There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

PoliticalAgitator

@[email protected]

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.

PoliticalAgitator ,

Most people who aren’t conservative psychopaths actually like their families and want to help them when they can.

PoliticalAgitator ,

“Said” is past tense. Yesterday, when you were pretending to be an authority on historic rocks, you said it wouldn’t wash off. I didn’t see that thread and immediately understood what they meant.

They weren’t being even slightly dishonest, but it’s clear you are. Would you have admitted you were wrong if you weren’t called out by name? My gut feeling is “not a chance”.

PoliticalAgitator ,

You inherently claimed to be a victim by claiming that people were attacking you. You’ve done an embarrassingly bad job of damage control today.

PoliticalAgitator ,

GIMP is bad. If the problem was simply that it was “different to PS” then other apps like Krita and Affinity Photo would have the same reputation.

If a user goes looking for a tool or feature and it’s not in the first place they look, that’s a problem of “didn’t really practice that much”. If experienced people need to look up how to do basic operations and their reaction is “that’s fucking stupid”, then the software is bad.

To then say “well why don’t you help the Dev team then” is insane. I’m not spending hundreds of hours digging GIMP out of bad design decisions when I could just use better software and I haven’t seen any evidence that my PR would even be accepted.

Nobody needs excuses and apologism, they need Blender for image editing and GIMP just isn’t that.

PoliticalAgitator ,

Have you thought about applying for a job at Adobe and fixing it?

PoliticalAgitator ,

To add to this, it’s not like other apps have just blindly copied Photoshop. Affinity Photo has shape tools that are far less convoluted than Photoshop but they still feel instantly familiar.

Even when they couldn’t stick to common patterns (such as the eyedropper tool) they still manage to communicate how the feature works just by designing intelligently, no Googling required.

But every time I’ve used gimp, common tasks feels like a collection of workarounds for missing features. Someone elsewhere in this thread asked how to place an ellipse and got told that wasn’t something commonly needed but to make a selection and fill it using the paint bucket tool (and a modifier key).

That solution is jankier than MS Paint, which at least offers you an actual tool and a short period where you can make non-destructive modifications to the stroke, fill, size and position.

But since you’ve technically got the circle you asked for, it’s treated as “people who don’t like GIMP are just haters” rather than “people don’t want to use bad tools for their job”

PoliticalAgitator ,

No, but “fix it yourself” is apparently a completely acceptable response if someone criticizes GIMP.

Anyway, I don’t care how bad the tools you use are, but it’s time to stop acting shocked when industry professionals have no interest in GIMP and don’t take anyone who advocates it as a Photoshop alternative seriously.

PoliticalAgitator ,

Nobody is acting shocked. Least the people who learned to use GIMP.

So the people who learn GIMP are fully aware why it gets zero industry use? Thanks, that was my point.

The problem is people like you who are outraged, when asking for a free Photoshop alternative, that the next best thing is not to their likening.

I’m not outraged in the slightest, nor am I asking for a free Photoshop alternative. But I’ve seen people claiming GIMP is a viable alternative to Photoshop for 20 years and for anything past the most basic use cases, it isn’t. You may as well be telling people to use Nano instead of Visual Studio and when they complain about the experience, tell them to code the features themselves.

GIMP has had literally decades of development and even with Photoshop in the worst state it’s ever been in, it isn’t competitive. There are clearly systemic issues with the project and I’m certain this “head in the sand” mentality is at least partly to blame.

PoliticalAgitator ,

It is the next best completely free alternative.

And if that was how people actually presented it, I wouldn’t be objecting. Instead, people pretend it’s as good as Photoshop and anyone who disagrees is blamed for not programming it themselves and attacked for suggesting that commercial tools are far better.

How is that an argument? How do you get the idea that GIMP is basically required to be competitive, just because it’s old?

Looks like you’re more interested in defending Linux software than actually seeing my point.

So why isn’t it competitive? It’s not because it’s new and hasn’t had time to mature. It’s not because developers haven’t put time into it (despite the ridiculous “fix it yourself” bullshit that people keep pushing). It’s not because the problem it aimed to solve has been solved.

It’s because the people involved with GIMP have the usual Linux community resentment about what “good software” actually is. It’s fuck ugly, but they don’t think that should matter, so it doesn’t get addressed. It doesn’t follow patterns that similar software follows, because they’re used to it, so everyone else should be too.

It’s the same pervasive “good software is good code and nothing else” mentality the plagues the OSS community.

But who cares? Use your shit software. Defend it to your dying breath. It’s not going to fix systemic problems with the project nor fool anyone who actually tries it.

PoliticalAgitator , (edited )

Because it’s made by volunteers, in their free time, who either don’t have the time or skill or goal to make it competitive

Didn’t stop Blender. Didn’t stop Firefox. Didn’t stop Linux itself.

If someone is not able or willing to learn their way around something new, that’s literally their problem

I’ve already covered in this comment chain. Krita and Affinity Photo do things differently and nobody complains because they can see actual value in the change. Being “different” isn’t the source of GIMPs reputation, being shit is.

Why would it need to be similar? If you want Photoshop, well then use Photoshop.

I moved to Affinity Photo over a year ago, despite it being different. I don’t even keep a token pirated version of Photoshop around for compatibility anymore.

Sometimes doing something different might also end up being the better idea. Won’t know until you tried.

I tried multiple times and it simply isn’t. That’s been their most common feedback for 20 years but people like you still refuse to acknowledge that people might have a point.

And yes, good software is good code. That’s just a fact.

Yet somehow, no matter how good the code might be, ugly software with shit UX just never seems to gain widespread popularity. Don’t worry, I’m sure it’s not because “good software” is holistic, it’s because the entire world is wrong about GIMP except for you.

PoliticalAgitator ,

Charismatic, intelligent people don’t need fascism nearly as much as dumbfucks do but even for the few who get sucked in anyway, there’s easier and more self-serving ways to express it than a grueling, always-on position in the Republican party.

But ultimately the answer to both “why don’t they run someone actually good” questions is “because it would be a threat to neoliberals and their record profits”.

PoliticalAgitator ,

While “find the worst photo of them for the article” is definitely a thing that happens, are you sure it’s happening here? He just looks like a normal person in a normal pose. It’s what people look like without makeup and studio lighting.

PoliticalAgitator ,

Doctors treat symptoms while they treat the problem, they don’t just offer you thoughts and prayers. Even if the problem isn’t treatable, they still do everything in their power to control your symptoms.

Imagine you turned up to a doctor with every bone in your hand broken, only to have them claim “Sorry, we refuse to give you painkillers because the pain is just a symptom. If someone just spends 12 months reconstructing your hand, the symptoms should be mostly gone. I won’t do it (and I’ll staunchly oppose anyone that tries), but that’s the real solution”.

They wouldn’t just be considered a dogshit doctor, they’d be considered a genuinely evil person.

So stop with the apologist bullshit. No gun control advocates are stopping you from building your violence-free utopia that you insist will solve everything. The society we have today is fucked up and you need to stop selling them guns.

PoliticalAgitator , (edited )

You take your magic wand and make all guns disappear, people who want to harm others will turn to knives.

Which would instantly be a massive improvement. Americas crime rates are functionally identical to other wealthy countries, only with a massively inflated homicide rate thanks to sick, stupid and desperate people being able to buy all the guns they want.

When people try to raise money for cancer research, do you spit in their face and tell them “you’ll never cure all cancer and even if you do people will still have heart attacks and if you cure those too they’ll just die in car crashes”?

You don’t think it will ever be your life it saves, so you don’t give a shit.

PoliticalAgitator , (edited )

The right to keep and bear arms is a fundamental civil right in the US

The pro-gun community has wasted the last 20 years demonstrating that they’re unwilling or incapable of addressing gun violence and they use the second amendment to prevent others from addressing it.

Eventually, the people you’ve sold out will have no other choice but to repeal it. Pro-gun groups will throw an almighty tantrum but so what? They have no room left to escalate because we already have to listen to them endlessly bleat about guns, we already have to constantly fight them politically and we already live under the threat of being murdered by a far-right extremist with a gun.

access to the means of self-protection is a human right

Sure, if you can prove you’re not what we need protection from because you’ve been sold a gun. Nobody is opposing legitimate self-defense – that’s why they’re not banning door locks, burglar alarms and MMA classes.

But just because a weapon could be used in self-defense, doesn’t mean it should be sold in corner stores to anyone who wants one. Landmines could be used in self-defense but we all know they’d be used 1000 times for terrorism, arming cartels and killing the family members of reactionary idiots for every 1 “noble” use.

I think that correcting the underlying issues that lead to gang activity would have more benefits overall than trying to ban a constitutional right

Let’s take you at your extremely dishonest word and say that gun violence is 95% social problems and 5% access to firearms.

Well the overwhelming majority of the actual people you’ve grouped as “enemies” support both gun-control and social policies designed to combat inequality, which addresses 100% of the problem. It’s literally the progressive platform.

For you to actual have an argument, they would need to support gun-control but oppose progressive social policies – and those people simply don’t exist in significant numbers outside your imagination.

But what about your “allies”? Well the majority of them support neither gun-control nor progressive social policies, for a grand total of 0% of the problem fixed. This tracks with the last 20+ years of them not solving any of these problems. It’s literally the Republican platform.

However you’re happy to be dishonest so you pretend they all belong to a group that only opposes gun-control while still supporting social reforms. Sure, people like that do exist, but not only are they a clear minority of the pro-gun community, they’re still only fixing 95% of the problem

While gang activity exists in all countries, countries with fewer social problems and lower economic inequality have far less of a problem with gang activity.

All of them also have restrictive gun laws, making them far more closely aligned with gun-control advocates than pro-gun groups. They didn’t have to endlessly argue over exactly how much gun access, culture, poverty, mental health services and the media contributed to violence.

They just did it all and by your own admission, it worked.

PoliticalAgitator , (edited )

Drop the bullshit. You’re using short people and lone women as human shields for your hobby.

Are we really supposed to believe your dogshit gun laws are an act of feminism? You’ve put 100% of American women in more danger by arming criminals, rapists and domestic abusers and you want to claim it’s all worth it because the less than 20% of women who want to carry guns are possibly safer.

Which of course they’re not anyway. The moment they know a man is a “brandish your gun” level threat is when that man grabs them or pulls a weapon on them.

And you know what happens next don’t you Mr Action Hero? If the man is already in grappling distance, she gets disarmed and then probably killed with her own weapon. If the man has already pulled his gun, she gets shot before she can aim and fire her gun.

The best thing women can do to keep themselves safe is to avoid men who are walking red flags, like gun-owners that throw women under the bus for their own self-interest and awkwardly brag about martial arts training and being immune to stun guns.

PoliticalAgitator ,

Bad news sells

So do lies and propaganda. That’s why pro-gun groups rely on imaginary threats, bullshit statistics and unverifiable anecdotes to justify a multi-billion dollar industry.

PoliticalAgitator ,

Would we even notice if they followed through? From the people who brought you domestic terrorism its… more domestic terrorism.

PoliticalAgitator ,

They wouldn’t wear a paper mask to save their own family. They’re not going to drop 100 pounds and die for their asshole king.

PoliticalAgitator ,

Isn’t it cool how many red flags he managed to sneak into that one sentence?

The fact that he used the word “clandestine” makes it sound like he convinced himself she must have a secret dildo she was using to destroy her genitals, because a 13 year old boy told him that’s how vaginas work and he never grew out of it.

It’s really easy to imagine him being the problem. He decides she has a secret horse dildo hidden away somewhere, accuses her of it repeatedly and when she tells him to fuck off, decides she is “cluster b” for having reasonable reactions.

4chan will not help this person.

PoliticalAgitator ,

Oh look you’re dumb as fuck when it comes to women’s bodies too.

PoliticalAgitator ,

You can’t really expect logical consistency from any large group of people. It will always be trivial to find 2 people with conflicting views, so trying to paint the group as hypocritical is worthless.

But Republicans are indeed worthless shitcunts, so it’s never hard to find an individual being hypocritical. Unfortunately, the accusation means nothing to them. They don’t care if they’re hypocritical, immoral or bigoted, they only care about getting what they want – and there’s nothing they won’t say to get it.

PoliticalAgitator ,

It was true before the internet too, there was just less opportunities to witness it because you didn’t interact with thousands of strangers at once.

PoliticalAgitator ,

Then it sounds like all that’s left to do is get 150 million people to use them.

PoliticalAgitator ,

Why stop there? Do the open source apps you’re advocating run on Windows or Nvidia drivers? You could get upset about them too, because they’re also one step removed from something closed source.

PoliticalAgitator ,

The software in the screenshot doesn’t require you to use Discord, but that’s not good enough there.

PoliticalAgitator ,

Sounds more like you just don’t know anything about the gambling industry. They run rigged games in predatory ways. They happily let organised crime launder money for a cut. They fight regulations designed to reduce problem gambling.

Nevertheless, nobody here is “forcing their way of life on others and taking away their agency over their own lives”. They’re just acknowledging that casinos have a long history of being absolute cunts.

PoliticalAgitator ,

I don’t know much about the gambling industry

You can stop there. You don’t know much about the gambling industry, defending them was just an opportunity to tell us your opinions on “some people”, none of whom are actually here.

PoliticalAgitator ,

Nobody in this thread has forbidden anyone from doing anything. If you want a soapbox for your irrelevant opinions, start a blog.

PoliticalAgitator ,

Two neoliberal parties, each allowed to accept massive donations from lobby groups, without ranked choice voting to punish them. While they’ve built managed democracies the world over, nowhere gives them wet dreams like America.

PoliticalAgitator , (edited )

On reddit, it was obvious that people would read the headline then check out the top comment to find out what their opinion of the headline should be.

PoliticalAgitator ,

Straw purchasing isn’t an issue in most countries. Buying a weapon may include background checks, psychological evaluation, safety training, being a member at a range or club for 6+ months or even military service. It doesn’t end there either, with many countries requiring registration of purchased firearms with heavy fines if you’re unable to produce the weapon when asked.

Luckily for cartels and criminals, Americas gun laws are dogshit. With private sales, you don’t even need to pass a background check in some places. Straw purchasing isn’t just viable, it’s the fastest, easiest, lowest risk way to secure practically any semi-automatic weapon you want.

But no matter how serious or widespread those failures are, the pro-gun community staunchly opposes addressing them, backed by lobby groups who are keenly aware their profits would be quartered if gun regulations worked.

PoliticalAgitator ,

Why would they bother to disarm you? They make billions of dollars a year selling you guns and you’re no threat to them at all, physically or politically.

PoliticalAgitator ,

You should really make a token effort to read the article before trying to be a smug fuck about it.

PoliticalAgitator ,

Aren’t you forgetting something? Every gun owner is a super cool action hero and if anyone tries to break into their house they’ll be all “blam blam blam” and they’ll be able to turn on their wives again.

PoliticalAgitator ,

The answer has been given over and over again but it doesn’t meet the pro-gun communities deliberately impossible standards. Why bother answering it yet again?

PoliticalAgitator , (edited )

What made you think I cared? I’ve never advocated making gun owners public knowledge, I’m just laughing because gun owners insist their guns can keep them safe from criminals but shrivel up at the idea of those criminals knowing where they live and targeting them specifically.

As always with the pro-gun community, consequences are other people.

PoliticalAgitator ,

You really need to get your feelings out about this don’t you? The world must no your opinion, even the people who aren’t actually advocating it.

Anyway, your feelings are bullshit. The pro-gun community routinely opposes safe storage laws and are happy to leave guns in glove compartments and closets. Not that the black market is required to arm criminals, given how easy it is to pass a background check, straw purchase or buy privately but again, the pro-gun community opposes reforms to combat all of that.

So whatever the fuck “The consequences are the people’s who commit the crime, not the gun owning populace as a whole who has not? Yes” is supposed to mean, it’s clear that you’re only upset that you would be in danger, since you put other people in danger all the time.

PoliticalAgitator , (edited )

Safe storage penalizes victims for being stolen from

Good. If you didn’t take reasonable steps to secure your firearms, your negligence armed criminals. Guns are already an exception to “dangerous things must be properly secured” thanks to crybaby gun owners.

Oh and don’t waste your breath with a “B-B-B-But LockPickingLawyer opened this gun safe with his flaccid cock” because that’s not even close to an insurmountable problem.

a tax to stop those dirty poors from having guns

You’re using poor people as a human shield. You’ve never advocated giving people guns as a form of welfare and realistically a gun is one of the last things those “dirty poors” need.

You’re a simp for a multi-billion industry that funds the very worst Republicans and puts profits before lives. You don’t have a leg to stand on.

glove compartments are necessary

Sounds like we know where you leave your gun. It’s grossly negligent and absolutely your fault. Either leave your gun at home (where I’m guessing it’s just as poorly secured) or don’t go to places that don’t want you.

Well it is if they’ve been charged with something. Oh so “no criminal record,” shocker Illegal

Laws that are a complete failure, which the pro-gun community opposes all changes to, including better enforcement.

Illegal if you’re a prohibited possessor

Consequences for other people. The “responsible gun owner” making the private sale gets away with selling a gun to a dangerous person. If we only charged underage people for buying alcohol (and not the person who supplied them), there would be zero expectation of those laws working.

And even with all that, publishing a list is still stupid

Yet again, not actually a thing I advocated, just something I mocked your reaction to. Let’s hope for your families sake you’re not so easily confused when you hear a bump in the night.

I put nobody in danger

Another worthless promise from a gun owner. Whatever minimal vetting you’ve been through is demonstrably not enough to ensure gun owners aren’t a danger. You cleared the same low bar as the people shooting at children who rang their doorbell or used their driveway to turn around.

If we reduce you to a statistic, it’s even more bullshitty. Every person in your household is at a greater risk of domestic homicide and suicide.

it’s your stupid ideas on guns

Are you still throwing a tantrum about an idea I didn’t suggest or supoort, or are you just assuming all of my opinions based on what the gun lobby have told you I believe?

Your laws have failed America. It’s 20 years past when “responsible gun owners” should have actually taken some responsibility.

PoliticalAgitator , (edited )

Way to victim blame

“This woman scratched and bit me while I was raping her, so I’m the real victim”

I remember you now. You’re not worth my time and it doesn’t look like there’s anyone left in the thread who is. I didn’t read most of your comment but laughed when I saw you’ve lifted my insults to use as your own. Looks like you have made space for me in your head.

PoliticalAgitator ,

Didn’t read.

Families of Uvalde school shooting victims are suing Texas state police over botched response (apnews.com)

The families of 19 of the victims in the Uvalde elementary school shooting in Texas on Wednesday filed a $500 million federal lawsuit against nearly 100 state police officers who were part of the botched law enforcement response to one of the deadliest school shootings in U.S. history....

PoliticalAgitator ,

The profits must flow.

PoliticalAgitator ,

It also makes it nearly impossible for independent researchers to uncover bot networks and AstroTurfing, just in time for fully automated AI propaganda.

PoliticalAgitator ,

The very first prompt this AGI is given will be “secure as much wealth as possible without breaking any laws that might see us punished”.

PoliticalAgitator ,

The sales mean more to them than someone else’s children.

PoliticalAgitator ,

Who cares what you’ve seen? Nobody is interested in the pinkie promises of the pro-gun community – they want actual regulations with actual enforcement but every step of the way, corporate interests and useful idiots are there to block them.

Background checks are optional. Gun safety is optional. This is what the pro-gun community insists on time and time again.

PoliticalAgitator , (edited )

Semantic bullshit designed to drag out the conversation instead of addressing the problem. Nobody has gloves in their glove compartment but everybody knows what the glove compartment is.

Multiple attempts have been made to close this loophole and have been blocked by the pro-gun community, rendering background checks optional – if you don’t want your background checked, buy privately.

If you want to make effective regulations, then you need to understand what regulations already exist, how guns work, and how loopholes are exploited.

There is no gun control legislation that the pro-gun crowd will support. It doesn’t matter how minor, or how perfectly written.

Otherwise, you get another AWB that bans a bunch of cosmetic features that really don’t matter.

No problem, we’ll just ban all sales of semi-automatic weapons and firearms under a certain length (such as revolvers). After 20+ years, it’s clear the pro-gun crowd has no solution.

PoliticalAgitator ,

I just have to wait. One day, the millions of school children that Republicans, gun owners and the gun lobby sold out will have to send their own children to school.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • random
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines
    •