to suffer the consequences. Why are you pretending you don't get that?
But the problem is that the high rate of mostly gang-related murder in these small, concentrated areas, is used as an excuse to strip constitutional rights away from the 300,000,00 or so people who have nothing to do with it. Places like Chicago and Baltimore are allowing their local dystopias to damage the entire rest of the country.
Right, because only traitors think nuclear power is an important source of electricity, while patriotic socialist heroes who say we should shut them all down have a totally sane grasp on our actual energy needs. Gotcha. Thanks for your insightful contribution, especially the way you addressed the substance of the matter.
You think the mayor of Chicago would be more concerned with the city's murder rate right now, instead of energy generation.
The reason they have such a murder rate in Chicago is because of their sophisticated gang member recycling program. Arrest them, and then put them right back out on the street so they can commit more crime. It's super efficient!
That's all fine, but by then AOChe will be old enough to be president and she says no more nuclear power will be allowed.
Or ... someone could have spent 30 seconds in Photoshop with half a dozen normal face shots of different people, and produced exactly what you're talking about while setting up some fake journo profiles. That's been done for years. And is not the same as an AI-ish thing synthesizing faces.
Odds are it was the fentanyl that got him.
The odds are that choosing to use heroin in the first place got him on the train to fentanyl.
So when you change the subject to a non-scientific area, the definition of the word changes?
No, but the overwhelmingly common use of the word does. Which you know. Stop pretending you don't. When a Hollywood celebrity says that you should change what you buy or how you medicate your family because of consensus, you know exactly what I mean.
Consensus in science has nothing to do with popularity.
But it has everything to do with contemporary politics over which country should kill its economy while other countries are let off the hook, over low-information blog hysteria about GMOs, scaring parents away from using vaccines, and countless other topics that result in know-nothing celebrities tell us what to believe because of "the consensus" in the way that essentially everyone else now (ab)uses that word. Regardless, even the "do it a bunch of times" science types are the same crowd that all too often end up retracting their bogus white papers or changing their tune as soon as the source of their grant money changes.
The Scientific Method is literally built on consensus.
That is exactly the opposite of the scientific method.
The validity of a theory is tested by demonstrating its predictive powers. Repeated results. NOT by counting how many people you can get to say they like what you say. Consensus is people singing the same song. Science pursues actual understanding of reality and the ability to test what it finds, even when people - even a majority of them - don't like it. Pick the right people and you can accurately say there's a consensus in the room that the earth is flat.
You have no idea what you're blathering about. Petitions become ballot measures become law all the time. Why would you advertise how little you know about this without researching it?
Is it physically painful to be so obtuse? Which part of your brain is damaged to the point where you can't include the contemplation of any sort of context when cranking out your juvenile response?
The murder statistics are nonsense. Saying "Mexicans murder people in America, therefore we should have a wall", is as silly as saying "Californians murder people in Nevada, therefore we should have a wall".
No, it's not silly. Because Californians living legally in the US are different than people who we should be preventing from being here when they cheat to do so. If we can reduce some of the tens of thousands of crimes committed in the US by those who are illegally present, that's tens of thousands of crimes fewer we have to deal with. People who end up alive, instead of dead.
Let me guess. You're going to say that there are simply a fixed number of crimes, and if the illegals who commit thousands and thousands of violent felonies every year weren't in the country, then law-abiding citizens would step up and commit those crimes instead? Do you realize how absurd your position on this actually is? How about we just use that old liberal/progressive staple: "If we can save just one life by [banning/regulating/taking-away-liberty-in-some-way], then it's worth doing." So, if we can prevent thousands of violent felonies from being committed by people, many of whom have been repeatedly deported and who simply walk back across the border because there's nothing stopping them or even slowing them down, doesn't that more than qualify for a Progressive "Think Of The Children" blessing for whatever method contributes to that end? No? I see.