Oh yeah? Name ONE ape that wrote Shakespeare. Go on I’ll wait

Comedy has become an act of airing social grievances (maybe always has been but definitely amplified these days) and thus peoples inherently political social grievances are going to sort them into their respective camps.

If the problems you’re facing and exposing are “the big man is keeping me down” you’re gonna find solidarity in that message and if your problems are “those people are gross and I don’t like them” only other people who have similar obsession with ordering society into groups of chosen people vs undesirables will respond to your message.

Idaho looks at those lists for the worst state in the union and say “we gotta pump those numbers up”

I have wondered a similar question… Is the trend that young men who are raised in a republican environment / family / culture aren’t leaving it at the same rate as their predecessors? Or is it that more young men raised in a liberal / apolitical environment are being captured by the right wing internet pipeline?

I would guess that in previous generations, kids are raised about 50/50 to match their parents beliefs (who are roughly 50/50 conservative or liberal) and the significant dominance of liberal youth vote was attributable to kids leaving that ideology behind as they form their own beliefs, reenforced by peer effects. But I’ve wondered if tiktok and other new social dysfunction of current generations has made it easier for kids raised in that 50/50 to just “stay” where they were raised.

Perhaps it could all be explained by the weakening of the ability of peer effects to influence young people’s political beliefs. Young men feel they have more community in online conservative spaces than they do in their more egalitarian real world social environments, so instead of ditching their parents beliefs to match their real world friends they ditch their real world friends that don’t match their beliefs.

There is no contradiction. Anyone can put their foot in their mouth or trip up what they’re saying. Doesn’t mean they are casual or even rare users of racial slurs. My point is If somebody is saying something racist it’s easy enough to criticize that without resorting to pointing out they used one phoneme of a bad word. It just sounds petty and it doesn’t at all speak to the people that need convincing that the rhetoric around immigrants is unacceptable. Do you want to feel superior or do you want to win?

Did he do that? It’s not clear. Sounds like he just fumbled his words. And no I don’t use them on accident or on purpose but nice try

Then just attack his racist comments and not speaking. It’s not clear that’s what he said. There’s plenty of racist people who would never ever in a million years use that word. If they’re really so bad it’s easy to beat them on substance without resorting to gotchas that can happen to anyone

AI is cool. AI research is valuable. AI has the power to be a transformative technology.

Corporate AI hype for tech fueled neofeudalism is not cool. Commodification of AI is not valuable. LLMs will never substantively change the world.

This whole message reads like “we don’t actually care but we have to say that we do 😉🙂‍↕️”

retired

😐

Depends which one is a more fundamental belief. If you are willing to vote for socially liberal agenda despite being a (horribly misguided) fiscal conservative then that’s a disagreement and something we can work through. If you are willing to vote for a fiscal conservative agenda (republicans) despite being a social liberal, yeah, you clearly have terrible and selfish priorities.

Two cycles ago (Obama v Romney) was the first time a candidate even openly supported gay marriage. We are still in the infancy of queer liberation

Extremely rare side effects aside, what about all the kids whose lives you destroy by _not _ intervening? Do you know how many confused cis kids go on blockers, decide they want to stop and go on and live a cis life? It literally almost never happens.

Of the children accessing trans healthcare available to minors, the overwhelming majority are trans kids who do not detransition or regret anything they do to transition. The kid you are “protecting” is that “confused cis kid” who is vastly outnumbered by genuinely trans children who will become transgender adults. By withholding blockers (at the minimum), you are sacrificing the well being of the overwhelming users of blockers, genuinely trans children, for the sake of the wellbeing of an almost non existent subgroup of confused cis kids.

How many trans kids lives are worth sacrificing so that one cis kid might not accidentally do something totally reversible that might increase their risk of cancer the same amount as eating bacon?

When you put it all together like that and the outcome is still a desire to prevent access, one has to ask: maybe the point is to make the trans kids suffer? Maybe the point is to make it harder for them to blend in with cis people? Maybe the point is to not treat their illness in hopes they give up and conform or kill themselves?

*at least I’m safe inside my mind *

Why not password protect the keys (ala Linux ssh / gpg symmetric encryption for local storage of PPK)

BuT wE hAvE jOuRnAlIsTiC iNtEgRiTy. AlSo FuCk DaVe SiRoTa

I literally could not even tell you who tf George soros is or what he’s known for besides triggering conservatives for being rich and donating to dems

Thats probably a more accurate and charitable meaning of what they are referring to here, I’m just being cheeky. Cause that’s the thing, all the “rich” people that conservative middle class people are mad at are upper middle class people lol it’s people that have it slightly better than them, ignoring / simping on the mega rich

Let’s take a minute to appreciate the real victims of patriotism, the “very rich”

Half the time I look on stack overflow it feels like the answer is irrelevant by todays standards