Oh man. The last part of my comment is a joke. Im mocking you. You seem like you’d be really fun at parties. Go shitsplain jokes to someone else.

Populism sucks. Blame your troubles on the most vulnerable.

Even if it were true that migrants were taking the jobs and even if they did return home then they will just live in poverty in their home country.

Its more for the benefit of your executionists. A fig leaf for their shame.

Exactly. It’s something like a gish gallop - you can’t really rebut that and explain why it’s a comment made in bad faith, but to casual readers it’s a valid retort.

That sounds like a hell of a survey.

Mine are always like “on a scale of 0 to 10, 0 being very poor and 10 being outstanding, how would you rate the service you have received today?”

Fair point. I do agree.

Correct on all counts.

Most stupid questions in nostupidquestions are indeed stupidquestions, but… that’s literally what its for.

With the frankly pathetic MAU numbers on the fediverse this stuff doesn’t matter very much.

After her weird press thingy a month ago this is what everyone concluded, yes.

You’re right, I don’t know him, but I still think you’re making up a deeper level of humor that wasn’t intended.

“Luckily the good guys have won every single time” is a very direct jab at historians always casting themselves as the good guys.

You’re all up in here like “wull ackshually this is a post modern commentary on feminism because he’s used the gendered phrase ‘guys’ and you just wouldn’t get it because reasons”.

Ill have to take your word for it. As written, it doesn’t seem that way to me at all.

The joke refers to the addage that history is written by the victor, but that just isn’t true.

I have no idea, but I have some supposition: no it won’t work.

Like others have said warships used to do something similar.

The naive idea is a WWII concept: that the hard lines make it more difficult to see your heading from a distance.

The problem is drones don’t “see” the way people do.

Indeed.

Also just naive to think that there are “good guys” and “bad guys”. When you dig into the nuance of any conflict its almost always complicated.

Naming a Bluetooth device “bomb” could absolutely be intentionally disruptive or threatening.

Im not saying thats provable beyond reasonable doubt in this case.

Cherry picking.

These are just weeds growing in the rail reserve, of which there are many billions which do not receive the life giving drips from the air con condenser on a briefly stopped passenger carriage.

In a couple of days the maintenance crew will spray them with glyphosate and this “tiny ecosystem” will cease to exist.

Probably using speech to text so, that’s already happening.

Actually I’m interested to hear your perspective because I have no experience of anything like that.

I just feel like star trek has romanticised space exploration to the point where most people can’t conceptualise the hardships that would be involved.

Just as an example, on the ISS, just outside earth’s atmosphere, ive heard that the air smells putrid. Astronauts just deal with it because they’re passionate about the project.

I guess my pessimistic view is that “life on Mars” would basically be very similar to life on a submarine but with no ports or shore leave or furlough.

As time rolls on im increasingly confused by the growing chasm between the lovers and the haters.

FWIW im firmly team fuckai. I find the implications for the future and for my children kinda terrifying.

The part I dont really understand is that to me it just seems SO inescapably terrible for any specific purpose, but people still seem to think ita useful.

WDYM? Its right there.

Sorry you’re thinking about it like, if everyone has a lawn that needs to be mowed then there will be many mower guys all competing on price.

In this case someone has built a gargantuan mower in the middle of your city that eats a dozen students an hour and everyone prefers to more their own lawn anyway.