Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)WH
Posts
1
Comments
196
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • This question is probably worth revisiting after 2024's election, since Trump may still have more mileage. A second term might be more dangerous than the first was. Assuming he doesn't win, then his legacy will mostly be all of the weird and slightly hard to measure changes to American culture, specifically conservative political culture.

    He generally seems to have made more dangerous ideas popular but also to have made getting a governing coalition together to actually enact those ideas more difficult by eroding the Republican party. Bush's foreign policy decisions seem to have been far more dangerous so I think I'd vote for Bush being the worst as of right now.

    That said, Trump still has a non-zero chance of bringing real American fascism into power so that would change things.

  • I think a big factor here is the size of the group you're working with. If you're frequently shooting down others and contributing no constructive alternatives in a working group of, say, 5 or fewer people... people are gonna get tired of your shit really quickly.

    Feedback as part of a larger scale effort can always be useful, though.

  • Settlers aren't the government, they're just private citizens taking people's homes from them. This all sucks. We're all losing. No one is winning when children are dying.

    We shouldn't have to constantly qualify every statement we make when we talk about this. Just a constant stream of tone policing while children are dying.

  • Are they doing that? It's an earnest question. The ships they hit may be only the ones marked as Ukrainian.

    Assuming yes, then my guess would be that other countries are trying to look the other way here to keep the war (or pretend that it's) as "cold" as possible.

    Both sides have incentives to avoid turning it into an open world war, so instead they do ridiculous stuff like this.

  • Targeting for the weapon itself is done by a human remotely at least right?

    ...

    ...right?

    *eta: yeah, it looks like it has a remote driver who can take over the steering and control the gun with a little PS4 controller thingy

  • I've seen theories that the attacks were timed and motivated to drive a wedge in the normalization talks between Saudi Arabia and Israel, which would also be a huge problem for Iran. So, yeah, seems like they would also have motive to fan those flames.

  • If they just say "experts," it gives the impression that there is a broad consensus in the field, which I'm not sure is the case here (cmv, I guess). If they just included that line after talking to like two people, that feels like a downgrade in quality from what I'd expect from AP.