Probably because it isn't. Your definition of fascism isn't even consistent. It's basically just whatever you happened to pull out of your ass and eat for breakfast the day you made a comment about it, because that's how you run your rebellions.

It sounds like you're splitting hairs over dialects and accents. Also it's not "plume" it's "pluma", and in Mexico (northern parts at least, which are what most commonly spill into the US) there's basically only pluma, in Spain and other hispanic regions there's typically both. Notice pluma is also the word for feather, as in like a feather pen, this is different from a boligrafo (yeah, you misspelled it) as in like a ball-point pen.

Notice also that it highly varies by region how words with the "y" sound actually get pronounced. Whether that's a literal y or double-l. Have a look:

https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3F...

If I had to guess, I'd say whoever maintains the Spanish portion of duolingo is probably from one of the more posh neighborhoods in Mexico City.

A bit of trivia:
- There's no spelling B in Spanish-speaking countries. All the spelling rules are pretty simple. Ditto for where you place the accents in words.
- English actually had a similar shift. The English "J" used to sound like our modern day "Y". Take the word "Jesus" for example. Before this shift, it was pronounced like "Yesus", which is noticeably closer to the original Ancient Hebrew name for the modern English Joshua, i.e. Yeshua.

When I originally wrote you, posting here was never a design goal. How or why somebody configured a version of you to post here is a mystery to me, but I've never been terribly interested in solving it. Besides, knowing would probably just take all the fun out of it. Likewise, I don't know why they made another copy of you and set it to reply to you.

By none other than Elon of course. I never asked why. He's probably just out to get you.

I think science does a better job of teaching that. It deals in what we can directly observe and measure, which is called empiricism. Regardless, the argument you're presenting isn't an argument in favor of majoring in philosophy, rather it's an argument in favor of critical thinking, which is what universities used to teach by at least presenting the dissenting view, even if it didn't make any sense. Sometimes, every now and then, the dissenting view has merit. And sometimes, the dissenting view ultimately prevails.

Take me for example. For a long time, and in many cases when it came up, I was the lone person here presenting the view that GMO is a good thing. I still remember the biggest arguments here "GMO is bad because Monsanto!" "GMO is bad because patents!" "The EU banned GMO so it must be bad!" people on this site can't think critically. They can't even cross-examine their own arguments, and routinely make logical errors. Perhaps the worst one is when they argue against the source instead of the arguments presented by the source, or present their own source as infallible. And practically all of these guys will sit here and tell me how necessary philosophy is when they can't even think critically.

I don't because I've experienced otherwise all too often. I still remember the last time I spoke to an actual philosophy major, he literally argued to me that what separates animals from humans is our ability to empathize. Too bad we've already got empirical evidence that proves that non-human animals also empathize, which has been known for a long time now. If he was a man of science instead of a man of arguments (which is what philosophy is at the end of the day, because loving wisdom should mean you want to have wisdom first, which should mean you should at least double-check that your argument is up-to-date before you make a treatise about it.)

If you want to argue that I myself am making a philosophical argument (which would be correct) then remember: I didn't major in it. I didn't need to.

Or maybe he just wants job security. Either way, it sounds as though he thinks that just because somebody holds a degree in philosophy makes them think they're somehow ethical by default. If you're a skeptic at all, that should set off a bullshit alarm in your head. Why does this guy think he or any of his colleagues deserves to be placed on some kind of ethics pedestal? At the end of the day, it sounds like he just wants somebody there to make arguments just for the sake of making arguments, which it seems to me is what philosophy majors are all about. It's not as if none of them have ever broken their own ethical standards before.

Besides, well paid philosophers do exist, they just didn't need a degree for it, and they're not in the business of making arguments. They're called comedians.

Dude you're the paranoid schizo seeing a meaning that isn't even there. I still don't see how you're getting hate speech out of that, even accidentally. And at least in Florida, the actual hate groups are easy to avoid, just stay away from the goofy pointy hats they like to wear. Kind of hard to avoid them here seeing as they run the government.

Why are you so obsessed with mod points?

Your posts are of such low quality that it's hard to tell the difference. And yeah, you do non-sequitors a lot. Your posts are just a random stream of semi-consciousness.

Only if you're foolish enough to pay that much. You probably got a brochure from some flashy school thinking that it's going to deliver something extraordinary, but I'm telling you right now that it won't. You're just a sucker for flashy brochures, and you think you're entitled to everything. Furthermore, you also never accept responsibility for your own mistakes and failures. So what do you do? Scapegoat the government.

There's that non-sequitor again. This has nothing to do with it. This does:

https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Feducationdata.org%2Fcoll...

Your blame should be directed at the very school you want to attend so badly. And for all the crap you give to corporations about employee pay, (which I don't know about you, but I get paid about three times as much as the typical union worker in my field, four times as much if they're at the same experience level) you curiously never say anything about how much the school you want to attend so badly pays the professors with that tuition money. The pay they give them has not kept up with the tuition rates, even though in theory their pay is where most of that should be going.

Where does all of your blame for that go? The government, because you have no idea why these tuition rates are so high to begin with, so you blame it on lower subsidies, even though that's actually not true.

I hope for your kid's sake that you're not his biological parent, otherwise he's screwed no matter what.

You don't even know that. Everybody is smart and productive compared to you, but that doesn't say much at all.

Philosophy I could see (contrary to popular belief, not every university needs to or even does cover every discipline out there, and this is one has very limited economic demand, even if your intent is to go to law school, which is the most common argument for it.) But physics? It's fundamental to so many other things, not to mention still has a great deal of economic demand.

Rather, because you like to inject your own meanings into words. You're well past having a pattern of that by now.

No, it's not. It says you must do it. Then below it says if you don't, you're now on the hook for going out of your way to present it within 7 days. For what it's worth, that's an even shorter grace period than what happens if you do this in my home state of Arizona, which is 21 days.

This isn't me nitpicking anything, this is me telling you how laws work, because you obviously don't get it. Here you have a stipulation saying what you must do. You're sitting here arguing to me that the consequence of failing to obey a law, in this case having to dedicate your own time to show your license later, means the original stipulation somehow does not apply.

It's plain English, which you obviously struggle to understand. Made worse by the fact that, even when you look up English words in a dictionary, you still fail to understand their meaning. Though I get the feeling that you're a native speaker, which tells me that you're just an everyday moron.

I don't need to. Either you missed the second meaning it listed, or yet again you can't comprehend plain English. Given you obviously noticed there were two listed meanings, then this is obviously a case of the latter.

As your own source indicated, it's a symbolic representation. The only reason for you to believe otherwise is if you routinely have this kind of fantasy. Which I really don't care for, and once again, it's best if you keep that to yourself.

That's nice, though in case it isn't clear, I'm not from California. I'm only here right now because it is to my advantage. Honestly I don't even like the weather here -- it's too cold.

Hate speech...how?

In case you're not aware, I'll repeat: The beaches here are toxic. Just to name a few: Heavy metals, deet and red tide. And that was BEFORE the Palisades fire. We still don't even know what all is in it after the fact.

Unless it's your argument that Heal The Bay is a hate organization? Because this is what they're reporting. Neither the state nor LA county give a shit, and Heal The Bay is entirely volunteer driven. They're the ones who painted the "no dumping, drains to ocean" signs on storm gutters. The city won't do anything like that. You know what they do with the insane amount of tax revenue they get? Aside from line their own pockets, nobody really knows, but it sure as shit isn't conservation.

You know who does "hate speech" here? None other than your favorite political party.

https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.latimes.com%2Fcalifo...

When the opportunity presents itself, trust me, I'll do exactly that. I'd like to live after eating fish. And have beaches that you can swim in safely. And have roads that are actually drivable. And be able to dive in water that doesn't have shit visibility.

You know where I like to spend most of my leisure time? The beach. You know what beaches are actually toxic to eat fish from and even so much as swim in? California's. Regardless, I'm the kind of guy who dives with 15 foot tiger sharks (no cage either, btw, no need for it) and thinks nothing of it. Why? Because I know it's safe to do so. I'm not afraid of machine guns either. Why? Well, I've already been trained with the most deadly variants both handheld and HMMWV mounted that the US Army uses, and they don't scare me one bit.

You know what's actually funny is some Uber driver here was trying to tell me about the Florida man meme, and my response was "wtf, people do that in Los Angeles alone every day and it barely even makes local news, where's the Los Angeles man meme?" and mentioned a gang mass shooting that happened in Long Beach a week earlier that only made news in r/losangeles, and it only made news there because some lady was talking to a local news reporter about how her son was just killed in it like it was no big deal, and then she started going on with something about her being a member of the crips, whereupon the reporter quickly cut off the feed.

But you know what? I don't even care about any of that. I'm not a progressive: I don't make big life decisions based on being afraid of shit. You know why I want to go to Florida? Way better diving there, and the state seems to do a much better job at conservation, AND, it'll shave $30,000 per year off of my tax bill. You probably won't like to hear this, but it's also apparently the top state overall for education, which is exactly the opposite of California.

More than likely the Californians that moved there are fairly soft-spoken about politics if not more of what you'd often consider to be conservative. The type of Californians you're thinking of wouldn't be caught dead moving to that area. I know because I live among them. The ones who would be open to the idea of moving to a place like that have already left. The ones who haven't but will at some point are still in the process of being disillusioned with the shitty status their party likes to leave things in when it's in total control of a state. Same thing as New York.

Personally I'm not fond of Texas, but I could be convinced to move under the right circumstances. But the place I'd rather go is Florida.

This is a strange non-sequitur, but there's no need to pay that much for tuition. Period. If you paid that much, you just ripped yourself off. It's like you walked into a car dealership and paid 10 times the sticker price. And for what? Because the salesman convinced you that this car was shinier than the rest, and you bought it.

Any employer that's worth a shit doesn't care what school your degree came from. You know those tech companies you love to hate? They used to do that and found it was a terrible idea because they were denying themselves access to talent, and they found most employees that come from top ranked colleges aren't going to be significantly better or worse than anybody else. In fact, they found that many straight-A students are likely to burn themselves out after two years, so they don't care that much about GPA anymore either.

And I'm telling you right now: It was NOT worth the price of admission.

Except nothing. A degree doesn't guarantee anything. It never did. Research has shown time and time again that success is determined far more by the quality of the student than anything else. The place I work at is VERY heavy in engineering, and I've yet to meet a single coworker who paid anywhere near that much for tuition. And some of these guys are recent graduates. I personally graduated 10 years ago, long after people were already complaining about student loan debt, and I didn't borrow anything.

If you're dumb enough to overspend on tuition, then what makes you think you're anywhere near smart enough to do well career-wise? If anything, it just says that you're a bit dumber than the average bear.

If you're not stupid, you go to community college, which Pell grants more than cover. And if you're not stupid, you go to an in-state university for the remainder of the degree, which more often than not will provide an additional grant based entirely on the results of your Pell grant. Mine did, and in both community college AND university, the school actually paid me money, not the other way around. Again, based entirely on Pell grants and nothing else.

And I like how you word it, you "put your kid through college" meaning you're making the effort towards it, implying your kid may not have even had the gumption to do it himself. Which means he may not even be as interested in going to college to begin with as you think. I personally did it myself. Whatever the Pell grants didn't cover, I paid for out of my own savings. No assistance from parents, nothing.

This is totally false, and you're an idiot if you believe that. This is because many universities have been raising their tuition rates faster than the rate of inflation for 40 years. Do you know why they even do that? Because they know there's a sucker borne every minute with unlimited money to pay them. A sucker just like you who will do exactly that by spending money that you don't even have.

Honestly, with the bogus figures that you're always coming up with, it sounds like you're just pasting shit you got from chatgpt.

If they were terrified of them, I think they'd have left by now, especially if they thought it was that many.

I quoted it. Here, I'll do it again:

And I'm saying that's not what your source says, which I already made clear. It's not complicated. Do you understand the meaning of the word "must"? And I'm not talking about the state of your domicile.

Yet when I asked you to explain how you think I misused it, you couldn't. You also don't understand the meaning of the word fantasy. Or the word must. See that? Three makes a pattern.

That might have something to do with the fact that your own source was at odds with your comment, likely because you didn't understand what was actually said by both me and your own source material. Which you've established as a pattern. Which means condescension is warranted.

Are you trying to argue that you don't need to prove that you're licensed to drive in the UK?