It’s even neater. The name of towns/cites cannot be trademarked. The safest thing you can do when naming a project is naming it after a town so you don’t run into legal troubles in the future.
You can eventually trademark once you get big enough. As with all things law it’s a bit tricky. However, the default is that geographic locations aren’t trademarkable.
Yup, 100% with the sign. Last I checked, it’s not like in order to be Jewish you have to kill children, in fact I’m pretty sure the religious texts promote love and compassion. Therefore saying “I fucking hate child killers” is not synonymous with “I don’t like Jewish people” because that venn diagram is not a circle, and child killers and sponsors of genocide are not a religious group.
I’m on the opposite side of the world to the conflict, a large number of synagogues and Jewish groups in my country are flooding to social media to condemn the needless deaths, and speak out against the actions of both Israel and Hamas on how they have both decimated innocent lives. So I’m in agreement with my local Jewish community and support what they are doing, and I don’t see how that could be antisemitic.
Man I never had a Twitter account to begin with, lol. Any Internet site that wants my ID can eat a dick instead because I will straight-up close that tab and 360 moonwalk right out the door.
Printers are the text book examples of why device manufacturing shouldn’t be left to big companies. You have tracking dots, spyware infestation, subscription for ink/toners, reporting of the cartridge as empty when you still have much left in it, refusal to print when unused color cartridges are empty, intentional bricking if 3rd party cartridges or ink is used, and utterly crappy firmware in general.
Inkjets require precision manufacturing. But assembling it or other types from components should be possible - like how desktops, mechanical keyboards, etc can be. We really need to ditch filthy mass market printers because DIY printers will be much better than anything they offer.
I do think it shoukd be left up to (potentially big) companies; however, we should put restrictions on e.g. ink cartrige compatibility, just like what the EU is trying for smartphones and messagin right now.
It’s insufferable that the answer is always “build your own.” Lemmy assumes that every single person on the planet is an engineer with enough free time to design, build, and troubleshoot every device they own.
It’s based in rugged hypercapitalist bootstrap thinking. If something is broken just do it yourself! Even though that’s never realistic, and even if it were, no one person can or should be expected to do everything.
It was requested by the secret service as a countermeasure for counterfitting. More frequently it’s been used to “catch other criminals”, at least that’s what they say.
I fucking hate my Roku Tv. One of my roku TV became unusable after software update. Can’t be rolled back. I’m just stuck with a perfectly fine screen and shit software. And yes even connecting another device via HDMI is an issue because the TV restarts randomly for “updates” while watching external sources.
You can, but don’t forget to also block other outbound DNS connections in your firewall. Lots of “smart” devices are hard coded to use 8.8.8.8 regardless of what DHCP says. Pihole won’t stop those, so you have to block it at the firewall.
No, you can’t. I’m running pihole and have a TCL Roku tv connected via HDMI to an Apple TV, and the ROKU APP RECOGNIZES CONTENT FROM IT and makes the suggestion, overlaying it OVER THE HDMI STREAM.
I have an old Roku Express or something similar and love it. It has an RF remote and a very responsive UI. But it is slowly becoming crappier with the infrequent updates.
Those channels precisely. They get ad revenue when you watch it on their channels. If they can get Roku to bring them traffic, Roku would charge for that. No engineering effort goes unpaid.
This was always legal. I’m an attorney, I do not represent any Trump supporters. If a client says something favorable about trump, they are no longer my client. They are just too stupid, judgement too poor, don’t understand difference between reality and fantasy. They make the absolute worst clients.
I’m not sure about discrimination against customers based on ideology, but I’m pretty sure you can’t discriminate against customers based on protected class (sex, race, orientation, etc.) What this supreme court case does (IIUC) is that companies are now allowed to not provide services to protected classes if those services constitute speech. So if you are a restaurant owner, or a hotel, you still can’t refuse a gay couple, if you are a cake designer, you can’t refuse to make a cake, but you can refuse to do anything remotely gay-related to that cake, if you are a web designer, you can refuse to make something altogether because the government can’t restrict or compel speech (and graphic design is speech).
Money is speech, right? Does that make the ramifications of this decision go a lot farther? I don’t see how yet, but it seems like this ruling may have broad impacts when people start getting creative with it…
Gotcha, yeah I agree. I personally don’t think a website designer building something for a client is either. But we live in a dystopia right now. Hope you are doing well this evening.
Well, Roe v Wade set a precedent, which was then reverted ~50 years later, so I’m not sure how much precedents apply to the supreme court (it definitely applies to lower courts tho)
Nah. Many of them have stumbled their way into money. Lots of trade people and small businesses, which makes up my typical clientele, others are sons and daughters of second or third generation union humps. Many grew up with one working parent being able to provide and that union parent has one or two pensions and is still hustling jobs. So, many of them can afford a lawyer. They are unfailingly whiney babies who are an awful combination of privileged existence and self agrandizement. I blame social media for validating their most half-baked ideas and emotional reactions.
I mean, if you don’t mind/know about the bigotry, it’s pretty fuckin good chicken. And their waffle fries are good too. Haven’t eaten there in years and I do miss the food. But it’s still a hard no for me.
I’ve had this idea kicking around in my head for a few years: Christian Chicken Offset Charity. It would be an app that would notify you “You appear to be patronizng a bigoted establishment, do you wish to make a $1 donation to Charity X to offset?”
Dan Cathy has no reason to question his biggotry. The conservatives in the United States made that clear by giving the chain record profits after he gave his speech, and after it came out that the restaurants direct profits were being donated to anti-lgbtq groups, including those that support conversation therapy.
Heres an excerpt of what he had to say: “we’re inviting God’s judgment on our nation when we shake our fist at him and say we know better than you as to what constitutes a marriage. And I pray God’s mercy on our generation that has such a prideful, arrogant attitude that thinks we have the audacity to redefine what marriage is all about.”
People like this need to shut up, or go die in a ditch somewhere so the rest of the world can see progress. The people that eat at this chain will always earn my contempt.
Oh, so the CEO uses their personal slush fund, which definitely doesn’t have any connection to the business they own and make money hand-over-fist from, to make the donations to the anti-LGBT organizations instead of making the donations through the company?
That must make it all okay then!!! /s
Don’t give these fucking pieces of shit any more of your fucking money, please.
Here here. People shouldn’t support monsters (or their organizations) that dehumanize others for the way they were born.
Greasy chicken isn’t doing anyone favors before this nasty realization, and there’s simply no excuse for it after. This is the smallest sacrifice any of us can possibly make.
For anyone still eating there: You’re weak, and you’re supporting cruelty. Do better.
This isn’t how reality works. Offset is basically babble. What actually happens is company A does something actually harmful like poison the environment, pave some wetlands, burn down the forest and plant corn and then your offset goes to pay people with masters degrees to THINK about what they might do about assholes ruining the world.
On net assholes with masters degrees have houses in the burbs and the fucking damage is still done. If you want to offset harm you actually have to decrease harm not pretend to be offsetting it.
Oh no, do you cry and piss and moan every time someone validly critiques a business you just want to shop at without having to think about ethical considerations?
Someone call the fucking waahhhmbulance. So sorry that ethics are so hard for you.
Nope. I don’t give a shit what their corporate overlords beliefs are. I still go get my chick-n-minis and hash browns like I do every other week because I like the way it tastes.They could be on the brink of bankruptcy from customers taking their dollars elsewhere and it won’t magically change what they believe.
I’m sure you do happily drive your Tesla to the Chick-Fil-A after shopping at Hobby Lobby for Nestlé products. Safe in the knowledge that they all love you and have your best interests at heart.
It’s because assholes like the controversy and want to support the company. There was a time, long ago, when CFA legitimately had the only good fast food chicken, but those days are long gone. CFA is mid tier at best, so the only reason people would get in line to eat there these days is to own the libs
can’t speak for the bigots, but as a non-bigot who buys it for my kids a couple times a year -
there is no ethical consumption under capitalism. i say this as someone who doesn’t shop at amazon or wally world, but it’s really difficult to avoid every single brand/company with an asshole owner/ceo. additionally, my impression is they are one of the better employers in the area for people who just need a job and lack skills/ability to do something else.
This is exactly what people love using this argument for… It’s a toxic concept that if we can’t make a big enough impact, we shouldn’t even try.
I think one could correctly argue that this is one of the major things wrong with the world today. If we aren’t willing to fight injustice, how can we expect anything less from the world around us going forward?
In this case “fighting injustice” just means buying greasy chicken from the place next door. It’s such a pathetically easy thing to do. Better yet, go buy some discount raw chicken and make something cheaper, healthier, and better tasting at home.
In this case “fighting injustice” just means buying greasy chicken from the place next door. It’s such a pathetically easy thing to do. Better yet, go buy some discount raw chicken and make something cheaper, healthier, and better tasting at home.
It’s kind of proportional to the amount of impact people are making. Not only is the whole “ethical consumption” thing kind of like, oh, yeah, you’re fucked buying anything from anywhere, and working anywhere, because it’s a tangled web, but more than that, I think that most people are going to look at their individual contribution to chick-fil-a of like, ten bucks for a chicken sandwich meal, and think, hey, who gives a shit. And they’re not really wrong, successful boycotts tend to need to be spurned on by some sort of external action. If chick-fil-a was unionizing, and the union said to stop shopping there in the intervening time, you’d see that eat into profit margins a lot, something to that effect.
Everyone collectively kind of understands that individual agents are too weak to do anything on their own, spontaneously. Worse than that, they’ve internalized it, so it’s kind of turned everyone into stones that can only be shifted by larger, tectonic forces. It’s like voting, everyone (or most people) are conscious of voting strategies, to not “waste their vote”, and it is precisely this which takes away their power to vote. I can’t really fault them for this, though. You just kind of have to face the reality, bide time in your organization in the wings, and then kind of choose your moments, when you’re going to really push back at something.
my impression is they are one of the better employers in the area for people who just need a job and lack skills/ability to do something else.
We, like you, avoid what companies we can, CFA included, but this is often overlooked. The individual locations (franchises) are not equal to the anti-lgbtq+ corporate leaders and many of the ones here (Midwest) seem at the local level to better align with the community they serve.
And yet, their profits still go towards anti-lgbtq+ programs and organizations. And they still stand for biggotry, which was Dan Cathy’s intention 11 years ago when he made his dish on behalf of the company.
Ethics are what you make of them. If it doesn’t bother you that this organization directly gives profits to organizations that dehumanize lgbtq+ people, then keep offering them your business.
In our society our purchasing decisions can absolutely have moral ramifications, and it’s not about the impact we may or may not have. Dan Cathy stood up 11 years ago and said the following on behalf of his restaurant in direct defense of giving money to anti-lgbtq+ groups, including those practicing conversion therapy:
“we’re inviting God’s judgment on our nation when we shake our fist at him and say we know better than you as to what constitutes a marriage. And I pray God’s mercy on our generation that has such a prideful, arrogant attitude that thinks we have the audacity to redefine what marriage is all about.”
To clarify further, Dan Cathy himself turned his chain into a symbolic beacon of religious zealotry and biggotry. It’s a symbol to many conservatives and bigots all across this nation. It doesn’t have to be that symbol to you, but to those of us paying attention, we may use a measure of contempt and caution when measuring up those who eat there.
I find the entire concept of being unable to try to be moral with our purchases positively dripping with intellectual dishonesty. Life isn’t about being 100% moral, it’s about doing our best with what we have. If we can’t avoid a greasy fast food chain for being a symbol of hate, then how will we ever foster true change in this broken world?
This applies more for corporations that own unavoidable infrastructure than restaurants with ample alternatives. The former would cost you a lot to forego and interfere with more effective praxis, while the latter costs nothing to support gay rights.
I get this and understand to the point that I dont judge people too hard for just getting it out of convenience.
That said I feel like it’s an easy mark to boycott. At it’s best it’s just fast food chicken and the creators have an active hand in anti lgbt and weird religious fundamentalist stuff.
This may be conjecture, but I think that the reason that they’re so busy is because people think that if they don’t eat there then they won’t get into heaven.
This is one of the reasons I don’t get food from them or in-N-out. It may be illogical, but they tend to get a plot in a shopping center and take over a huge portion of the parking lot, pushing out customers from other stores in the shopping center. I couldn’t even get into the driveway to go to the grocery store one time because they were mis-managing the queue and had to go across town to the other store.
There’s a whole ass freeway exit I purposefully avoid for the same reasons. It’s a nightmare getting on and off because of a fucking chicken restaurant.
Man, I never missed the food even a single day since I stopped eating there around a decade ago due to the biggotry. It was always really greasy, and it made me feel like shit a half an hour after eating it.
$0.02: I can’t prove it, but I think it comes down to the line itself being a mode of advertisement. You wouldn’t want to eat somewhere unpopular, and a hyper efficient drive-through would give that appearance. To blunt the impact of a deliberately slower drive-through, they put people out front* to greet customers so they don’t feel ignored in line. This in itself is something other chains don’t do and, instead, have to crush the drive-through line fast, just to keep everyone’s blood pressure in check. It’s better “customer service”, but as OP illustrates, places your staff out in the elements.
Meanwhile the food is bland and factory-assembly-line consistent, with toppings that range from bland to sweet and bland. Perfect for kids and adults that already have enough excitement in their lives. Are powdermilk biscuits on the menu yet?
(* if this is a corporate-mandated thing, it’s freaking brilliant. A manager can’t realistically pull one of the greeters to handle a kitchen disaster in the moment, since they’re outside. So, service in this regard is hard for management to screw up.)
All the people here talking about boycotting chik-fil-a, yet the “boycott” has been going on for almost five years now and it made literally no difference.
They’re way more likely to be affected by the right-wing boycott due to the company having a VP of DEI than a bunch of people that never ate there in the first place “boycotting” because of bigotry.
Negative reviews should remain until the purchase restrictions put in place on Steam for non-PSN countries have been reverted.
Until then this looks like a temporary move for damage control and they’ll try this again when refunds are less likely and wont be from restricted countries.
There was a theory that the purchase restrictions were put in place by Valve, not Sony (because those countries couldn’t make an account without violating TOS). If so, Valve might shortly remove the restrictions.
Valve can remove games from sale for any reason they like - it’s been a point of consumer contention when they are accused of censorship for certain risque anime games, too.
They can completely remove a game from sale if it turns out to be bricking people’s computers or function terribly. (Sony did this with Cyberpunk on PSN, without CDPR’s approval)
There may be suspicion the game is not legitimate for sale, for instance it illegally uses someone else’s work.
Going country-specific, if a game is revealed to be slightly less than universally positive to the perfectly infallible, totally-not-genocidal Chinese Communist Party, they may want to stop sales in China.
If a game lets you buy it in Tanzania, download it in Tanzania, and then to play, has you sign an agreement that says “I truthfully state that I do not live in Tanzania”, then that bone-headed agreement reflects poorly on Valve, so they have almost a legal need to take it out of sale in that country.
Basically, each country has its own laws of sale. Having those switches to turn off sales in certain places is important for the store’s own safety. While 60% of the blame for selling a faulty product goes to the manufacturer, 40% still goes to the storefront that chose to stock and sell that faulty good. In this case, the fault was specific to the country of play.
That’s right, I have heard of some of these cases, but thank you very much for the info! I definitely didn’t want Sony to have any ground to stand on here, so happy that Valve is able to step up to protect consumers however they can.
I hope Valve never does this. Tons of games on Steam only work with community fixes, it sets a bad precedent if they pull them because they don’t work in their official state.
It’s better to have them then not, I would just force a disclaimer during sale for abandoned titles that most players have reported that the game does not function without community patches.
Well the guy who made GotR to get saints row working died a few years back and AFAIK the game is effectively nonfunctional for the majority of people who buy it. Those people paid for a product that they cannot use. They could go emulate the game for free and it would run better.
Plus, the owners of the title have a functioning PC version sold elsewhere than Steam. They could easily remedy this if Steam took away their listing.
Illegal means against the law… so no.
Out of their jurisdiction, Steam is Valve’s platform, so no again.
Valve is the seller in this case, who will be liable for the agreement they have with their customers. If one of their sold product is going to end up massively refunded, who do you think will be processing these? Then Valve has to turn around and get the money from Sony… guess how Valve estimates that will go.
So step 1 for Valve is limit exposure by stopping sales where you expect issues.
Step 2 is analyzing the potential for refunds in other countries and limiting there as well if deemed to big a risk.
I can only imagine that feedback from Valve to Sony played a role in the decision to not push forward. As large corporations only speak money… the cost benefit made at Sony must have missed some things to have it now skew the other way.
I’ll believe the account requirement will be totally in the past IF the sales to the non PSN countries are reinstated. Cause why limit your customers to countries if that is not necessary.
Honestly I’m keeping my negative review permanent. The game is great and I enjoy it, but besides a temporary back lash I want the sting to stick around to hopefully teach companies about fucking around and finding out.
They won’t learn anything. They only nulled their bullshit because it would hurt their financial quarter because their biggest cash cow game at the moment is bombing. They only way to maybe make them learn would be if every single one of the “outraged gamers” would just uninstall and never play it again, but that won’t happen and Sony knows that (which is why they can try pulling that shit in the first place).
Good for the peeps in non-PSN countries tho. For them, this is a real win.
And then the inevitable day or week or so where it’s unseasonably cold before we barrel into another couple months of record breaking heat. But during those weeks I will be told innumerable times “so much for global warming! This idiots don’t know anything!”
Not true. Fake news. Everyone knows that for the first few hundred million years after Earth first formed the average surface temperature was 80C (176F).
Weren’t there already some 82 C temperatures recorded at ground level already? I seem to recall a post here in the last couple of days saying that people ended up in hospital with burns and such from contact with very hot pavement.
I’m one of the few that never used the third party apps for Reddit during my time there. Only the official app. And even I could tell you that app was miserable. No exaggeration, every third post is a massive ad. Once you’ve scrolled far enough your entire feed becomes ads. You have to close out/refresh to make it go back to normal.
Wefwef is a glitchy web app that doesn’t let me scroll or post comments sometimes made and maintained by some dude in his basement, and it’s still preferable to the official app of a company seeking a multimillion dollar IPO
not saying wefwef is perfect(i personally can't use it bc use kbin and not lemmy) but it will probably improve a ton since there are many new people joining lemmy/kbin
Regardless, I really don’t care much about the glitches or slowdown if it means I don’t have to see a full screen “He Gets Us” ad every two goddamn seconds.
The Memmy TestFlight is full at the moment, but should be on the App Store soon. I highly recommend it.
Mlem and wefwef started good, but imo, they’re not there yet. They both look good, but are still missing a lot of my preferred functionality. Development also seems slow compared to Memmy too, but Memmy’s dev is also a machine pumping out updates every day.
On Liftoff it’s needed to be logged in on every instance (it handles multiple accounts), so I don’t find it convenient even though I admire how polished the interface is.
On Liftoff it’s needed to be logged in on every instance (it handles multiple accounts), so I don’t find it convenient even though I admire how polished the interface is.
this. the corpos have pushed us to apps so much that many of us forgot that web browsers are very much an option.
lemmy has been the only thing that made me open the regular firefox in a long time. for the most part, i use firefox focus, because everything you wanna stay logged into makes you use an app. no exaggeration there. but lemmy’s web ui actually works because it’s been made by people who just want you to be able to use it, not people who want you to sell you on an app instead that can track you way better than your browser would ever allow.
I tried out different apps because of the autoloading of new posts that happens on the site. I think that might have been fixed in the update, but now I’m having issues logging into lemmy.world on the site, because if the update. I keep reminding myself it’s early days and things will get smoother soon.
Ah, good point- I was mostly being hyperbolic to illustrate just how shitty the Reddit app was.
I think all the previous redditors did the same thing I did when signing up. Lemmy.world sounds the most general, so that’s the instance I used. I’ll give a smaller/more local one a try and see if that improves the performance!
Same. Started on lemmy.world which was great and all, but switched to feddit.nl since it’s closest to me, smaller and works faster for me. There are a lot of servers out there so we can spread the workload.
I ran into the same issue with Lemmy.World. Tried switching to Beehaw.org first (before I learned that they had defederated from some of the bigger instances) and had my “application” rejected. Appears I didn’t provide good enough reasons for why I wanted to join their particular instance. To me, it just shouldn’t be that serious. Tried sh.it just.works and well, it works!
I ended up just setting up my own instance. Wefwef is speedy since I’m not hosting other users or any communities. I tried the native iOS apps but prefer wefwef.
I was using Jerboa but just started using wefwef a couple days ago. I really like the look and feel, plus sorting Top by 1/6/12 hours is dope, since I tend to see a lot of new stuff when I was just doing Top by day.
As someone that only used the official app on iOS, I have to disagree. For me every 9 or 10 posts in the feed there was a “promoted” post. Using the compact view they aren’t huge ads like OPs one here, just like any other text post but they say “promoted” so you know it’s an ad. Also never had this “entire feed becomes ads” either.
Given how buggy it is, it’s entirely possible. Also, ad targeting exists. He could be a member of specific demographics (age, income, location) being targeted by a lot of ads, thus he ended up seeing a lot of ads.
Dude, you absolutely need the /s on this one. There are people who authentically say this. And they read your comment thinking you and the upvoters all support that same belief too
Yeah, that’s why he showed up and did zero non-benevolent things for hours, and then when a maniac literally screamed a death threat at him (in response to Rittenhouse putting out a dumpster fire he started), his immediate reaction was to run away.
Literally the only people shot by Rittenhouse that day were people who tried to kill him, and then DIDN’T LET HIM run away when he tried to flee, which was his consistent first reaction to all aggression directed at him. Everyone who got shot CHASED him when he fled, cornered him, and then tried to murder him, forcing him to use his weapon to save his own life.
Those are the facts.
I’m glad I don’t know anyone dumb enough to unironically claim he intended to shoot people. There is so much publicly available evidence, it’s frankly secondhand embarrassing to see, even online.
Literally the opposite of the truth, lmao. They didn’t “stand their ground”, they CHASED Kyle as he ran away! And that was after they accosted him while he was running TOWARD the police line, to report what happened with the first attacker.
Which you claimed was “literally a lie” and then claimed there was video.
I did not claim there was video of Rittenhouse NOT doing something, lmao.
I replied to you saying you saw no footage that didn’t start with him already running away, by pointing out the obvious fact that there is. One little example, from a CNN article, under a heading that , lmao:
In another clip from an on-camera video with Richie McGinniss, the chief video director of the Daily Caller, Rittenhouse says he was there to protect a business and “to also help people.” “If there’s somebody hurt, I’m running into harm’s way. That’s why I have my rifle because I need to protect myself obviously, but I also have my med kit,” Rittenhouse says in the video. McGinniss points to other armed men around Rittenhouse and asks what they are doing. Rittenhouse responds, “Their job is to protect me.”
“We’re running medical and we’re going in and we’re getting people,” Rittenhouse says in the video
“That guy” being Rittenhouse who specifically went there with a firearm with the intention to stir up shit? He was absolutely hoping he’d get to murder someone, and surprise surpise – he did exactly that
The little fascist went to a counter protest with a rifle as an agitator. He was looking for a reason to use that gun, and definitely manufactured the exact thing he was looking for. Don’t be such an utter dipshit.
Wrong. It’s an open carry state, there was nothing strange about it.
If it was such a “provocation”, then why did nobody give a shit when he showed up, even though it was super obvious he was armed with a long rifle? How come he walked around for hours doing his thing (handing out water bottles, giving basic medical care to whoever asked (at least 8 people according to evidence and trial testimony), etc.), and literally nobody gave a shit, while he had that rifle on him the whole time?
Rosenbaum literally screamed “I’m going to kill you” at Rittenhouse, and for what? Because he put out Rosenbaum’s dumpster fire.
Correcting false statements with known facts (it’s so extra absurd because there is SO MUCH hard evidence!) is not fascism. It’s not even political at all.
Actions speak louder than words, especially when those words are a teen talking big to his friends.
The fact is, nothing he did in Kenosha supports the claim that he wanted to kill anyone, period, and everything he did directly contradicts it. He showed zero aggression toward anyone, and his first response to aggression toward him was to RUN AWAY, every single time. Bottom line, none of the people who got shot would have gotten shot if they had let him run away.
ROFL…. “locker room talk” right? You apologists are fucking hilarious. Where I come from (America) this is called “Premeditated Murder.” And in any courtroom with an unbiased judge, he’d have been convicted on that alone.
‘You can tell he planned to kill someone by the fact that he never showed aggression toward anyone, and his first response to unprovoked aggression toward him, all three times, was to run away’
Actions speak louder than words. He was around tons of looters (that’s what the people he was talking about were doing, when he said that) that day. Why didn’t he ‘shoot rounds’ at any of them, if that was his plan? He had all the opportunity in the world.
That’s the question people making this argument can’t answer honestly, because the only honest answer is that what he did directly contradicts what he said.
Arguing that he planned to do something that he literally didn’t do, despite myriad opportunities, is just silly.
Again… you apologists are fucking hilarious. Dude wanted to kill people. He killed people. No amount of hand waiving and excuses from you will change that.
Yes, ok. But you’re not providing a counterargument. These are all just feelings. It’s possible he was there to kill people. It’s also possible he saw what happened in Minneapolis when rioters set entire storefronts on fire a few weeks prior and was concerned about his community.
If he really wanted just to kill people he had lots more opportunities before he was being chased. The person you’re responding too is just countering your arguments but all you have very charged feelings about the case which is understandable.
Kyle is a bad person who did something really stupid but it doesn’t help to fight every person on details which have been disproven in court. The whole trial is available to watch online. Our side needs to do better and stay grounded in facts otherwise we just lose all credibility.
It’s not feelings. It’s facts. He was on video saying he wanted to kill people. And it’s also well documented that the judge in the case was incredibly biased. He didn’t allow damning evidence against the murderer that any other judge would have allowed.
Please follow closely because it’s getting lost in the sauce and I know there’s a lot of charged feelings involved in this conversation.
He may have said he wanted to genocide all people on earth and stomp on puppies prior to the event. He still has the right to self defense which is the crux of the whole argument.
In the US bad people have a right to self defence (In America open carry is legal and I’m grateful I moved out of the US).
I can tell you feel very passionate about the topic. My recommendation is that you go and watch the trial (the whole trial was recorded) or at the least download the transcripts and follow the evidence.
Just to repeat: I agree Kyle is a bad person. But we have to ground our discourse in facts. It doesn’t help to create false mythos around bad people because it only emboldens the other side.
Sigh. This type of epistemic analysis leads to monological thinking and is why the Kenosha riots had no grounding to begin with. More people will die if we just dilute every fact to dismiss narratives we don’t like and it will lead to more violence and hate.
I don’t like conservatives either but we have to ground discourse in facts not feelings.
He’s a murderer
Judge was biased
It was premeditated
None of this was proven but we can just handwave it like nothing else matters. After a while we are all going to start living in parallel epistemic bubbles.
If you want to have a discussion on the moral ethics of his actions: that’s fine; Plenty to criticize.
If you want to have a discussion on the legal merits of the case, that’s fine too, but you need to be at least somewhat aware of the facts beyond verbal statements that preceded the shooting. OJ (although a cherry picked data point does not prove a point) is a fine example of the judicial system working as intended even though the defendent was guilty.
To summarize: These are two separate conversations (legal vs moral). I’ve noticed that whenever Kyle is brought up, as lefties we tend to hop back and forth between the two (sort of in the way you are doing --I can’t tell if it’s intentional–) to muddy the discussion or get some type of gotcha. It’s not productive.
I agree that Kyle is a bad person, Flying, but there is a lot of misinformation being spread around that makes our side look bad. I know it’s an emotionally charged topic.
If Hitler rescues a dog he’s still a bad person. But it doesn’t help to mythologize characters through false narratives because it empowers them even further. Just my opinion. I’m not on team Kyle and I’m not a fascist (sad I have to state this last tag on Lemmy in case I get misconstrued).
Yeah I think you’re saying that --correct me if I’m wrong-- him
bringing the AR to the protests is an act of provocation
while the person you’re arguing with said
open carry is not uncommon and no one felt provoked
At least that’s how I read it. Maybe I’m wrong. I can see how both statements could be true to some extent. Many protesters were from out of state and possibly not familiar with the open carry laws in WI so it’s possible they felt threatened immediately. I’m no longer living in the US, and I never lived in an open carry state, so the sight of an AR strapped to a kid would make me uncomfortable in that situation. However, I’ve also lived in the middle east were the sight of soldiers walking around not in uniform carrying semi automatic rifles was very common and that did not make me uncomfortable. So context is important.
This is Kenosha, not Fallujah. If you think people walking around with ARs is a common or non-worrying sight there, you really know nothing about this subject.
I don’t understand this response. There are several states in the US where open carry is quite common. There’s a whole subreddit dedicated to pictures of dudes walking around like para militias. What’s your point in comparing it to Fallujah after I already conceded that it likely made many protesters uncomfortable. No need to go all agro on me man, I’m just pointing out the two perspectives that’s all.
Sorry… you’re taking anecdotal pictures from a subreddit to argue that people walking around Kenosha with ARs is a common sight?
I live in an open carry state. I drove through Wisconsin in March. I didn’t see a single person walking around with an AR then and I never see them here either.
people walking around Kenosha with AR’s is a common sight
These are two completely different statements. Is the opposite of uncommon by default common? Even after I conceded that it would still alarm some people. I don’t get it. Is there a different way I should explain myself? I’m so lost :( What am I doing wrong? Maybe I shouldn’t have used the word uncommon. There has to be a better word. Maybe surprising?
Okay, if it is not a common sight to see people carrying ARs in Kenosha, then it makes sense that people at a protest would take that as a threat and act accordingly. I really don’t know what you’re saying here other than doing some ridiculous “both sidesing” when only one side committed murder.
I don’t really remember any more because I had to translate my position through several iterations since it kept getting twisted. I have to figure out how to make my points more direct and succinct. It seems no matter how much preamble and explanation I offer, my position gets twisted one way or another.
All I’m trying to say is that when we argue with the other side (in this case conservatives that defend Rittenhouse) we should be mindful if we are addressing the ethical argument or the legal argument. Typically, conservatives will overstate the legal argument and dismiss the ethical argument.
If I had an elevator pitch it would be this:
>> It’s helpful to steelman the opposition to be able to refute it better. <<
I think the ‘left’ should also step up their game and open carry, if they want to be taken more seriously by:
Some of those that work forces [1] Are the same that burn crosses
…but… we must not forget what may follow if they do, planning is also really important as well as having legal counsel and video footage of all interactions:
Being a bit more forceful and agressive, in showing open carry, so that we may have a better chance of changing our systematicly broken system, will not be an easy feat to accomplish.
Great point, you are correct, the Black Panther Party also ran into that problem, where they had shoot outs with the police.
It would need a bit of planning, knowledge of the local laws, and live filming/documenting interactions with any law enforcement/groups/people.
In life, all good things come hard, but wisdom is the hardest to come by. – Lucille Ball
Nobody is gonna hit as hard as life, but it ain’t how hard you can hit. It’s how hard you can get hit and keep moving forward. It’s how much you can take and keep moving forward. That’s how winning is done. – Rocky Balboa
Don’t pray for an easy life. Pray for the strength to endure a difficult one. – Bruce Lee
Actions speak louder than words, especially when those words are a teen talking big to his friends.
The fact is, nothing he did in Kenosha supports the claim that he wanted to kill anyone, period, and everything he did directly contradicts it. He showed zero aggression toward anyone, and his first response to aggression toward him was to RUN AWAY, every single time. Bottom line, none of the people who got shot would have gotten shot if they had let him run away.
ROFL…. “locker room talk” right? You apologists are fucking hilarious. Where I come from- (America) this is called “Premeditated Murder.” And in any courtroom with an unbiased judge, he’d have been convicted on that alone.
‘You can tell he planned to kill someone by the fact that he never showed aggression toward anyone, and his first response to unprovoked aggression toward him, all three times, was to run away’
the fact that he brought a gun with the intent to kill people
Literally not a fact. Even as just a hypothesis that that was his motive, every single bit of evidence (all the facts we have about what he did in Kenosha that day) contradicts the notion that he wanted to/intended to/planned to kill anyone. He literally did everything he could to avoid using his weapon, short of literally forfeiting his life to homicidal maniacs.
I’m sorry you’re getting downvoted. I wish our side (I’m a full on leftie and I don’t like conservatives) did a better job of countering arguments instead of using emotionally charged language in debates and spreading misinformation. The whole trial is recorded and all the transcripts are available.
I wish Kyle had not shown up with a rifle to a charged and tense event, especially after what happened in Minneapolis in the prior weeks. There really isn’t an excuse for a 17 year old to show up with an AR-15 to such a situation, even if it was perfectly legal. Yes, he bad better trigger impulse control than 99% of police officers, but a 17 year old should never be allowed in the first place. My argument is not a legal one, but an ethical one.
To me the fault lies in our society:
We encourage proliferation of gun ownership.
We allow 17 year olds to open carry.
I could keep going but I’ll stop.
Just to reiterate for Lemmy user base: I’m not on team Kyle; I’m on team facts and stop gun proliferation.
Every once in awhile these sort of posts make me introspective, they say almost exactly the same as my opinion about what I think of far right conservatives. Then I remember I’m not the one oppressing people and want to accept everyone as long as they don’t bring intolerance.
Something to remember I think is that just because people on both sides of an issue talk the same way about the other side, does not inherently mean that both or neither have a point.
This is one thing that I find very odd: you’ll see posts like this of obvious pieces of shit but the moment you start talking about being intolerant on intolerant people, or of being tired of caring about this sort of thing, you’re suddenly a worse per son than the actual bigot.
Can confirm, wrt the boundaries portion. I had to have a discussion with the parent with whom I maintain minimal contact, for reasons. They managed to throw in a wild accusation and went absolutely bat guano, demanding I inform a payee of one of her checks that did not show up in the mail that she would be deducting the stop payment fee from the next check. I said I would not, because there is no legal provision for that, and they sent me a screenshot of their bank's stop payment notice suggesting she talk with the payee, circled and highlighted in paint, to inform me, and I copied the text to paste it here:
You’re out of line. Its not my fault they can’t keep up with their mail. Someone has to pay the fees and I’m not paying!
It’s crazy. I know I’m part of the problem too. These people need something other than factual rebuttals to bring them back into the fold but I’m le tired. I can’t do it anymore. But that means the system is working as intended and we must strive to dismantle it.
That’s how the religious indoctrination at the base of this works. By design you NEVER question the church. And the Conservative GOP leadership has tapped into that reality distortion field. They could literally tell these people to commit murder and they would…
I mean, he admits to not being there when his kids were growing up. And he spends the time talking about his offspring’s family and their “values.” They have the kids, so they’re obviously willing to keep tolerating him if the kids get to see him enough that they are “the light of his life” or whatever. But he’s still talking about how he doesn’t know if he can stand to have a further relationship with his kid (that he wasn’t around to raise) and their spouse. Because politics.
So…I don’t think this guy’s probably on the right side of any issue they have.
A few weeks after we met, we realized that we had to write a joint paper because the combination of our last names, in the usual alphabetical order, is remarkably obscene.
lemmy.world
Top