It won’t. Nobody inside the leftist bubble (blue sky, Reddit, etc) is seeing anything other than the celebratory posts. So for them, celebration is normal and right. None of them are thinking “this is wrong - it was wrong to kill him and wrong to gloat” because they’re getting a very very strong signal that it’s all right and good
If they saw you being upset they would be genuinely confused …then they’d label you a nazi and start advocating for your death too
This is what I was trying to explain to people when the whole u-turn murder happened. White people were shocked. But to an Indian, obeying a rule when you can get away with breaking it is a given. They always cheat. They always scam. As you said, they think that’s a virtue
I expect those people are middle-class
Counterpoint: they will happily pack 50 of them into a four bedroom house, which means they can afford a middle class house without being middle class.
The bottom line is that they all need to go back.
I was about to disagree with you and then I remembered that bald guy who Biden put in charge of nukes who was stealing luggage. He wasn’t even trying to be an attractive woman. He was trying to be in-your-face ugly.
And there are examples of men with thick beards who put on bright red lipstick. You’re right. They’re being ugly on purpose
So let's say I pay $50 for a silver coin and I mail it to this guy.
He now wants to use my donation to buy real estate. The bank does not take silver coins. So he has to sell the coin to someone. How much will he get for it? Maybe $30?
So your plan results in a 40% overhead?
I don't believe I said that?
I'm sorry to have to contradict you, but you did in fact say it.
You think the Apollo landings were fake. But wait, there are records of the landings. There are, for example, photographs. You obviously think these records are fake.
...but also, your point in this thread is, "they didn't keep certain records! That proves it's fake!" Therefore, you think not having records proves it's fake.
So yes, my characterization of your position is accurate. Your position is self-contradictory. You think that records are fake, and at the same time, you think that not having records is evidence that it's fake.
are you really saying it's NOT weird
"weird" is zoomer girl talk. Please say something more meaningful. What exactly do you think was destroyed? Please don't link me to a news story (spoiler: I'm already well aware of it). I want you to say in your own words what you think happened.
What specifically do you think was the value of the records that were destroyed?
Don't say "lolol it's weird! Its so weird and creepy lolol!!"
Say something like, "the following records were destroyed: _______. As a result, we cannot know _______ (some fact about the missions)"
This rigor that I'm demanding of you is the difference between a fly-by-night idiot who looks at something with no depth of understanding and declares, "that's weird" and someone with the intelligence and determination to actually get to the truth. Which one are you?
I think you really have to have natural selection at work to kill off (or least, prevent from reproducing) those who don't accept the changes in a culture.
We'd be in a much, much better place as a species if there wasn't a taboo against offering losers money in exchange for sterilization. Think how many welfare queens intentionally have 4 or 5 children! 100% of them would have taken a deal where they're offered the same amount of money for life but they have to get their uterus removed.
But leftists recoil in horror at that idea. I ask, "why" and they can't explain why, beyond some vague feeeeeeeling. So I think they're just racist. They hate whites and love blacks, and the only actual reason they oppose this is because they know that blacks would happily take the deal.
This country would be basically crime free if we had done this for a full generation. And the cost to the taxpayer would actually be less.
this was intended as a mockery?
yup. There was lots of reporting about it at the time. The left thought it was some hilarious "own" because they think masculinity and strong men are "toxic"
Here's an example: https://people.com/politics/donald-trump-emperor-statue-in-italy-carnevale/
Keep in mind, these are the same people who think Starship Troopers is some brilliant takedown of fascism. If you start questioning them about it thought, they retreat to meaningless bullshit like, "JuST lOOk aT tHE uNIfOrmS!!"
I'm sure you've seen the study that found that leftists care more about inanimate rocks and motionless trees than they do their own kin.
All of these things are related. Leftists are broken, broken people.
White people act surprised when non-whites ignore rules. They scam, or the make illegal u-turns because they can. You tell them there's a rule against it, and they look at you puzzled. "Why would I obey that rule?" they ask.
The only high-trust societies that have ever, or will ever exist, are white and east-asian. Everyone else will scam and cheat whenever possible.
I still can't believe this was intended to mock Trump ..and it's the most badass thing ever: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cwrswvqv8sY
Maybe that should be against the law too.
They (the courts) are saying that a website is a whole product, and you don’t have the right to alter it. An ad blocker alters it … removing something you would otherwise see.
A TV show is a whole product, and a mute button alters it, removing something you would otherwise hear.
But how did the people arguing the case fail to make the obvious analogy to a mute button on a TV or fast-forward on a VCR? It’s the exact same principle. The content creators made a product that includes ads, and mute/fast-forward/ad-blockers remove part of it.
I get that the judges are boomers but how did nobody make that case to them?
Leftist: “release the Epstein files”
Me: (smiling) “first time?”
We’ve been calling for the release of the files for a while now, and still are. You were silent when Biden was president. So you really don’t have any moral high ground here.
Here’s what I think; it’s the only thing that makes sense to me: Epstein was an Israeli intelligence asset and the Israeli government made a credible threat against the United States in order to protect him. I don’t believe that Trump is in the files himself and yet the dems didn’t leak anything about him, and he openly called for the release of the files all this time.
That’s what happens when you train it on Reddit and reinforce any leftist tendencies it may have.
I remember when Microsoft Tay happened and people on the right (/pol/ for example) were circle jerking saying that AI will always be right wing because our positions aren’t bullshit. I tried to tell people that AI will be whatever you tell it to be. I said that silicon valley will most definitely create an SJW AI and I was right.
At least now we can see it clearly and react to it instead of deluding ourselves
platforms
There’s the ultimate problem. We accepted the idea of YouTube as a platform. It doesn’t have to be that way. You could have your own website, post your videos to all video hosting services (including YouTube) and engage with your supporters only through your website.
It will not start to replace a lot of blue collar work simply due to how much cheaper is will be to have a human pulling levers on a tractor than making specialized guidance software
For the AI we have now, you’re right. A human is cheaper and more versatile.
I don’t know how close we are to AGI but when we get that, the math will change. Theoretically, all it takes to teach a “general intelligence” to do a job is the same effort or less that it takes to teach a human.
That means if you have a humanoid robot of the kind that already exist today you can get it to do any job by showing it how to do it, like how you’d show a new employee. Now the question is if the cost of the robot plus electricity over the life of the robot is less than the cost of a person.
Let’s say you pay a human $40k to work on a farm, running a tractor and so on. Maybe the robot costs $100k. Electricity for the whole year is certainly under $5k. So three years with the human costs $120k. Three years with the robot costs $115k.
Four years with the human costs $160k. Four years with the robot costs $120k
We’re all in trouble here. I’m not sure what the solution is. I feel certain the elites are doing this math too and dreaming of a day when both the farm worker and the farm owner/manager are AI and they no longer have to put up with us lowly serfs.
It's so weird to me that the top response is asking for context, and we're not 3 replies down and nobody has correctly quoted the joke.
"A young man is injured in a car accident. The doctor says, 'this is my son' but the doctor is not, in fact, the young man's father - how is this possible."
You left own "not his father" and therefore your version isn't a riddle.
They're human beings, not mere animals
This is the logical fallacy known as “special pleading.” My assertion is true. The default assumption is nature. It’s totally fine if you want to present an argument that a particular behavior is nurture, but that ball is in your court.
if you see a cat barking like a dog, the logical assumption is that it was raised with dogs and not that it has barking genetics.
That’s logical … but notice, that cat is breaking the pattern - it’s an exception
Above, we were talking about patterns. And now you’re raising an exception.
Furthermore, when you find a cat barking you should not merely assert that it must be nurture. What you should do is start with the assumption that it’s nature, and then disprove that by, for example, finding out if the behavior is only exhibited by cats raised by dogs.
My position here is logical and has survived several challenges. I hope you can admit that.
We agree that Jews (indeed, all races) have certain behavioral tendencies. The default explanation is their relatedness to each other (genes/nature). If you believe otherwise that’s totally fine. But you need to present an argument (show that some of them are raised by dogs who bark, and that the behavior only manifests in those).
If you make another reply where, instead of presenting such an argument, you continue to claim that my position (that nature is the default explanation) is not true (and that therefore you are allowed to assert that the explanation is nurture without an accompanying argument) then I’ll have to assume you have no such argument
That Reddit post is one of those situations where they think they’re so clever, but none of them has put any thought into it. If you rolled into that thread and asked them to explain it to you, they would just downvote you and ban you.
That’s also why there’s no leftists going onto campuses and doing what Charlie did. They’re not capable of defending their beliefs.