slg

19 ms·

421.
by slg 1y ago
>The way to prevent authoritarians from abusing power is to not elect them, and to throw them in jail when they violate the law. This was the true motivation for my comment. It's futile trying to design your laws to withstand the d
422.
by slg 1y ago
It's weird how many people's perception of this type of behavior is shaped by the person sitting in the White House. EDIT: It's also weird how my comment is being perceived exclusively as criticizing the critics of this admin
423.
by slg 1y ago
Your logic is built on the common misconception that the only ad that has any value is the last ad you see before purchase.
424.
by slg 1y ago
I don't know anything about you and I understand the desire to not dox yourself. However, just a friendly tip, the way you are talking about your identity and how it has led to persecution against you while simultaneously avoiding giv
425.
by slg 1y ago
It’s wild to complain about liberals’ hypocrisy of suppressing speech while defending Elon of all people, the most prominent “free speech absolutist” hypocrite there is.
426.
by slg 1y ago
>These deals are also being done in the open with publicly traded companies. Investors can see the balance sheets and react accordingly in the stock price. I'm no expert on the specifics of the circular financing we're seeing h
427.
by slg 1y ago
This idea that something can't be confirmed as true unless a court says it is bizarre and totally antithetical to the idea of journalism. Journalists are not court stenographers. Sometimes it is entirely reasonable to call someone a m
428.
by slg 1y ago
>You used to be able to get news that at least tried to be unbiased, that wasn't openly pushing a narrative. That made it possible to form a more accurate (though not totally accurate) view of what was actually going on. Part of the
429.
by slg 1y ago
As someone once said "Because of thousands upon thousands of documented accounts from eyewitnesses and participants".
430.
by slg 1y ago
From the Cambridge Dictionary[1]: >war criminal >noun >someone who commits war crimes: >- He was a Nazi war criminal. "Commits" not "convicted". If I had to summarize my point it would be "you're ob
431.
by slg 1y ago
>Because of thousands upon thousands of documented accounts from eyewitnesses and participants? Then why can't you accept the "thousands upon thousands of documented accounts from eyewitnesses and participants" of him comm
432.
by slg 1y ago
> They can certainly point out that he was the leader of a group that was systematically killing millions of people with physical or cultural attributes he deemed undesirable and people will reach the same obvious conclusion about him. H
433.
by slg 1y ago
That’s interesting, although that seems to be a different usage than OP mentioned. It seems to be used interchangeably with headphones as it’s also being used to describe cables and jacks.
434.
by slg 1y ago
That is a silly standard. Hitler was never convicted of war crimes, would you object to someone calling him a war criminal?
435.
by slg 1y ago
Some people are of the opinion that the world is flat, I would say it's objectively round. That is the context in which I'm using that word. I'm not using it to describe 100% consensus, because there will always be someone
436.
by slg 1y ago
>So it gives the appearance of “opinionated news is good, so long as the opinions are correct.” All news is opinionated news and some opinions are objectively better than others. For example, the simple act of choosing which story to co
437.
by slg 1y ago
Another example of us being separated by a common language. I don't think this has ever been common in the US.
438.
by slg 1y ago
I'm not sure if this is a "when did people start" situation. I have never heard a layman use "earphones" in casual conversation.
439.
by slg 1y ago
>speech that signals hostility to enforcement naturally places a person in an adversarial category Yeah, and that idea is fundamentally in opposition to free speech. A person shouldn't become a government adversary because of their
440.
by slg 1y ago
You're acting like we can't see your original comment anymore. The words are right there, "If you call lawful arrests 'kidnappings'". You weren't referencing any crime or investigation, you said that the
441.
by slg 1y ago
You specifically said "If you call lawful arrests 'kidnappings'". You're either excusing or endorsing the government sending armed goons to people's homes in response for saying something you/they don&#x2
442.
by slg 1y ago
That is highly debatable. Stories about "politics, or crime" are allowed if "they're evidence of some interesting new phenomenon"[1]. I'm not sure what to make of the word "interesting" there, but t
443.
by slg 1y ago
This is the side that claims to be the champions of free speech?
444.
by slg 1y ago
Currently, number 1 on the front page. I expect it to drop in minutes. EDIT: 3 minutes. That is how long it lasted after my comment before it was flag killed. I truly wonder what the line will be for all the technolibertarians and the &qu
445.
by slg 1y ago
> What happens when everyone recognizes that the whole thing has turned into a money laundering grift? Part of the problem is that this seems to describe most of the economy now. Maybe not specifically money laundering, but it’s all a gr
446.
by slg 1y ago
>When I send an email that isn’t bounced back, or better yet, get an auto reply with a ticket number, I’m a lot more certain it’s going to get read. An "auto reply with a ticket number" is not a feature of email, it is somethin
447.
by slg 1y ago
>I don't think that people are afraid that he will become a dictator because of his popular support so much as because no one is standing up to his abuse of power. This is frustratingly self-reinforcing. Why is "no one... stan
448.
by slg 1y ago
>Once the army fires on peaceful protestors For what it is worth, this weekend was roughly the 7th or 8th peaceful protest I have attended so far this year. It was the first in which I did not directly see a government employee firing s
449.
by slg 1y ago
Try reading the whole sentence next time. I specifically chose to not use the percentage of votes cast because inconsistent turnout changes the denominator in a way that can be misleading. The numbers you cited imply that Trump got more p
450.
by slg 1y ago
>> ostensibly apolitical corporations >Oh, you sweet, summer child. As someone who has spent decades having written conversations on the internet, it really seems like basic reading comprehension skills have plummeted recently. It

More ›