The main weakness
is it’s a pain in the ass.
one of these is not like the others
sorry, bruh: on a scale from critically important to idgaf, this ain’t ranking
Nope, and the suckers who did can suck big, fat ones.
Bruh, everyone else just posts a link to an archive.
Okay, but where are the diagrams?
Is it illegal for US citizens to donate?
Did you know that it’s illegal to say, “I wish someone would kill the president of the united states”?
Nope: can’t know things that aren’t true.
It’s not a true threat. When someone said
If they ever make me carry a rifle the first man I want to get in my sights is L.B.J.
that, too, was rejected as a true threat. The Secret Service may pay you a visit, though.
So, when are you not killing the president?
physics too hard: nonphysical things can’t kill? preposterous
Basically. Pretending the harm of something physical going wrong (potential to cause real death) is at all comparable to the nonphysical going wrong (a jumble of angry words) is unreal. Lemmy confirms the premise that this discourse & the people spouting it are broken & senseless. The distinction between physical & nonphysical is lost on these loonies.
How do you control the course of a failing rocket? Are you claiming such misdesign is impossible?
The fact remains that unlike with words, a physical potential of death & injury exists in what is technically a missile of significant weight carrying enough explosive substance to escape orbit. The difference between non-0 and 0 possibility of death/injury.
Unless magic exists, words are incapable. Do you claim magic exists? How do mere words cause death without the personal responsibility of something else culpably choosing to take several steps of its own? Or are you arguing the sight of words have deranged you into a mindless killer? If so, maybe you’re the real threat.
Seems like you’re arguing society is dangerous to life: I agree. That’s not a valid argument against words, though.
Again, total lack of perspective & sense.
reading comprehension: none
Don’t know, man: kinda think the potential loss of life from a failing rocket crashing into people matters somewhat more than words. Maybe?
Musk himself seems to abhor guardrails generally—except in cases where guardrails help him personally—preferring to hurriedly ship products, rapid unscheduled disassemblies be damned. That may be fine for an uncrewed rocket, but X has hundreds of millions of users aboard.
In this discourse, anyone else find a broken sense of proportion & consequences at stake?
The text editor has
Anything independent of human convention (like the rest of nature) isn’t. Neither is anything a priori (like logic).
There’s no confusion. I was merely adding that they’re all social constructs. (As real as money.)
Partly inspired by socks.
Social currency & sanctimonious displays to gain it: also a social construct.
The rule is it’s a taboo word particularly in the US and in English-speaking communities aware of its US history. In the US, there’s an ingroup & outgroup dynamic with the black community where in less formal registers the ingroup may use it
However, the ingroup speaks in black vernacular English, so the word sounds different.
You’re recognized as a member of the ingroup community if they generally perceive you as such: culture, speech, appearance, other social markers.
Usage by the outgroup is typically treated as insensitive & insulting outside special cases such as quotation & academic discussion. The euphemism n-word is typically employed to minimize offense.
Permissibility also a social construct. Society, too.
Free trip to Sudan, here we come!
If you killed Ted Cruz on the floor of the Senate, and the trial was in the Senate, nobody would convict you.
―Lindsey Graham
Makes it harder: when I go to the wrong website, the manager simply doesn’t suggest credentials (it does not have) for it. That causes me to wonder why.
Without a password manager, a user is never prompted to wonder. They’d simply not notice.