AnonTwo @ AnonTwo @kbin.social

Posts

3

Comments

713

Joined

2 yr. ago

He really shouldn't. What the guy did was still legally wrong, and he probably knew it and weighed he would rather take jail time and commit it. A less scrupulous person could do worse things, which is why those laws are in place.

If he could somehow reduce the sentence that would be great, and if that is on the table he should, but some punishment should still occur.

He's a vigilante hero for what he did, but vigilantes are still criminals. The main issue here is that the punishment is clearly wrong, and the message is wrong, as the judge seems to think this is paramount to treason, which it isn't.

So the judge is in with trump. Hope none of his cases go that guys way.

Like yeah, he broke the law and needed to be punished. But it wasn't government secrets, which i'm pretty sure is already legally coded separately from this guys crimes, and also neither of which are treason, which would be the capital attack.

So the guy blatantly spoke against his own legal experience for a political swing.

I mean, I already did. You just didn't respond, Mr. Intelligence.

Why would he even need to read the article, if his entire post is responding to your counter arguments? You're already a step past the article.

It would look less embarrassing if you didn't actually write it, that's how bad it is.

should've just admitted to chatgpt. That paragraph makes you look old and disconnected. You made a lot of assumptions about people you don't know, and clearly don't know the current age you're in. It's not entitlement or some need for instant gratification. People are actually getting less than they got when you started working. And generally a lot of jobs are also expecting more, especially now that computers allow for deeper, more analytical, and less empathetic tracking of employee activity.

You leaked the code for when it's out of warranty

So really you're only playing moderator because you're for it, and don't want people to vote against it.

I mean, "obviously causing damage to our health"

The issue with that is the question "And do what?"

Like what matters is that you do something that is actually healthy for your body. Internet is if anything probably a step up from the age of couch surfing on the TV, since you at least need to actively navigate it. Mostly meaning to say that you could easily just choose something that isn't any better.

But either way you'd be better off just choosing something healthy to do, like exercise.

Basically we encompass everything as black/white socialism/capitalism

When pretty much every country (including the United States currently ) implements both.

And the problem is by demonizing socialism as the main economic structure, politicians basically succeeded in shaming people for any socialist policy they disagree with.

I mean,

I don't think psychology is meant to help people.

It's neutral, neither good or evil. While you can argue it's pretty dark how deep the psychology can go, it's hard to go into a deep evaluation of that.

I mean,

If it stops the war let him do it for the wrong reasons.

I don't think this will actually stop it, but i'm just saying.

I still use redirects to visit Reddit (I don't bother if they don't work), mainly because one of the main communities I track didn't really move here.
Does Youtube count? That's pretty much the only other thing I could think of.

First person games

I think Portal is the only one I'm fine with, probably because there's not as much action. First person puts me on edge and not in a way that I really appreciate. I also really like to be able to see the character in general.

To that end I also don't really like horror games, but I don't think that's as divisive an opinion.

I'm not

I can't even try using an alternative redirect because apparently all of them are blocked.

Was strict the default? I'd assume the standard would be the default.

I'd imagine if you were using strict you want the sites to break because you absolutely do not want fingerprinting. That kindof restriction usually comes with the breaking being expected.

Uhhh...that's not a meme, as the other guy said it's virtue signalling. I don't even know why you would fallback on it being a meme since people generally agreed with what you said.

If anything I think that makes you sound like an ass but that's just me.

You've never been in a car accident, but car accidents do happen, and frequently enough that there's still a very good chance it will one day effect you.

The same is not true for your election logic.

The numbers are actually pretty small, and ironically the group claiming there are voting issues (republicans) are the ones primarily getting caught doing it.

You're arguing based on a scenario that has historically never happened on a level where it has had an effect on any election, past present or even recent.

To be fair, I don't think there's harm in there being a voter ID, but there's no evidence of there being an issue for it not being there either. The biggest issue would likely be it would take time, and the world has to keep moving.

As long as Trump gets elected, it's money well spent I assume.