Dude that’s not even close to the most insane part. They expect one in every 8 humans on the whole earth to play EVERY DAY.

Put that on billboards in swing districts. Can’t be sued for libel because he said it. Might get Republicans but to vote. Shows on the fence voters how dumb he is (although at this point…)

He doesn’t need to shoot, he just glides over to the target and mows them down with his human piloted arial weed whacker.

Yeah and they should also eat vegan organic low FARTMAP gluten free Paleo diet. It will fix everything! It cured my mom’s dementia, fixed my kleptomania, my brother has a bigger penis and my dad stopped smoking!

Kanye West, the disgraced former shoe salesman and dinner companion of Holocaust-denier Nick Fuentes

https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2023/01/kanye-west-reportedly-under-investigation-for-battery

I chose NOT diddling kids!

It’s better than modern pick up trucks though. Not sure whether this says that the APC should have seen the guy or whether we should just accept pick up truck drivers running people over because they can’t be expected to see people lol

No. They’re dumb. It’s scientifically proven at this point. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0160289609000051

The government simply doesn’t understand technology. If someone said “I bought a book, but after 6 years the publisher came in and stole my copy and burned it” they can understand that. But a single player game, which is in many ways the same as a book, these old politicians just think “spoiled millennials just want free stuff handed to them. Stop playing games and grow up”. No one would say that about a book.

I want to be able to enjoy my private, legally purchased, leisure activity without the risk that the publisher steals it from me through deceptive practices. Is that really too much to ask for?

The trick is to dress as an apex predator so they let their guard down!

Damn hungry helicopters. Always eating my fuel lines!

I’m generalizing here, but men’s lib looks VERY different to women’s lib. Women started from a position of very low power, liberation was nearly a continuous improvement for all but the most privileged women.

Men’s lib requires first giving up a lot of patriarchal power before gaining the benefits of men’s lib, which in my opinion far surpass those of patriarchal power. There are a lot of barriers to this. First, most “online” feminists talk only about giving up patriarchal power. This feels hostile to most men and has bolstered misogynist influencers like tate et al. Second real life men and women are typically both complicit as men in enforcing patriarchal views of what a man is supposed to be. You can see experiences of men crying or expressing real emotion in front their prospective significant others as a prime example of this. Third there is no easy to access popular description of the benefits to men of men’s lib. There are great examples, but they aren’t as culturally relevant as patriarchal influencers yet.

The path to men’s lib is complex and has very different challenges than women’s lib. I think we’re getting there, but it’s certainly a slow process and at this time I think the counter reaction is more prevalent and popular.

Housing can’t be an investment (i.e. exponential growth above inflation) AND an affordable place for people to live for future generations. This mentality is absolutely brain-dead.

Lol the place that must not be named.

It’s a numbers game. Getting engagement and knowing your audience are skills. The fediverse is a small place compared to meta. Being a big player in the fediverse for most posters is like being in the best team in a college league. Meta joining with 500-2000x the users is like suddenly having to compete at a national professional level. Certainly a few players have the skill, but most will get benched in no time.

Maybe I’m wrong and I hope that I am, but I certainly know most default sub comments at the other place had no upvotes, no replies, and were at the bottom of the thread never to be seen. On here, nearly every comment i see or post has SOME engagement (like this discussion!). It’s a different game when you have hundreds of millions to billions of users.

You wouldn’t create a meta account. But I know I consume a lot more content than I create. Probably 1% of social media users create 80% of the content. If meta joined, the users that make most fediverse content now will see their engagement drop. There will likely not be a good reason for them to post at all since, in all likelihood, that content has already been posted by a meta user or reposted with more engagement.

Eventually they’ll stop posting because it won’t be fun. At this point almost all content will be meta content, and most activity pub clients will be “alternative meta clients” in practice. If/When meta leaves, the fediverse will likely have a fraction of the content it has now, it’ll be a ghost town and have a long and hard road to recovery.

That’s not to mention the other problems in the article.

When a big corporation like Walmart moves into a neighborhood it kills the small stores because it delivers most of what people want more effectively. Then when Walmart closes shops to consolidate those neighborhoods don’t go back to the way they were, they now have no stores.

There is a lot of content in the fediverse that wouldn’t exist with meta, because meta users would provide better content, more discussion, and more votes would mean more granularity so better content rises higher. That would stop a lot of the people who post content on activity pub. They would be too late and have too little engagement to be relevant. Those people don’t magically reappear if meta decides that activity pub was just a bad mistake.

I don’t see any large leaps.

If threads uses activity pub, most activity pub users will be meta users using the meta client. Meta will not feel the pressure to conform to the activity pub implementation. They could add features as they want since all their users will use their client. This will cause a sudden incompatibility and the fediverse will have to be the one to fix the problem.

If the fediverse wants to update the protocol to add a feature, we’d have to run it by meta first since they would have to update their client. If they drag their feet it would be hard to force the update knowing it will disconnect the majority of users from the fediverse.

It’s the same situation described in the article with Google and XMPP.

I don’t see any leaps or jumps. This could be how meta kills the fediverse and we’d be walking into it eyes wide open.

I don’t know if this is a joke or not but Nietzsche’s whole effort was spent on defining and opposing nihilism, not creating and advocating for it.

He realised that God (the philosophical entity which guarantees meaning) is dead and knew that God was a tool used to combat nihilism. He was afraid that at the time nihilism was seen as the only alternative to belief in God. He spent his whole life trying to establish the virtues that were required (the ubermensch) in order to lead a meaningful life when there is no guarantee that the world itself had a meaning.

The Wikipedia article covers this topic well https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedrich_Nietzsche

The death of God may lead beyond bare perspectivism to outright nihilism, the belief that nothing has any inherent importance and that life lacks purpose. While Nietzsche rejected the traditional Christian morality and theology, he also rejected the nihilism which many thought was the only alternative to it.

I love the caption! 6 people holding a seance but they have 22 hands lol

Jokes aside the fact that people put the effort to caption their images for accessibility is awesome!

I’m sorry, I just have a hard time agreeing with you on the definition of progressive taxation here. Sure SOME rich people will pay more than SOME poor people. But even that statement is tenable at best. Certainly MOST rich people will pay less than an average family farm. Most rich people will pay less than an average person who owns a self sufficient rural homestead lot.

It’s not as bad as the libertarian “15/15/15 flat tax” that was making the rounds a few years ago, but that’s the best that can be said about it.

I like a lot of consequences of the LVT, like that if famously solves the downtown parking lot problem. But I’d never call it progressive. A progressive tax should tax people who own more wealth more than those who own less. If you tax someone who owns a multi million dollar hotel the same as someone who owns an empty lot next door all you’re doing is making it so that only the rich can afford lots. Then when they improve the lot to make more money you reward them by effectively taking a smaller percentage of their new found wealth.