Introducing meme technology earlier in the time stream could have disastrous consequences
just 10 or so people who are shit hot at their jobs.
Why would you want ten competent people when Deloite and McKinsey prove you can make way more money with a thousand incompetent people?
This is the Centerpoint strategy for maintaining the Houston electric grid
Practical alternatives
hard choices
:-/
Really feels like Vance is being set up as the fall guy to blame when trump loses.
He was the bag man for Cryptobros. Trump puts him on the ticket and the money flows into the Trump campaign.
Now it's looking like a raw deal, as Trump has to spend all that new money defending his hideous little troll of a VP.
“If he had just picked someone else as VP, he would’ve won!” -conservatives in five months
Missed a perfectly good opportunity to run a horny VP like Kristi Noem or Laura Boebert or Hope Hicks.
Still would have lost, but at least we wouldn't need Vance's mug all over the TV.
So you think it should be illegal?
I think it's an example of partisan language that ends up being blandly homophobic.
You’re entirely ignoring my point
Why would putting up a giant sign reading "My neighbor murders dogs for fun" be a tort but a mural to the same effect be protected?
where someone spreads nudes around as a way to punish their current or former partner
I would consider, as an example, a student who created a vulgar AI porn display of another student or teacher out of some sense of spite an example of "revenge porn". Same with a coworker or boss trying to humiliate someone at the office.
Think about a political comic showing a pro-corporate politician performing a sex act with Jeff bezos.
That's another good example. The Trump/Putin kissing mural is a great example of something that ends up being homophobic rather than partisan.
it’s perfectly legal for me to generate and distribute a fake ai video of my neighbor shooting a puppy
If you used it to slander your neighbor, it would not be legal.
written for Taylor swift and not a random high schooler.
In a sane world, class action lawsuits would balance these scales.
there are fair use exceptions specifically to prevent copyright law from running afoul of the first amendment
Why would revenge porn constitute fair use? This seems more akin to slander.
the poor were always preferred to be sent to die in wars.
That's not actually true
I’d say most religious, nonreligious and atheist people are not preaching their religion or opposing others
Most successful religious movements are explicitly evangelical. And it isn't as though religious debate is uncommon in society.
The number of hard core missionaries and zealots are in the minority, but their success is predicated on a large financial and political base back home.
So every group will have a majority of neutrals and subsets who aren’t.
For any group, you're going to have a "standard" view which will be the baseline. And you'll have deviation from that baseline by degrees of orthodoxy or heresy.
But standard doesn't mean neutral. You can have a predominantly Catholic or Hindu or Taoist community with very staunch beliefs and taboos. You can also have a very segregated religious environment, where Pakistani Muslims and Chinese Buddhists or Afghan Muslims and Soviet Atheists or Chinese Falun Gong and Chinese Confuscians both hold to their views rigidly, while feuding over public policy as a result.
The majority doesn't have to be neutral. There may not even be a majority, in a significantly pluralist community.
This comic is a deliberate effort to categorise atheists as: all being anti-religion.
A lot of the staumcher atheists I know are people who were raised and then rejected a family/community faith. I don't think that's an unfair conclusion, but it ignores the cause (social structures that produce a hard divide between these cohorts).
We're not all neutral. There's a lot of intense feeling around religion
It's not true, folks. The lying liberal media wants you to think he'd shag a settee. That he'd bone a book stand. That he's creamied on the credenza.
Don't trust them. My beautiful boy JD, he'd never do it! He's chaste with the chaises. He's never loved a loveseat.
My VP would never fuck furniture.
view more: next ›
Nobody ever posts the "Here's a teenage boy who has been beaten bloody by the Shah's secret police" photo from the 1970s
Neither do we get the "Meet the PhD student who graduated without a penny of debt" from the 2020s.
But the sepia photograph of a hot girl in a short dress? Literally the only evidence we have that Iran even exists.