No, we’re saying that maga thinks gay=bad which makes it funny

Powershell is nice for scripting things close to the (windows) OS. But (granted I’m not exactly some PS wizard, I’ve just used it a few times for minor things at work) I agree it often feels unnecessarily verbose and cumbersome. For example the fact that you need to define a whole function to alias even just a single command with parameters. And just overall I find it very hard to read (though maybe that’s on the guy that did the powershell stuff before me, I don’t have great sample size here).

But I’ll take what I can get.

Tbh I don’t really get why though. Clearly he’s good at getting people to listen, but… why?

Hitler was similar (except I’d say better looking) but listening to his speeches I at least get how he had crowds cheering. Trump could say things I agree with and I’d still not want to listen to him.

I’m the last person that will ever screech men are the issue because I hate nothing more than blanket generalizations. I do think the actual issue behind a lot of the sexism women face is male culture (depending on specific peers, of course, but common enough that I’ve seen it everywhere). Not quite toxic masculinity (though that’s part of it), but normalization of behaviour I would say is clearly wrong (most commonly some forms of sexual harrassment). There’s a disconnect there and I agree that saying “men are the issue” isn’t going to solve any of it.

But this image is still not saying “men are the issue”. I also think it’s hard to argue against it (or for it) with stats, since it’s about the dynamics of specific topics. Your gender or sex do not really change how much you are affected by idk general economic policy (effects of wage gap aside, but that’s its own issue and not inherent to anything). But for example abortion disproportionately affects women, so women should be overrepresented in related discussions. Similarly if you want to discuss, say, racial profiling, maybe you should actually include people that would be affected and not just the majority ethnicity.

And yes, in both those examples wealth is also a factor. But we can start with the things that are easier to control for - just in general trying to represent as much of society as possible, while focusing on the groups most affected by the particular issue.

I’ll go spell it out because people missing the point can’t possibly find it otherwise: The criticism expressed by the image (which iirc is either a direct quote from the show or was originally about a very similar issue) is not about who is for or against abortions, it’s about who shapes public discourse for a variety of issues, which tends to have a clear bias. Which then shapes the opinion of everyone.

With abortion in particular it probably originates more in churches than tv panels, but churches aren’t exactly known for gender diversity in leaders.

The liberals demonified by trump, however, are more like the party where many members put up resistance even in the face of violence - the SPD. American version of “liberal”, aka anything left of american center.

But yea neolibs will vote for anything if it makes them money in the short term.

If the character’s ethnicity isn’t directly relevant to the story or its message, why does it matter? People of all kinds of heritage live just about anywhere in the world, so a character being from some country doesn’t have to determine their ethnicity.

Training is the expensive part. There are also hordes of developers either developing the LLMs themselves or something to work with an LLM, and theyre often quite well-paid.

I don’t trust a random unsourced figure either but queries likely aren’t even half the total cost.

Dunno about his socials (because really I couldn’t care less who killed that piece of shit), but pretending the bullet engravings were anywhere near as clear as “heil hitler” would be can’t be serious. It’s more like if he had some random version of pepe engraved on them. Hints that he could be a groyper but by no means conclusive.

I mean yea that doesn’t surprise me in the slightest honestly, even outside of the number itself being pretty meaningless in the first place it’s very fuzzy what the actual dates are.

I never said it was the left lol, everything I said applies regardless of political leanings. Though in all likelihood there were at least some leftists that didn’t.

Also the commenters that were saying as much on this extremely left leaning platform are probably the ones mainly adressed by OP.

Both can be true. The major US parties are both rotten to the core and as such the leadership of the democrats has much of the responsibility for this, but people not voting are still fascism enablers, albeit to a lesser degree than those voting for trump for non-fascism reasons.

Voting third party is one thing, it’s the only way outside of revolution you’re going to escape from the established two parties. Not voting only signals apathy and the only explicit statement is “I’m ok with whoever wins, including the raping racist hitler v2”.

Average. It’s just an average. I haven’t verified whether the number is accurate (and often it’s probably debatable what qualifies as an empire and at what point it fell) but some empires lasting way longer does nothing to disprove 250 years being the average lifespan.

The second part of what you said is still entirely correct of course, that number has no real predictive capabilities for the collapse of the USA.

I never even thought it was that deep (idk if in other countries ppl go over it in school or something, I first heard of it online) so I never really understood how people are relating it to any economic system. All it’s saying to me is that one bad actor can be enough to ruin something for everyone - as far as I’m concerned it’s just prisoners’ dilemma in a larger group. So we need some way of enforcing that, if a shared ressource is vulnerable to singular bad actors (which isn’t all of them, e.g. some people abusing welfare doesn’t suddenly skyrocket costs), it won’t be abused.

Edit: just realized I forgot whether tragedy of the commons was about some few fucking up the pasture for everyone, or everyone slightly overusing it. The latter is ofc a bit different, but “ah I can cheat the system a little, I need it after all” isn’t an uncommon sentiment. That one usually just means you need a bit of a buffer, though, because most people won’t grossly abuse something. (And of course, it’s still quite independent of economic systems - regional software pricing for example is ultimately a capitalist thing to sell more, and yet would fall under this as it’s usually possible to get these prices from other regions.)

No, but they do all use their respective religion as a control tool, and all of them would have (had in khominis case) a harder time pulling off their respective atrocities without it. Organized religion is very easily abused.

The specifics of who gets fucked over in what way might also differ, in israels case it’s a geographical thing, but the other two could use any outgroup. Organized religion provides an easy way to find one. Sometimes even half the population (women).

Yes, but that doesn’t make the comparison to all countries with over 500 000 people meaningful. It’s specifically that part that seems dishonest to me.

Though I suppose it is also possible that the full data has a few states where incarceration rates are more around the global average, which then would actually have a point in including other countries. Those weren’t part of the image posted here though (which was also dropped without context as to why it was posted)

Edit: yknow it occured to me i could click the link and yea, some states are indeed more normal, though still kinda high. That’s really the interesting part far more than the top of the list.

Yes, but that is not how the graph is framed. It’s framed as “look, if we put US states on a graph with other countries, they have such a high incarceration rate that there are almost no countries even on the graph!”

If it was honest and just trying to compare the incarceration rate of US states amongst each other (and the national average) it wouldn’t be titled “[…] in U.S. states and all countries […]”. It’s a clearly manipulative title.

The reason that a graph with this title could maybe make a point if it was absolute numbers is that most U.S. states’ population is less than most countries, so if individual states were still high on such a graph, that would be shocking.

They are, and I agree it’s misleading. It’s implying that it’s somehow shocking that the individual states of the county with the highest incarceration rate in the world also have a high incarceration rate. If it was absolute numbers, it would maybe make a point. As it is, it’s stating the extremely obvious and framing it as “look, it’s even worse than you thought”.

Not sure how much the people you talk to about this care about facts supporting the argument but if they do, the US government spends by far the highest %gdp on healthcare out of any country in the world (https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/public-health-expenditure-share-gdp?tab=table), and people still go bankrupt from medical debt.

Now, in reality this figure is likely a bit skewed because well earning jobs (like doctors) in the US make obscene amounts of money (hello extremely high income inequality), but you don’t have to tell them that, and also the other argument still applies anyway.

To add something else, preventative care can often save costs compared to the ailments it’s trying to prevent. By making preventative care free, more people are likely to get it, reducing overall healthcare costs.

Yes. But the elderly get that money from past labor. Which does not contribute in the present. The entire system of retirement is built on the assumption that you work for more than 1 person until retirement to provide for the elderly (and well, also to provide for children) so that then, once you are retired yourself, the next generation will provide for you.

There being fewer children does feather the effects a little though.