Yeah that’s how I see it too. Political strategist types can’t understand that not everything is a grand strategy. They assume if they can’t understand the strategy it must be 5-D chess or whatever. But maybe there is no strategy, and they’re just being idiots?

For some reason they simply couldn’t fathom an old man giving up power for the good of the country.

From an economic perspective, it’s mostly positive. Raising a child is expensive, and those costs go on for about 20 years before you have a person that’s economically productive. Most Immigrants are adults and can join the workforce immediately. The economic costs of their childhood was paid by the country they came from. It’s a negative for the country they came from, this is refereed to as a “brain drain.” But for their new country, it’s like a tax paying worker just appeared out of nowhere.

As for the economic negatives, the big one is housing. Too much immigration all at once can result in a shortage of housing. It can also put stress on public services and infrastructure. Businesses may not have the capacity to serve a larger population. These things can adapt of course, but you can’t instantly build a house and you can’t instantly expand public services, etc. So you might want to limit immigration so an area can adapt to all of the various economic needs of a larger population. An immigrant will work and pay taxes and contribute to the local economy, so long term it’s all positives, but there can be a lot of short term problems if a population grows to rapidly.

As for social… well I’m not really much of a sociologist, but just from I can see, people who already live in an area might be uncomfortable being around people of a different culture. Might say crazy things like “They’re eating the dogs!” Yeah that’s crazy, but it is a problem. Not caused by the immigrants themselves, but it’s a problem that does happen when there’s immigration.

But there’s social benefits. Can learn from a new culture. May get some new options for restaurants to go to.

Generally the young will enjoy more social benefit (going out to the different restaurants and learning about different cultures), but the older people will tend to be uncomfortable with it. But that’s just the tendency.

So overall I’d say you do need limits on immigration to mitigate the short term issues, but it’s all positives in the long term.

So you’re encouraging people to commit violence based solely on some shit they’ve seen on the internet?

What makes you any different than any other nutjob that does some crazy shit because “they did their own research” on the internet?

You aren’t going to have an impact on the violence that’s happening on the other side of the world by doing violence in your own country. Get some perspective. You’re saying that people should bring an end to violence by using violence. How does that make any damn sense?

Seen it before… watched it again anyway. Praise Vectron!

Yeah I used to be like that, just not something I’d think of. Now I just automatically swap it out when I finish a tube of toothpaste.

Some of the ad revenue goes to pay the people that made the content tho.

But I have over 10,000 bookmarks!

Problem I have is I got my lastname@gmail.com as my email address. Many times when people with my same last name they’ll type firstname<space>lastname@gmail.com for their email address. And guess who gets signed up?

At first I unsubscribed, replied back to emails that were meant for someone else, etc. But the number of things to unsubscribe from unmanageable and it gets to be too much of a chore.

What they didn’t say was Jamie and Adam were shitting themselves in the workshop on a regularly basis.

IMO it should even be hashed on the client side before being sent so that it doesn’t show up as plaintext in any http requests or logs. Then salted and hashed again server side before being stored (or checked for login).

But if someone got that hashed version they could hack the client to have client side hashing code just send that hashed value to the server. You’d want to have the server to send a rotating token of some sort to use for encrypting the password on the client and then validate it on the server side that it was encrypted with the same token the server sent.

Seems complicated to me… https is probably has good enough encryption, so eh, whatever.

You know Canada is always lobbying Congress for trade deals, right? Every country does these kinds of things with every country they have relations with. The term we usually use for it is “diplomacy”.

Nah it tried to have three ceratops but it only got two of those things.

Changing the length of a second would be so insanely difficult that it’s probably isn’t worth attempting. Pretty mush every other standard unit has the second in there somewhere at some point, so changing that would mean spending decades of changing math on so many things. That story about the Mars probe that slammed into the planet because someone screwed up the units? That would be happening everywhere all the time.

In the end you’re always going to have weirdness with time because the orbit of the Earth around the sun isn’t going to be divided evenly by the rotation of the Earth. Whatever you do is going to come out janky, so why spend all the time and effort to change from our current jankiness to a different janky system? We’d have to put a lot of time and effort into solving the new problems caused by the new jankiness. Then someone else will probably propose some new janky system to replace that system, and it’s a never ending frustration because we’ll never have a perfect system because ultimately orbital mechanics don’t divide into even numbers.

Sure it seems draconian, but how else are we going to get the kids to stop vaping and start smoking cigarettes like we did when we were in high school?

Won’t someone please think of Phillip Morris’ profit margins?

But yeah if you think that we were blameless on 9/11 disregards the history of US foreign politicy.

This is where “But yeah if you think those countries weren’t entirely blameless disregards these country’s support of terrorism”

I won’t though, because unlike you I don’t think there’s any valid rationalization for deliberately targeting civilians. That would just be me lowering myself to the level you lowered yourself to by rationalizing the targeting of civilians.

But you don’t really have any kind of argument against killing civilians because you’ve already suggested that it’s acceptable to do so.

Many many times more. An eye for an eye leaves the world blind.

Why don’t you apply this to 9/11 and October 7? What al Qaeda and Hamas did are an “eye for an eye” mentality aren’t they? Why not just do the sensible thing and denounce these “eye for an eye” actions as inexcusable?

And what’s the point of bringing up that some of them may have done compulsory service at some point in their life under a story about Hamas killing six hostages?

There is a context to this, and there is a narrative being promoted that justifies Hamas taking hostages (which is a war crime) and justifies the killing of these unarmed hastages (which is also war crime) because they were at one time IDF (aeven if that were the case, it would also be a war crime to summary execution prisoners of war).

It’s all about building a permission structure to make the war crimes of Hamas acceptable by attempting to classify the hostages as IDF.

Twitter did have an office in Brazil (with legal representation) but after refusing to implement court ordered bans, the court fined them. Elon Musk threw a temper tantrum and shut down the Brazil office and eliminated his legal representation in Brazil.

Note that Musk will implement bans when requested by authoritarians, just for some reason he draws the line when it’s a court order in a democratic country.

Anyway the situation where Twitter doesn’t have legal representation is a situation Elon Musk created. Basically “I fired my lawyers so there’s nothing you can do against me now! Checkmate!” So Brazil says “fine, I guess we’re banning Twitter then…”

So Space Karen thinks the the law doesn’t apply to him and it’s going to cost him a lot of money. Again.

To be more fair, Brazil is a sovereign country, Starlink is not.

I see you there making an effort to dehumanize the hostages. Shame on you.