A lot of them are arguing in bad faith or have been brainwashed by the people that do. It is clear people can not only still protest, but protest far better with fewer worries and more effect under the lesser evil. These clowns would be complaining about the US winner-takes-all system of democratic governance if they truly cared, and there was only basically one option where protesting for that didn’t make you a potential deportee to El Salvador prisons.

Unfortunately, if it were only the president who’s corrupt, he would have already been impeached and removed. Even if there were a question about whether he does or does not want to become an authoritarian dictator, ignoring everything that is hinting at it, he is digging himself in the sort of hole that he can only survive in as long as he retains power and I’m sure he knows it.

The only thing you’ve argued is that you are choosing one particular definition of smart, ignoring the one I was using, and going all Grammar Nazi into how that’s the only possible definition. As I’ve said, if I am grateful for one thing, it is that I am not one of those people whose ego ^{is shallow enough to} has ^/have to be jizzing everywhere, including their perception of things.

They are. Unless you can translate what I’m saying to any language I tell you to on the fly, I’m going to assume that anyone that tells me they are smarter than LLMs are lower on the spectrum than usual. Wikipedia and a lot of libraries are also more knowledgeable than me, who knew. If I am grateful for one thing, it is that I am not one of those people whose ego has to be jizzing everywhere, including their perception of things.

“Maximally transparent” in the same sense that Musk is a “free speech absolutist”.

In the future: “Everything they had was repossessed by the jackasses associated to these assholes, but now we have freed them and crowdsourced society into compensating them for the stuff those jackasses enriched themselves with, so it’s all fine now.”

Imagine dreaming to fly to space only to be denied having it because you also cared about the rights of indigenous people.

The biggest enabler of these are those bundles you get with cable / Internet providers. Do yourself a favor and buy these individually if at all so you can stop the subscriptions at any time without worries.

I don’t think you realize just how fast lead acid batteries deteriorate when using their smaller charge capacities. In cars and many electronics they are used because they can be shamelessly charged to 100%, and they are supposed to maintain 100% or close to it. They require constant monitoring to be stored properly in a way that lasts. Using them up below 50% will decrease their lifespan significantly. Lithium batteries are quite different, they shouldn’t be charged to 100% but in turn they can use a greater amount of their charge while holding more of it without significant deterioration. They have significantly longer lifespans when used properly. Before we had gasoline cars we had electric cars that used lead acid batteries, there’s a reason they stopped being used.

What China wants to do is eliminate the older lithium ebikes because they were built with barely any safety regulation. To do this, they need to offer a cheaper option to their citizens, and the only way they can essentially do this without the original problem persisting is using lead acid batteries, because even a cheap lead acid battery with a cheap charger isn’t going to fail spectacularly like the lithium ones. LiFePO4 are far safer than lithium while still having higher energy densities, but you won’t see those get promoted because they would be costlier.

So what? Either reason is bad.

There’s a name for that. It’s called “karma”.

I tried to ask it how I could remove it, Gemini told me that in order for me to help it I needed to active some of the “smart” features I didn’t have active on my account, essentially helping do the opposite. It follows the ever increasing practice of trying to shove basically illegal behavior into “it’s just the algorithm, bro, there was no intent!”

I can’t be clearer either. The jury needs to have a sense of what they are participating in it, and “consider whether evidence confirms the defendant performed the acts they are charged with” is just another way of saying they have to determine something but disingenuously acting like it’s completely different. Grammar Nazis, people who will argue to oblivion about something, MAGAists, they all have one thing in common, they focus and overextend very limited but convenient interpretations in order to build walls around a context that suits them.

“Juries are required to perform determinations based on a system of ethically based laws and justice. That does not require a sense of ethics and justice.”

Try again.

By that logic, why bother with democracy and not trial by combat?

The problem with your logic is that you assume jurors don’t have a sense of ethics and justice. If they truly don’t, then forget the judiciary as a problem, because the society itself isn’t going to hold up. So in that way, applying your logic here and under that assumption you are right, why bother with democracy and not trial by combat when people no longer care about acting in good will?

Jury nullification doesn’t really exist. It’s just an attempt to label something the jury decides that you believe goes against the law. The fact is, the jury is part of the law, and the jury can decide what parts of it are relevant, are enforceable in the case, and which need special considerations. Complaining about “jury nullification” is complaining about one of the fewest democratic elements in the judicial system, a system that on its own is almost completely autocratic and as such that much more susceptible to the formation of oligarchies and nepotism from within.

In other words, they be searching for new jobs.

I’m guessing this push to prepare the network for politization comes either to normalize the way Xitter has behaved and/or possibly substitute it in case Felon Musk is able to get it banned in Europe. It’s so ridiculous that this comes after all their effort from the US to ban TikTok, like, y’know you were the ones to create the precedent to ban social networks doing shit like this across international borders … right?

In this century, there could never be an Anne Frank. Thank social networks.

But what is your mobility as one of its workers? What other social networks can they begin working for realistically in such a small market? Maybe that’s the way to fight against Zuckerberg’s and Musk’s attempts to turn their networks into propaganda tools for the highest bidder, to encourage disgruntled workers to start their own social networks and then go support them as well. I would seriously consider paying for an adequately moderated ActivityPub alternate that truly respected its users, was truly transparent, focuses on high quality content, and prevented brigade agenda pushing.