I’m guessing it’s whatever the next 7 poorest states are but hard agree they should list them

It would be very strange at this point to not see him be forced to spin them off. I mean, this is the trump admin. Anything is possible, but this is egregious (and also it would benefit musk if he was forced to do so)

Containment was a myth. They’ve been everywhere else the whole time. They’re just forced to keep quiet on sites with moderation. This is only positive

There is no policy which discord could enact that could protect children because they’re not in the room with the child. What they want discord and other websites to do is impossible and not their job

I mean, it would make no sense to call me a bot so yeah

Wait I’m confused. Did you just admit to being a bot account?

North Korea is balmy too. I just don’t get why anyone would risk it

Being South American doesn’t make it any less likely to be put into a concentration camp for jaywalking

Despite recent events, the camps weren’t built with holding North Americans in mind…

I mean I guess but I’m more disturbed by the fact that they have so much tourism given the fact they’ve had concentration camps for years

Who the fuck was going to El Salvador?

Joy… Thank you for your help

Weird. You called me evil when I suggested it as the correct way to pay creatives and everyone else. Maybe your problem with my argument is your own reading comprehension.

That’s what I was thinking! Except last time I heard it a decade ago there wasn’t any actual evidence and it was only antivax homeschool weirdos talking about it. I’d love to hear from anyone who read the actual study to see if this is real this time. Not about to trust the same people that ran “a glass of wine a day is good for you” at one point. US news doesn’t have actual science communicators and their popsci headlines are universally trash

Edit having now read the guardian article: only proved my point. The only thing they cite is the California prop 65 which is absolutely useless as evidence of possible harm. I’m genuinely asking for the real paper or someone who read it here because nothing from OP is of any use and the guardian doesn’t cite their sources (which sucks! because it might be genuinely dangerous and I have no idea! I don’t want to poison myself but this very well could be bullshit!)

Lololololololololol. No. Unless you have a massively expensive GPU, no. The image is not being generated by your device. It’s being generated by a mile wide server bank that churns through petrochemicals like a city all on its own. That’s the part of AI people are talking about when they reference it being bad for the environment. And if you do own a massively expensive GPU and generate AI images offline, you are not part of the conversation because your activities are an ounce in an ocean.

Are you suggesting we should feel bad about something here?

I mean… Russia would own Ukraine by year three of this war and wouldn’t be using WW2 munitions if they were prepared and strong. There’s something to be said about the Russian military preparedness

See, you have people like you all over saying “Linux just works” and then you have other users here saying “I have to spend an hour fixing my computer running one of the most user friendly distros every single time the power goes out”. I don’t know who to believe but both cannot be true simultaneously so which is it?

If you were in Thailand or China and you posted what you did, you’re even more of a moron than I thought.

I reject your false framing. You’re conflating society and the government in your question.

To answer the question I’m pretending you meant to ask: No, The government should not have the requisite monopoly of violence necessary to enforce speech laws. It is a human right. Any sanction should be exclusively received from society.

Except you can and projecting your beliefs onto others is the literal definition of society. You can’t not project your beliefs onto others

We are not bystanders. All societies are negotiated both within them between members and between members and observers outside. The idea that anyone should forgo their opinion on another culture is naive and asinine. You’re asking for all social exchange to stop in order to preserve an arbitrary set of rules in amber. The system you want to uphold as precious is both not real, and not valuable enough to justify the cost

Oh also, free speech is an inalienable right. In fact I’d go so far as to say learning it’s inalienable is how you learned the word inalienable. Free speech is a human right. Anyone anywhere who is limiting it is commiting a crime against humanity. The opinion of the people in charge doesn’t change that. That’s literally how inalienable rights work. So, no fucking clue what you were on about there

Also also, if you were Canadian, what trouble could you possibly get in being critical of Thailand? You’re either an insane coward or a liar for that one

Not being invested enough to engage isn’t pathetic, it’s the normal response. It’s not pathetic to not be chronically online my dude

I don’t doubt op has a stalker, but not commenting everywhere isn’t what makes them pathetic. It’s all the times when the stalker is engaging that are pathetic, not the times when they aren’t

Should or shouldn’t doesn’t matter. The majority wants an account that doesn’t require external verification.

Ignore the fact that that’s not truly possible. People will go to whatever platform makes them feel it’s true the best.

Being capable of effectively convincing people your platform will provide this is a baseline requirement to even start having this discussion. The anonymous Internet isn’t something most people want