xor

I don’t think there’s a valid moral argument for burning anybody alive

Hey, this is my screenshot I posted on Reddit a few years back!

The VAST majority of Muslims are just regular, kind people who don’t murder their families.

There may have been a small uptick overall, but that one is disproportionately insane, I think

I mean, they’re right that it’s not FOSS - the F is free as in available to anybody who may wish to use it, which is incompatible with defining who is allowed

Isn’t near transit stations exactly where you’d want to put high density housing?

It makes it difficult to use the pavement, especially for elderly people and people with disabilities, costs the council a bunch of time and money to repair, and doing the repairs often require killing off the tree

Technically, Gilead is a breakaway state from the US ☝️🤓

Hitler used the burning of the Reichstag as an excuse to clamp down on political dissidence and consolidate his power. It’s still not clear whether it was intentionally caused by the Nazis or just a convenient opportunity for them.

They’re both the respective heads of state, and they’re both not members of the legislative branches.

So yeah, in this context they are effectively the same.

I wasn’t claiming that he hasn’t been the president of France; I did, in fact, notice.

I said that’s not what the president of France does.

It’s like getting mad at the King of England for Canadian laws, that’s just not his responsibility, even if he is head of state.

There’s loads of issues with Macron, but I don’t see how he’s responsible for any of the above

The president doesn’t legislate, and he doesn’t command the police, he’s the executive head of state.

I think that’s largely for the same reason; their legal obligations to ensure they don’t facilitate illegal stuff means that the risk of working with companies that do e.g. amateur porn makes the potential consequences (financial processing ban, i.e. effectively the entire company being shut down) massively outweigh the potential benefits.

So you’re right that PH’s legal liability was part of the reasoning, but that pressure largely came from payment processors, for whom the legal consequences are more severe.

Oh no, a toggle switch! Whatever will we do?!

Actually, the Finns already spend 2.4% of their GDP on defense, making them one of the highest defense spenders in Europe (relative to GDP). And they’re famously very well prepared for wartime scenarios.

Turns out sharing a border with Russia makes military spending look very appealing.

No, it isn’t. Acknowledging that a strategy is ideal for the people executing it isn’t the same as agreeing with that strategy.

In fact, the idiom “a perfect storm” refers to a disastrous situation caused by a combination of multiple problems. You wouldn’t argue that using that phrase means you support the disaster.

Can you elaborate on what you mean by web tech? I don’t know much about how matrix works

GIMP is really powerful, but goddamn its UX is abysmal, unfortunately

Find hot Nicoles in your local Fediverse!

Well yeah, there was a deal on nuclear disarmament until Trump tore it up. Not surprising they’re not interested in going through all that again just so he can back out of it for a second time as soon as he wants to look tough.