Wars are extremely hard things to justify. It is intrinsic to what they are that they tend to death, destruction, and misery. Given this and some knowledge of history, one's default attitude towards powerful people purporting to do the world some great benefit by war should be extreme scepticism.
can confirm this
Markwayne Mullin Reportedly Fingered Nostrils of Colleagues and Their Spouses During Visit to Israel
not that sick & twisted yet
yeah that definition is very Lawvere. I don't really have a good way of thinking of that as some kind of "categorification of topological space" though, if that makes sense?
Grothendieck topologies feel like inventions from an alternate universe in which we more routinely talk about filters and covers instead of points and opens
topological groupoids, which are just groupoids in topological spaces, are topological over groupoids. so don't even worry it all works out
topological groupoid: beautiful, elegant
bounded ionad: neat!!!
category with a Grothendieck topology: wtf why
the thing about markwayne mullin is that his name is not the dumbest thing about him
My humble suggestion about age verification is that we've gone through two decades of widespread access to a mostly unregulated internet where children had free access to most sources, including adult sources, and everything we know about younger political demographics
De-colonizing the canon with Chicano voices (William F. Buckley Jr.)
A lot of people say AI isn't very good for the world and its outputs are routinely unreliable, but these haters fail to see how it's revolutionizing how we incinerate schoolchildren.
do you believe *Nancy Mace* managed to craft good policy that would do something to help victims and cast out the perpetrators, and then tried her best at gathering support?
or do you believe she just kinda said fuck it and sent it?
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez @AOC The idea is good but the text itself was rushed and not thought through. It violated a lot of standard practices to protect survivors and due process: 1. It also released documents related to allegations found to be false or unsubstantiated, not just verified violations or settlements. So innocent people would get lumped in with violators. 2. To our knowledge, there was zero victim consent or consultation on this text. That is very different than with Epstein, where victims are centered and consulted at every step. Here, victims offered all their statements with the promise of protection and anonymity. The text gave them no way to have a voice in what information of theirs or their accounts they wanted public or keep private. That is important because… 3. Although there was a throwaway line about redacting victim names, I do believe full witness or victim statements would have been released. With the way employment at the House works (offices are small, time periods of staff employment are publicly disclosed, etc) it means that even with names redacted you can definitely track details in witness statements and use that to ID victims without their consent. And there was zero mechanism for victims themselves to assert their privacy. Originally we were supposed to debate the details of the text over two days but for some reason they rushed the vote so we couldn’t iron out any of these details to get this information properly disclosed in a way that guarantees victim safety. If the text was clean I think you’d get a lot more support. As a survivor, I know why the vast majority of women never report at all and a lot of those reasons, even if unintentionally or inadvertently, were included here. For me at least, guaranteeing the safety and agency of victims and survivors would get me to a YES.
yeah pretty much what I thought was going on
if coming forward about workplace sexual harassment or assault necessitated that fact becoming a matter of public record and political discussion, I can buy that there might be some additional reticence, yeah, sure
I'm sure all the votes against weren't so virtuously motivated but like clearly there was some consideration put into basically everyone voting against this
basically the Ethics Committee argued that this measure making *everything* public would just make any (future) investigation infeasible?
seems like it was just poorly executed? like it needed an edit to make sure they weren't like ruining some survivor's life just because
the show is also clearly taking inspiration from Green Arrow/Green Lantern to which I ask...wh y
just give me Green Arrow haven't I been good
I cite: the time he drove drunk or the time he dated that 13-year-old girl or everything he said to John Stewart back in the day
I like that the thesis of the Green Lantern show appears to be that Hal Jordan sucks, which has always been true
love a "yeah, yeah [small smile and nod] good"
eliezer jump scare
TERA CHAD Clavicular has been MOGGED by Iranian missile strikes in DUBAI, leaving him DEAD and AURALESS... only to be reborn as an anime horse girl?? watch "Umamusume: Pretty Derby – Lead the Charge Kurabikyura-kun!!!" on Crunchyroll today
i didn't really want to criticize jasmine crockett because of how ~ racialized ~ so many critiques felt, but also god i really wanted to criticize jasmine crockett
and also defenses of her, especially on here, felt like booting up cringey Woke version 0.8 (unreleased beta)
i use a timer as if i know what i'm doing but really i'm winging it every time
of course, enigmas never die
if you want to really feed the conspiratorial mindset, we're apparently only *pretty sure* that this con man illusionist fraudster/Epstein fixer Al Seckel is dead
more fun undecidability news: Yu-Gi-Oh!
Hi hello just QRPing some info abt this coming in from the other site. This news is fake, it was a hallucination.
