The one conclusion we can draw from this is the folks drawing conclusions are exposing nothing but their own beliefs.
All we know is the dog was unleashed and the Waymo hit it.
We don't know if the dog shot out from under a parked car, so it was literally impossible to avoid. Or if it was sitting in the middle of the road and the Waymo ran straight over it.
All the folks trying to assign blame one way or another are doing so completely prematurely.
...while demanding the public ownership of the means of production. Can't write parody any more.
There's a narrative on the right that fascism was a left wing form of government.,
But the reality is that both fascism and communism were extreme right wing forms of government.
Fascism openly so, but also communism. Remember what fascism actually cares about, maintaining order, obedience to authority, sacrificing for the glory of the state.
Communism was supposed to be about equality and the people controlling everything in a bottom up manner. But the moment you implement it on a national scale you end up with a small inner circle, and they either go fascist like the USSR, or a technocratic dictatorship like China.
There's a reason that when the USSR fell the one narrative you heard was about how much the government lied (because they were far right masquerading as far left). And there's a reason why it was so easy for Russia to go far right under Putin, because they were under far right rule in the USSR.
So yeah, demanding public ownership is pretty on brand for fascists.
They've associated changes in the civilization with the changing climate conditions, it's likely not 100% certain, but it looks like a pretty likely cause.
It's easy to think that the world is "full" now. But the reality is that only a small percentage of the earth's surface has been "modified" by humans. https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.weforum.org%2Fstorie... If we needed to move, there are still vast untouched tracts of land that could be tamed.
That is a very weird take. The bits we modified are the best land, temperate zones, river banks, grasslands. You really want to move to some of that "untamed land" in the Sahara, Siberia, or Greenland?
And honestly, that map looks like a massive underestimate. I'm seeing big black regions in what I know to be largely unbroken crop land.
in the old it's not physics or chemistry that will doom humanity but economics, aptly called the dismal science
If you don't want Alberta to pump oil then don't buy oil.
But if you are going to pump oil then build a pipeline because shipping it by truck or rail is a horrible solution.
I want the oil industry to die because we're moving onto other energy sources, not because we're shutting down the Albertan oil industry so other producers like the US and the Middle East can make more money.
Nobody except the morons who voted for the orange one trust US institutions anyway.
It's actually the exact opposite. Most of his voters voted for him specifically because they do not trust US institutions. Remember that Ronald Reagan guy? I voted for him. Mostly liked what he did. The stuff I didn't like, most of his supporters didn't care about. But the worst thing he ever did was give his infamous "Government is the problem" speech. So Orange Man was voted in by a lot of people who specifically wanted him to fire a bunch of government workers and make trust in US institutions at an all time low.
Up until 2025, the answer was it's easier to get along with the U.S.
With the erratic policies and random tariffs of the U.S., however, it has become easier to get along with China, which, if nothing else, does not change their policies on a whim.
This is so not true. China is anything but a reliable partner. In the latter part of the previous decade, the Chinese government cracked down on the rapidly rising Chinese FinTech industry because a small number of CEOs in the industry, including Jack Ma, said things they didn't like. You know how you basically don't hear anything from Jack Ma anymore and how he is retired from Alibaba? This is why. The government clapped down that industry hard. The companies involved have never really recovered from it, with their stock prices stagnating. It's because investors realized that at any time, the Chinese government can and will intervene in the stock market to make a point about how in charge they are. A few years ago the government had to say publicly that they are totally not going to interfere in businesses again, please come back noble investors. All I can say is a really smart man said last year that investing in communism is a bad idea.
I thought Musk did a similar thing... Fake it, or maybe just had the robot remote controlled. In any case, Musks robots seemed to be a flop too.
So fake it until they give you a $1T pay package.
The proper way to do this is 1) fake it and 2) when queried, lie about it. I mean, this has been the traditional approach in all things AI and at least the LLM pushers know how to do it. I would have thought that Russians, off all people, understand this approach in a more general way. Apparently not. Some people will probably get an extensive "vacation" sponsored by the state now.
They did fake it. The "robot" was a guy in a robot suit, unfortunately, the guy in the robot suit got completely shitfaced.
Acceptable Identification at the TSA Checkpoint
Don’t Have Your Acceptable ID? The TSA officer may ask you to complete an identity verification process which includes collecting information such as your name and current address to confirm your identity. If your identity is confirmed, you will be allowed to enter the screening checkpoint, where you may be subject to additional screening.
US ciitizen here. That's important to what I have to say. While this all sounds great, you clearly don't know that many times the US government says they will accept something as proof of ID but in reality they won't accept it, even though their own website says they will. And there's nothing in what you quoted that guarantees that such alternate ID process can be done in time to actually make your flight.
About 20 years ago, I had to fill out a government form and I was required to show 2 proofs of who I was. Their own website said that they would accept a birth certificate as proof. I had it! Not only did I have a birth certificate, for another reason I had actually gotten it certified by my birth state and the US Secretary of State. You'd think having Colin Powell certify it would be good enough, right? Nope. They refused to accept it with no explanation. Talked to a friend who had done the same thing recently and he used copy of his passport as proof of ID, which they accepted. So I sent them a copy of my passport's main pages and I was good to go. So good luck with that whole thing of TSA having "other" ways to identify you.
Honestly the issue with the story is Ken Paxton, he literally has negative credibility. I know virtually nothing about Roblox or this case, but if Paxton is the first AG to pursue it my automatic assumption is he's prosecuting them because they either failed to give him a bribe or he thought they were helping Democrats register to vote or something.
you cant say that without "I believe you are a racist,"
just ask 60 minutes if ok to edit
And you can't post that if you understand nuance.
Yes, there was oil involved, and Cheney had ties to the oil industry. That's certainly part of it. But I've never been 100% satisfied that this was the only reason for the invasion. I heard a more nuanced theory, that the US was dealing with terrorist organizations who could cross borders with impunity, and trying to fight them from country to country would be almost impossible, so they needed a way to convince the countries of the middle east not to let these organizations operate in their countries. The solution: a show of strength in Iraq... "this is what we could do to you if you give us a reason."
I still think the 2nd Iraq war was a terrible decision because it was the beginning of the end of the rules-based world order, which is something the US created for its own benefit, and benefited the most from, even if it was costly to support. And Cheney was an undeniable hawk when it came to Iraq. He wanted the invasion, and was looking for any excuse. His legacy will always be overshadowed by that reality.
I agree it was a terrible terrible decision, I hated it at the time and I believe it's been responsible for millions of deaths, but I think the motive wasn't as bad as you suspect.
Basically, the Middle East outside of Israel was a bunch of dictatorships, some theocratic, some military, and many awkwardly allied to the US, but none of the Arab nations had a functioning liberal Democracy.
The neocons believed that they could go in, overthrow the dictator, and a functioning Democracy would pop up in it's place and they'd have a grateful ally, one whom they didn't need to look away as they went around murdering dissidents.
The initial returns on Afghanistan seemed to support the idea is would work, the Taliban melted away from the major urban centres and there was a government in its place.
WMDs and terrorists were both an excuse to go in and try this grand experiment in one of the few friendless dictatorships in the Middle East (the other being Iran, which they were planning, but was a much tougher target).
The problem of course was arrogance, they failed to understand the country they were attempting to launch a revolution in, and they failed to realize the kind of situation you needed for a Democracy to take place.
I think if they just stayed focused on Afghanistan, and basically ruled them by edict for a decade while they nurtured local political actors, then they might have had a shot.
But instead, it was an incompetent administration attempting to implement an extraordinarily ambitious and difficult plan.
You knew the job was dangerous when you took it, Fred. -- Superchicken
