Skip Navigation

Posts
6
Comments
866
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • We should be black and white federate defederate we should establish some rules here are some i would like to submit:

    No single direction federation No pushing ads

    We also need something to prevent a single instance becoming a monopoly on the fediverse but idk how we are going to implement that

  • Look i hate the man. But nuclear power is the best possible energy solution we have. Nuclear energy can fix all elecyricity related global warming issues we have in a reasonable acheivable world saving timeframe.

    But here we are associating what could be earths only hope of stopping the climate fuckup with the molerat man.

  • Bro the isralis and palestinians are killing eachother taking a side is immoral

  • Its a contravercual idea but it makes perfect sence to me. I fully support this as an excellent compromise

  • Wait till you hear about reverse cyxling air conditioning it exceeds 100% efficiency.

  • What models have u foubd to surpass 3.5? Any outpaced gpt4 yet?

  • Has europe finaly realised the russian threat? A more cinical person would say its cos once ukraine recaptures crimea they have mad oil and europe is in desperate need of oil independance from russia.

  • Evwn if u are a self entitled asshole who cares nothing fof the ukrainian people the worse case cenario of them joining is u get a beutiful country to visit on holidays. Not to mention the whole more people more economy more betterer.

  • Take care when recruiting 4chan they would love to oppertunity fo fuck with zucc but they would hate being used as pawns even more. Idk if rossman would bite tho?

  • Because there are limits to freedom of expression when it infringes on other people's rights.

    Did u read my second sentence?

    I'm not deffending explicit threats in any way.

    A threat is only as strong as u are to back it up. Hence ur bank example is either irrellevent i.e. no credibble backing or if they have a weapon (credible enforcement) then thats the crime not not the speach.

    The issue of implicit threats is its completely subjective hence literature is classifed as an art not a science. Whos the judge of how words and context get interpreted sounds very authoritarian to me.

    If u think of it in a more abstract way whats the difference between the government restricting how im physicly allowed to move my own limbs and the government telling somone they can't get an abortion? How can u possibly justify restricting my fucking body?

    Heres the hot take u can get mad at: What sort of a weak motherfucker do u have to be to feel threatened by a hand gesture? Go live on the ukrainian russian border or try being a muslim in china. There are fatter far eviler fish to fry than some insecure neo nazi ahirbag making a hand geature. Lets stop the current genocides before we start arresting people for thought crime cos they might potentialy one day start a genicide of their own.

  • they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols.

    Which is nolonger words and as im sure u would agree with that.

    We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant.

    That doesnt sound like use it to me that sounds like well let em have their speach but retain the right to supress them via bigger stick deplomacy. What does he mean by supress them? supress the ideology? people are gonna go speach regardless of if the speach is illegal. Or does he mean arrest anyone explicitly calling for violence (thats where i draw the line)? Or does he mean put em all in a train to poland?

  • We live in a democracy do u have so little faith in the people of society that u think a majority will support such violence? A government is defined as the power holding a monoply on violence within a region. Either the government will stop the violence since they hold the monoply. Or the government is committing the violence in which case it would be a democratic decision and we fall back to the do u have such little faith in ur fellow human that such a government would be ellected.

    How does banning speach and symbols prevent houses being firebombes schools being shot up churches masacred its not like the people who do such things respect the law about not saying shit, they gonna say it anyways even if it is illegal.

    The USA has plenty of fucked people who go around saying that sort of shit proudly. They dont have the sort of violence u speak of. They got a gun problem not a nazi problem us aussies pretty much solved the gun problem years ago.

  • Imo nobody wants whats best for society people only want whats best for themselves thats just natural selection, cooperation comes about as a product of mutual benefit hence we live in a reletivly safe and reasonable society. The more society aligns with interests of the individual the heigher the incentive for the individual to want the beat for society. Thats why democracy is such a good system.

    I know they don't plan to stop at voicing opinions but the second they step over the line and enact violence ship em off to prison or ideally rehabilitation.

  • "I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be unwise." - Karl Popper

    Banning certain kinds of speech doesn't prevent the thought behind it. The speech will continue, it just won't be where you can police it.

  • I beleive very strongly in equality, even for evil fuckers. I also believe its our juty to ignore them and encorage others to do the same.

  • First they came for the xyz, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a xyz.

    And yes i get the historical context behind that funny how u can apply it to everyone.

  • So i draw the line before war, mass murder, and violance u obviously draw it before free expression.

  • If we dont let our enemies have freedom of expression why should we have it. If he was explicitly calling for violence arrest him but an offensive hand guesture is just hurt feelings.

  • The day public transport is cheaper and faster than driving ill do that. I suspect we aint gonna ses that for many many years