1. Stop calling it “the fediverse”

Everyone wants to belong

Everyone wants allies, close friends, brothers and sisters they can rely on and love and support

In the modern world we have pale imitations and crap. There is no village, there is only a dim landscape through which we shuffle, largely alone.

And so there is craving for some substitute, because the under structure is unfulfilled

BOB: Well, when you have TIME magazine do a cover story on Palestinian rights you see that the perception of the problem is changing.

Any fuckin day now

The interfaces are relatively modern too, with VGA and a PS/2 keyboard.

Ha, yeah, I get it. “lol they gay” is usually a joke. In this case it is not, as you mentioned:

In Sparta […] the cropping of the bride’s hair and transvestism likely aimed to transform her temporarily into an adolescent Spartan boy – a less threatening figure to the groom, who probably had made his own transition to adulthood via a close emotional and sexual relationship with an older male

It is just what was up

I was being sarcastic but I was in no way whatsoever joking

Surrrre that’s the reason

I honestly cannot remember whether it was me or the other lefty guy that was comparing the US army to the Nazis. But yes, one of us was.

Super fuckin dystopian

You never played as the “bad guys”. You and your team on your screen were always American, 100% of the time. The terrorists you were fighting saw a presentation on their own screen that you were the godless terrorists, and they were the heroic Americans. No one was ever the bad guys. Except, some “other” in some distant place. But not you.

We had heated arguments at one place I worked when AA wanted to hire us for some short contract. The one side of the argument was, guys, they literally just want us to set up and configure one web service for them. I don’t think we’re gonna wind up killing anyone from the global south in the course of setting up that server. The other side, which I remember verbatim, came in the form of a heated retort:

“Would you set up a blah blah blah server for the NAZIS?”

There is a particular type of emotion which “The VVitch” and “Hereditary” get absolutely perfect. It’s actually not really my favorite type of movie; it’s not particular scary, per se, but it is just some stuff that is really awful that you don’t want to see. If you don’t want that, they may not be good, but if you vibe with that particular emotion they are hard to beat for it.

The HBO “Chernobyl” miniseries is absolutely straight-up horror. It has pretty much all the elements of a perfect horror movie, except it’s (with tiny exceptions and artistic licenses) all 100% true.

“As Above, So Below” is fairly good “normal” horror of a fairly unspicy flavor.

That’s honestly all I can think of that really does it well. Horror books in my experience are far better. “The Shining,” “Pet Semetary,” “Night Shift,” and “Skeleton Crew.” Also lots and lots of HP Lovecraft; the “Dunwich Horror” collection is wonderful.

Hope this helps.

He was a weird motherfucker in several different ways

He had money though. That’s the great thing about money; you can just kind of motor around with whatever priorities you want and for the most part no one intervenes or tells you to stop

Weird angel investor took us all out to a fancy dinner and made a weird extensive speech about the importance of the future; kind of “Godspeed my young protégés I know you’ll do wonderful things.” Kind of sounded like he finally believed in us and wanted to let us know with a nice gesture. Idk. No one could make any sense of it.

The next day his lackey informed us we were all fired. Oooh, that’s what that was about; makes sense, oh well, we have to get real jobs now apparently.

What the fuck is damn straight…

Brain: Hey I’m gonna use this time to rearrange wires. You don’t want to be around for this because the wires are you; we have a whole system to keep you out of the picture

Dude: I’m gonna do a hack so I can be in the picture

Brain: I don’t think that is a good idea

And lo and behold, it was not

Do you see any scenario where the IDF can allow itself to truly stop Innocent people? A soldier is being fired at from a school, should the soldier allow himself to get killed in such situation?

The whole concept is bankrupt. An IDF soldier is being fired at from a school because he is on Palestinian land, occupying it by force to maintain the land that was stolen from the Palestinians and facilitate the taking of more.

There are degrees. If he’s sniping schoolchildren, then that will inflame the conflict more and promote more October 7ths. If he’s “only” firing back at the school, so “defending” himself… well, it’s “better” I guess, but if you break in my house in the middle of the night and I attack you, you’re not “defending” yourself even if you limit yourself to fighting with me and not hurting my wife.

And vice versa, considering what you know about setlers in Israel, do you really think that they will not get even more violent in the west bank if they know that their actions has no cost?

Their actions don’t seem to have a cost though. Or rather the mechanism of retribution is so indirect and random that I don’t think that Hamas’s counterattacks make all that much difference to their calculus of what they can get away with doing to the Palestinians. I could be wrong, but that’s my impression.

And don’t get me wrong, I wish for Hamas to vanish, and I wish for the IDF to kill only militants (even that definition is not clear), just like you. But I don’t see any realistic scenario (considering the human spirit) that this can happen. Not in the current political situation.

Like I said, even “killing only militants” leaves Israel in the position of the war criminal. They are invading and stealing homes, farms, anything they can find and pushing the Palestinians into a vanishingly small series of refuges which they then invade in turn. Why would “militants” not fight back in that scenario? What should they do instead?

I do agree with your take on how unrealistic peace is in the present climate. It needs to be imposed from outside by force in order to happen, which won’t happen, because the US would need to be actively involved in making that happen and the US likes things more or less as they are (or at least as they were before the counterattack after October 7th got so genocidal that it started causing political issues for leaders in the US).

I don’t know a single person who was in the military who has good things to say about it.

After training, sure, they’re all for it. After doing the job for real (combat or not) and getting out, not a single time that I can remember.

I have a Brother MFC-J1205W and I’m super happy with it. Idk about the Linux support side, but it fits all the other requirements, it was pretty cheap, + so far for me it’s been super reliable, cheap ink, and very high quality prints.

I don’t disagree with any of that… the only part I was taking issue with was saying “there is a level of truth” that the armed forces of both sides are working for safety of both sides.

If the IDF stopped killing innocent people, it would dramatically increase the level of safety in the future for the loved ones of the soldiers. And likewise for Hamas.

I mean obviously having 0 Israeli military isn’t gonna work; I do get what you’re saying. But put it this way; if Hamas had disappeared entirely on October 6th, everyone on all sides would be a hell of a lot safer today.

without the auctions of their army their home will be at risk

Without Hamas’s recent actions, the home of the Palestinians would be at risk?

I think you gotta recheck your math on that one

And of course the same thing applies to Israel; without the IDF and settlers’ actions in Palestine, there wouldn’t have been an October 7th in the first place.

Yeah. I wouldn’t invest yourself too much in it. But yes, depending on things it might be worthwhile to just offer to let him put his money where his mouth is, if he’s super sure about things.

Offer to bet him money about the outcome of some real world event that is contingent on the way he is claiming that things are

IDK how you can apply that to AI; that’s not the best one. But you can bet that there are no workers dying of heatstroke in Amazon-supplier warehouses. You can bet him that Trump has agreed to honor the results of the election. Etc etc.

It’s very easy to just make statements at each other. If you offer to back up your statements, then he can either refuse (in which case it’ll be harder for him to say he’s definitely right and you’re definitely wrong), or agree and then one or the other of you will learn something.

It’s up to you. You can also just let it go. But if you want to prove him wrong it is easier to do with questions and real-world actions than it is by coming up with the perfect statements. As you’ve discovered, he’s not obligated to react to statements any way other than how he’s decided to react to them.