paintbucketholder @ paintbucketholder @lemmy.world

Posts

0

Comments

202

Joined

2 yr. ago

And that's hardly a good thing either.

That's my use case as well.

Just find a carrier you like for the country you're traveling to, download the eSIM, and you're ready to go.

All while keeping the physical SIM card of my regular, domestic carrier in the SIM card slot.

This simple issue was a major hassle before eSIM cards existed, and now it's the easiest, most convenient thing in the world.

Chutkan has other options besides a gag order with a threat of jail if Trump doesn’t comply. She could summon Trump to court and admonish him directly, subject him to escalating fines with each confirmed violation, or threaten to move up his trial.

Alright, let's see some of those consequences.

It's completely preposterous that Trump can keep breaking rules, laws, regulations and court orders with impunity because the entire nation is too fucking scared about what might possibly happen if we held Trump to the same fucking standard as everybody else.

That's an argument, sure.

It just doesn't make a lot of sense to me, at least if presented as an argument criticizing Israel.

"We want kids to see all the atrocities committed by our side, but none of the atrocities committed by our enemies" would at the very least be an unconventional approach to war time propaganda.

You know what I'm getting at?

OP is implying parents should be ok with Israeli violence, but not ok with Palestinian violence.

Parents should want their kids to see violence committed by Israel, but they should want their kids to not be able to see violence committed by Palestinians?

Why?

Because they were removed, I'll type up the sanitized version: the parent comment is pointing out the author of the article is singling out Palestinian violence, but is ignoring the violence, the genocide, being carried out by the Israeli government and the IDF.

You're still not making sense.

If this is a pro-Israel, anti-Palestinian propaganda plot, then why should parents want their kids to see the violence, the genocide, that is being carried out by the Israeli government and the IDF, but not the atrocities and the terrorism committed by the Palestinians and by Hamas?

Wait, I don't get this argument.

You're saying parents are cool with it if their kids see atrocities committed by Israel, but as soon as a Palestinians terrorist group commits atrocities, parents don't want their kids to see it - implying parents want to protect the reputation of Hamas?

This is what we get for not enforcing the tax code and basic business regulations (like "don't commit fraud") on the rich.

Trump's tax fraud schemes have been public knowledge for decades, but apparently it's not possible to prosecute these things when the fraud reaches amounts of 7+ figures.

Google already did this.

However, the onus to mitigate problems created by one company shouldn't be their on competitors.

Apple launched AirTags alone, leveraging its massive Find My network, in order to have an immense advantage in the market, and this helped Apple rake in millions and millions of dollars.

It could have coordinated with Google even before the AirTag launch, but this would have probably resulted in missing out on millions in profits. So Apple chose profits over mitigating ethical and moral concerns, and only fixed problems a long time after it started selling the product to customers.

Maybe because you're not looking?

There's even a link directly in the article, giving a timeline of MTG harassing, threatening and spreading lies about Ocasio-Cortez - and no, the timeline doesn't end with MTG being elected.

Where, in this case, "anger issues" translates to "was scheming to overthrow the government and install Trump as dictator."

The fucking media is really doing whatever it can to whitewash these insurrectionists' reputations.

Because he still has a decent chance of becoming President Chucklefuck again and living out his dream of making America a dystopian nightmare under his totalitarian rule.

The breathless, unfiltered reporting of any inanity coming from him is a different issue, though, and it's mostly the media that is to be blamed for it.

If Twitter is doing business and earning money in the European Union, then it has to abide by national law - just like any other business operating in the EU.

In a scenario where Twitter doesn't comply with the law, the European Union can fine Twitter, appropriate earnings from the European market, sue in the United States or invoke bilateral agreements, file for extradition, or shut down Twitter in the EU via IP ban and having the app removed from the various national app stores. Google and Apple will comply for their app stores, and European providers will comply regarding an IP ban. Some people might still be able to figure out how to access Twitter via sideloading and VPN, but it would effectively destroy Twitter's business in the European Union.

So yes, there's a lot the EU can do.

And only 23 percent of Israelis voting in the last elections voted for Netanyahu.

That's only half as much as Trump got in the popular vote in 2016.

Trump swore a presidential oath to “preserve, protect and defend” the Constitution, but the text of the 14th Amendment says it applies to those who have sworn oaths to “support” the Constitution, Blue pointed out the sematic difference in an Oct. 6 filing in the case.

Both oaths “put a weighty burden on the oath-taker,” but those who wrote the amendment were aware of the difference, Blue argued.

“The framers of the 14th Amendment never intended for it to apply to the President,” he wrote.

Absolutely despicable.

That's a lawyer arguing that a president is free to engage in insurrection because of a semantic difference between the 14th Amendment and the wording of the Oath of Office sworn by the president.

All of these people are fine with America descending into a totalitarian dictatorship, presumably thinking they're the clever ones who would be doing the dictatoring.

No that was an observation.

An observation about the argument is part of a debate, an observation about the person that is making the argument is an ad hominem.

It's literally the definition of "ad hominem."

In that regard, your defense that you were merely making an observation is irrelevant. It's relevant what you were making an observation about.

I'm not judging you for it, I don't think you're of poor character due to it.

Again irrelevant, and I don't particularly care either way what you may or may not think about me.

The relevant point is that instead of tackling the argument that was being made, you decided to instead attack my comprehension.

That's an ad hominem, an attack on the person you're having a conversation with.

I'm not complaining about that, by the way, I'm merely providing you with an explanation since you're apparently ignorant - i.e. lacking the knowledge - of what does and what doesn't constitute an ad hominem.

You, on the other hand, are the one complaining about being attacked after bringing the conversation down to a level of ad hominem attacks, and you seem to be interested in maintaining that low level of discourse by throwing in another ad hominem here.

So my suggestion to you would be: either refrain from attacking other posters and focus on the arguments they're making, or try not acting insulted when you're being treated the same way that you're treating others.

Of course, I'd be happy to!

It was when you questioned my comprehension of the argument that was being made instead of the argument itself by saying "you just haven't understood the position."

That's literally an ad hominem.

So why does he insist on being called "Coach" instead of "Senator?" Why is the "Coach" title more important to him than the title that comes with one of the highest offices in the United States?

Is he trying to show that he's just a common man, a man of the people, the common clay of the new West - while he's single-handedly impeding the readiness of the United States Armed Forces?

I just had that conversation with a group of adults who all had iPhones and were unwilling to add non-iPhone people to a group or change messaging apps.

The reasons given were:

• My iPhone is too old, I can't install another messaging app.
• I'm not going to install another app where I have to remember another password.
• Messages don't go through when we add a non-iPhone user to the group.

The conclusion by the group was "just buy an iPhone!"

And that's a group of adults. I can't imagine the bullying and peer pressure teenagers have to face over something as idiotic as messaging apps.

High density housing specifically dedicated to housing homeless people also seems like a really bad idea.

We have many, many decades of experience of segregating socially disadvantaged people into high density "projects," and it never led to any desirable results.

Much better to set aside a certain quota of new high density housing for socially disadvantaged people, one apartment at a time, and give people the opportunity to integrate with a community without the stigma of giving them an address in the undesirable stigmatized "projects."

You have to admire Trump's narcissistic skill to make literally anything about himself.

Largest terrorist attack the world has ever seen outside of 9/11, thousands of civilians dead both in Israel and in Gaza?

Why, yes, of course known fraudster and rapist Trump is the true victim here!!