Look I gotta say I’m not seeing this. Of all the things that would inspire someone to look inwards, I don’t see “not being a good guest host of a late night comedy show” or “booed at someone else’s standup comedy routine” as being good examples. That’s the kind of shit high schoolers think adults care about.

I thought the Cybertruck would be his wake up call, but somehow that is the best selling EV pickup in all of North America.

You can get knocked down without being destroyed. Like if he were just forced from his CEO positions they would be great.

A few years ago I would agree with you, but honestly I think female celebs also get away with this stuff, they just didn’t feel as empowered before.

Like nobody outside extremely niche Twitter spaces cared when Taylor Swift dated a 17 year old or when the owner of the Seahawks sexually harassed her bodyguards.

The gossip rags will milk a wooden cow for months though. Dude didn’t get cancelled or anything.

You know it’s kinda weird that nobody gave a shit when Arnold did this. I guess because Arnold didn’t make a brand around being wholesome, except when it comes to the gym?

I keep waiting for this guy to be knocked down a peg and it never really ends up happening. The only time he seemed genuinely embarrassed was when he had to back out of that Zuckerberg fight.

Honestly this reeks of corporate politics. I’m willing to bet at some point in development there was a regime change, and current management pushed this out the door just to clear the board.

Everything I heard about this came seems to indicate that it isn’t terrible by any means, just mediocre and overpriced in an absolutely oversaturated genre. If management was invested in it, they probably could have spent a ton on marketing, achieved middling numbers, and then used those middling numbers to justify continued development for another few months.

I’m confident in saying that because there are a handful of shitty live service games being operated at a loss for no real reason other than shutting them down would mean management would have to actually admit they fucked up.

Look I’m not saying that cooking your own lunch is a prerequisite for being an adult. However complaining about the quality of prepared food while not acknowledging you could just cook is sure as hell immature.

Okay man, believe what you want to believe. I’ve already wasted enough time on you.

Dude fuck off. You 100 percent had a stupid hot take, and are choosing to double down instead of just own it.

There is absolutely nothing I could show you that could change your mind. You phrased your original comment as a good faith question, but in reality you were trying to give yourself ammunition to attack me with.

Your take isn’t even rational. If I thought there was any chance of you changing your mind, I would go through your comment detail by detail showing what arguments you have that are wrong, where you twisted my words, and what claims you avoided.

You’d just respond with more bullshit and more bad faith arguments, until I eventually lost my temper. Arguing with someone like you is a complete waste of time.

Lol, every fucking time. The initial question was in bad faith, the response has misinformation, and there’s always some nonsense moral implication. Yet if I just didn’t respond there would be someone commenting something along the lines how “it’s pretty telling” I don’t engage with this crap.

If there are a multitude of other monsters, then he is not one of history’s greatest monsters. You could probably name half a dozen more evil world leaders from the twentieth century alone. I was initially thinking of Hitler/Stalin, but honestly even people like Saddam are objectively worse people than Reagan and Thatcher.

That’s just one century out of recorded history. It’s just an absolutely absurd statement.

Cow pies. There was nothing in your original comment indicating you are being facetious or intentionally hyperbolic.

This is comically hyperbolic. Ronald Reagan isn’t even the greatest monster in the history of US presidents. Frankly I’m not even sure he was the greatest monster to serve as president in the second half of the twentieth century.

I feel that this is not an honest question, but an attempt for me to state more concrete positions which you will then attack me for using misinformation and bad faith emotional arguments. I’m guessing it’ll be in the form of going bullet point by bullet point, and then with some witty last sentence implying I’m a bad person or a mossad sock puppet.

I’ll state a few obvious ones, in case I’m wrong

• The phrases “intifadah revolution” and “from river to the sea” are blantant antisemitic dog whistles. They are direct references to previous attempts to destroy Israel and terror attacks on Jews worldwide. Despite this, they are still ultimately accepted in liberal circles
• Liberals repeatedly refer to Israel as a European colonial ethnostate state. This is extremely misleading on multiple aspects. The most notable is 22 percent of the Israeli population is Arab, while the largest ethnic subgroup of Jews are mizrahi Jews.
• I’ve heard the Nakba mentioned a million times, but I never hear discussion about how basically every Arab state forced their entire Jewish population into Israel via violence and ethnic cleansing. Hence the reason for the large Mizrahi Jewish population
• College campuses have handled antisemitism claims with kid gloves, because the antisemitism comes from progressive coded groups. Their response would have been completely different if conservative groups were acting in the same way, or if black, Asian, or queer folks were targeted in a similar manner.

The top comments on this post alternate between blaming Israel, claiming the IDF accidentally killed the hostages and blamed Hamas, and claiming the IDF executed the hostages themselves as a psyop.

There is clearly a huge portion of liberals that have extreme issues when it comes to treating this conflict with any sort of nuance or objectivety. They see the conflict primarily though the lens of the US culture wars, are extremely comfortable with declaring themselves informed after reading a few curated social media posts and watching a John Oliver video, and are extremely confident that anyone who disagrees with them is either morally or intellectually inferior.

That mentality works fine when you’re dealing with straightforward issues like legalizing weed or trans bathroom laws, but completely fails here. Geopolitics in general is extremely complicated, the middle east is a particularly complicated issue for geopolitics, and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a particularly complicated issue for the middle east. Despite all this you have people running around with an extreme amount of self assurance that their barely informed zero nuance outlook is unquestionably correct. It’s absolutely insufferable.

All the vegans I meet in real life are normal ass people.

I feel like Jquery is unfairly lumped in here.

While other solutions have eclipsed Jquery, it doesn’t mean it’s in any way bad. Unlike the other products here, it’s still a capable library that solves the tasks it sets out to do. It never became a bloated mess or sold out to the highest bitter.

That being said I wouldn’t really use it today. It doesn’t play that well with modern tooling, and it is extremely easy to write anti patterns into your code. I would recommend either VanillaJS, a web component library like Svelte, or React depending on what you’re trying to do.

I always assumed conservatives would be into those safety razors with ten cent blades.