ℕ𝕖𝕞𝕠 @ Nemo @slrpnk.net

I like American music. Do you like American music? I like American music, t

---

Read more

Posts

1

Comments

1,357

Joined

2 yr. ago

But they are acting like assholes when they say things like "trans hysteria". Combative and dismissive behavior is jerk behavior, so if you don't want people to call you one, don't act like one.

I did consider it in that light. This analysis is from the perspective of an observer, not the presiding body. Since the presiding body's reasoning cannot be known, we observers just look for patterns of removal to determine whether censorship is occurring. These are the pattern-markers I look for.

"Dead" is an adjective, modifying the antecedent of "he", not an adverb modifying "is".

Contrast "he is well", where "well" modifies "is" as an adverb vs. "he is good" where "good" is an adjective modifying "he". There's no grammatic signifier which is which beyond the modifying word itself, so you need to see whether it's in adverb form or adjective form.

"he died" describes an action

"he was dead" describes a condition / state / quality

I'd abandon the growth mindset as actively hostile to both society and the environment and instead focus on quality, efficiency, and sustainability.

The best defense is avoidance. To that end, a personal time-travel / prognostication device that could both predict danger and chronoport you back to before danger was imminent would be the ultimate defense, though suppose not strictly a "weapon".

"Wrong" can mean so many things.

Removing misinformation isn't censorship, for example. Similar with removing off-topic threads or comments.

Removing illegal content is censorship if the law is unjust (eg. political dissent restrictions) but not if the law is just (eg. CSAM removal).

Removing immoral content is way dicier, because morality is not fully mapped, and what one person thinks is immoral might seem perfectly moral to another (eg. blasphemy or profane language). I personally would not removed content I found immoral unless it violated community standards, and would consider such removals an overreach but not censorship unless it was selectively targeted at an individual or group.

I guess by my lights to be censorship it has to be:

• subjective
• unjust
• systematic

Removing something objectively incorrect or in the wrong place is not censorship. Removing something justly proscribed is not censorship.

Removing a thread when one viewpoint or group posts about it but not when another posts about it IS censorship.

"The buck stops here."

I feel like music, film, comedy, visual art, literature, all just keep getting better and better. I haven't seen anything I'd call a "peak".

Are... are there people who think of that time as a cultural peak?

If that's the bar, then yeah, we've had at least one since then and are due for another soon.

My most likely cause of death is the same as most men my age:

Falling off a ladder.

Kids see you reading an e-book, they don't know what you're doing, they just see you staring at s phone.

Kids see you reading a physical book, they see you're reading, and what you're reading. It helps foster a love of reading in them.

Income tax? No.

Sales tax? Yes.

milk and pastrami

They're for my kids, not for me.

Any bike rental that's not a flat fee is a ripoff.

If I have access to free food, I eat it. Doesn't matter if I'm hungry, as long as I physically can I will.

I was only broke and homeless for a little over a year, and now I always know wherey next meal is coming from, but I can't seem to shake the mindset of that low point in my life.

It got swept up in what it was doing.

I haven't had that problem here, ever.

My bestie married at sixteen. It was an elopement, though, they never got engaged.

Like most things by Philip K. Dick, the man who has more movies based on his writing than any other author?