• 0 Posts
  • 86 Comments
Joined 7 months ago
cake
Cake day: March 6th, 2026

help-circle




  • Demilitarization is just a (admittedly big on account of how counter to the long running paradigm it would be) single step.

    The next 5 presidents will have a lot of work to do over the next 20 years…in the as of now extreme hypothetical thought exercise where the country is steered towards actually being an honest member of the global community.

    This hypothetical can’t even happen as long as the fascism is on active display mind you, so that means it would have to be thrown back into the shadows (most likely imo) or finally fully eradicated (I fucking wish).

    But after all that, the next 20 years of US history would need to be a lot of demilitarization, a lot less meddling in the affairs of other countries with the sole goal of “How does the US come ahead of absolutely everyone?” and a hitherto unknown for practically the entire country’s history period of “What do we negotiate to make a better world in which the US thrives because the world was made better?”.

    In addition to a lot of work and money spent to recoup any semblance of soft power back, and a lot of loss in easy political wins.

    The soft power can’t even begin to pretend to be restored without a lot of spending on public education and I don’t just mean schooling for children.

    Extensive outreach to deprogram the ‘might is right’ and other assorted fascist/racist bullshit out of the population would be required, because it’s easy as shit for other countries to see when there’s no political will in the American people to force its leaders to carry through with something.

    Fuck, I could stay here all day, but it’s also kind of depressing. It’s not impossible, none of it.

    But the hurdles to fix this fuckery? Hella.

    Maybe with some dragon gold hoards in the people’s Treasury, and some nice and fancy dragon scale armor, it would be easier. Grinding boss fights for XP tends to make the journey easier 🗡️.

    That probably should be one of the earlier steps and sure would show the world some commitment.




  • Aqivex@fedinsfw.apptoLemmy Shitpost@lemmy.world•Dog Love
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    12 days ago

    A farmer may want to make sure the law lets him fist his steers or whatever the farmer lingo is, whilst holding a fancy turkey baster with cow batter for the oven, for money. For more cows.

    Does his nephew diddle the sheep? I dunno. What happens in Kansas and stays in Kansas affects me a lot less on the day to day than…

    The director of the FBI seemingly and very vocally suspiciously trying to make his dog whistle sexy.

    These sick fucks would bring back the coliseum if they could, and make sure they bold on the marquee in big bold letters how the show features wild beasts sating their every appetite.

    So yeah, I personally count AG carve outs a few rungs beneath the wtf ladder from googly-eye. The horror machine AG exemptions can and do empower as far animal welfare goes non-withstanding.

    Because these weird fascist fucks always project their desires that they want to push on the rest of us in advance and this one is just fucking weird.



  • It would be pretty trivial for their backend system to interpret the images server side and build an identification profile for each vehicle. This way, even if you remove your plate, your vehicle can be identified.

    They already are.

    That’s what Nightshift/OS whatever the fuck they changed the name to, the law enforcement portal that makes use of the camera feeds and cross references with/across the various law enforcement databases, empowers.

    The publication briefly mentioned it obliquely, but the article is about the camera software itself and they’re being remarkably restrained in their reporting. To avoid legal challenges perhaps.



  • That’s because this is the normal flow of things. Pare the mediums away, and you’re left with the same basic core: Stories.

    The storyteller always has a reason for telling a story. Even when they are only setting out to entertain.

    To be able to separate one’s actual feelings, knowledge, and values in order to write a purely entertaining tale, requires that the storyteller be aware of them. At which point they must then take an extra step to insert others.

    What stories are, at their heart is the passing of an abstract message or purpose encoded in a surface pattern meant to be cognitively sticky.

    The reason might be to teach the young in the tribe the seasonal crop patterns as it was thousands of years ago, as it still is in some places.

    Or it could be a commentary on the social state of the times. Or any other thing.

    But the other thing a story must be, is engrossing.

    A good story must be entertaining or funny or terrifying. It must tug at the emotions of the listener in some way.

    That’s what makes it stick. That’s how stories work.

    There is nothing wrong with refusing to dig deeper into the meaning of a tale, especially if it’s presented or done poorly. That turns it into a lesson.

    But the best stories, it doesn’t matter if you seek out the deeper meaning or not.

    It’ll be there regardless and so will the story, and if and when the listener grows, the meaning will make itself clear on the next recounting.


  • Aqivex@fedinsfw.apptoLemmy Shitpost@lemmy.world•Impressive
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    17 days ago

    One should never engage in sounding as an escape for the ennui of life.

    Once it gets old the only next step is to try to fill the hole in your life by filling all the holes at once. Then when that doesn’t work you gotta work in electrification, macabre-sex circus acts, and hand holding.

    Even more after that.

    It never ends, and the slippery slope isn’t your bum like every fella thinks, it’s your pee hole.

    This is a cautionary tale.


    • I addressed the realpolitik in my last sentence re: black sites.

    • You seem to overestimate the acumen of the current members of the praetorian guard, in a way that is out of sync with their recorded performance lately.

    • The hypothetical presented has the perpetrator instigating a physical altercation in a moment of passionate rage, whereupon the perpetrator has placed themselves in an unfavorable position from which there is not enough time to avoid consequences.

    Whether the Secret Service risks shooting their charge to kill the hypothetical reporter on the spot or does their actual job and throws the sack of lies over the back of a strapping agent is not a part of the hypothetical.

    In such a scenario, the victim may be dead, but the perp, does not escape the classical (maladjusted) but natural response to saying shit like what is regularly produced with impunity, to another human being. The elderly perp.

    It doesn’t matter how big or tough you are. It does not matter what is legal, what is right or wrong, or any other factor. The victim would be dead, and the perp would be immune.

    You’re looking at the whole hypothetical exercise the wrong way. Despite its cathartic construction, it’s not about how big or tough.

    The enemy cannot be considered neither overwhelmingly strong nor inconsequentially weak.

    To say either one in absolutist terms is to play word games, rather than approaching a fight how it should be approached.

    Honest estimation bound to context is required to “Know thy enemy”.



  • He could be found not guilty due to Presidential action all day long for not committing assault and battery for all I care.

    So long as the boxing champ working for AXY news or whatever is also found to have acted in self defense in accordance to their jurisdiction after their reflexive and mighty right hook starts a needed constitutional crisis.

    The courts can handle the absurdity.

    Not that the presidential immunity is ok at all, far from it.

    But there’s a vital distinction between “Can’t be charged for anything while performing Presidential duties” and “Anyone who exercises a legal right that crosses unto the protected person has that legal right deactivated”.

    Which…yes, pretty much is defacto currently for 99/100 things that any aggrieved party could claim as a grievance committed by the US. Gov, currently and effectively, I’m aware.

    But unstoppable force meeting immovable mouth?

    I feel codifying that too deeply would be a legal bridge too far.

    Not for decency but because what it means for the puppeteering interests. The reporter would be more at risk of ending in a black site than a courtroom, imo.


  • It would be even more hilarious than that.

    Assuming he couldn’t just TACO and leave the encounter at the first opportunity anyways.

    He’d be trying to one-up the exchange but he’s neither smart enough for genuine roasting quips, nor half as crass as an instigator could be.

    Just constant sad old man energy “No you’s” while getting dunked on.

    Would take him like 30 seconds of genuinely facing vocal opposition he can’t simply pay to have stop, before he folds and completely narcissists-implodes into full body tantrums his physique can’t cash.