The TLDR: Don’t criticize China, you’re wrong anyway.

I don’t think you have an idea of how much of an information bubble Russia is in? In case you haven’t noticed the “western” internet speaks almost universally English. Unless you’re in some niche national community you’re unlikely to see any other language. We’re speaking English right now and that’s not my first language. Last time I checked something like 1 in 20 Russians understand English and even less can actually speak it. The vast majority of the Russian population, despite having near full access to the internet, are locked in the Russian sphere of information. And their primary search tool, Yandex, is majority owned by the oligarchs.

When you live in Russia you really have to go out of your way to escape the Russian propaganda. The vast majority of people in any country would never go to such lengths to get an broader view of a subject. Most probably wouldn’t even understand they need a broader view than what their regular media feeds them.

Feel free to correct me but nobody got a majority so 2 of the 3 largest coalitions would have to come to an agreement to get a majority. Macrons coalition could align with the left and Macron could appoint a prime minister without the opposition blocking it. So how exactly are Macrons hands tied? Does he have no control over the coalition he himself created?

Maybe she was taught the “when mommy and daddy really love each other” way of getting pregnant.

At no point did I say Ukraine shouldn’t get what it needs to end the war. What I said is that we shouldn’t let Ukraine get away with the same things Russia is doing. If for example Ukraine would gas the Russian front line we shouldn’t be “well Russia did it first”. Chemical warfare is not acceptable. Turning a blind eye towards atrocities is how we got Isreal.

The other guy is pretty much saying it would be okay if Ukraine dirty bombed Moscow because he is literally implying we should kill all Russians.

Go learn history. This “we must show them” mentality is how after WW1 Nazis got into a position of power. And no, we didn’t kill all of them. Some were sent to the Hague, most were picked up by the US (unsurprisingly US now has a fascism problem) and the rest (the wider population) got collectively guilted out of nazism. Oh and we made sure Nazi and Fascist are so bad words that actual Nazis and Fascists use them in a derogatory way to not associate themselves with that word.

The idea that we should ruthlessly kill Russians because Putin is a horrible person is Lemmygrad level of idiotic.

You missed the point. The point the other guy made is that for the past 50+ countries have turned a blind eye to Isreal not playing by the rules and that has let Israel become more and more ruthless to a point where they’re the ones effectively committing genocide. Maybe Ukraine won’t turn out like Israel but is it really the door we want to open?

Just because Russia is getting increasing more violent and inhumane doesn’t mean Ukraine should follow the same path. Nobody is saying Ukraine shouldn’t defend itself (or fight on Russian soil), we’re just saying we shouldn’t turn a blind eye if Ukraine starts shelling humanitarian corridors, chopping off legs of prisoners, gas striking the front etc.

I get what you’re saying but it’s still supporting the war. It’s like if someone grew up bigoted because of their upbringing. Guess what, they’re still a bigot.

Your choice to be ignorant about the world doesn’t excuse you when the world bites you in the ass. We can only hope the war at their doorstep is a wakeup call.

If by “well maintained” you mean keeping a whitelist of instances, then yeah. But I doubt anyone is doing that because it’s actually counterproductive to the concept of fediverse. By keeping a whitelist you are creating an in group and an out group and instances can live or die based on that grouping.

As for why you’d need a whitelist, you can’t defend against a malicious attack if they keep spinning up new instances with bots designed to spread misinformation. The moment you ban once instance another one gets spun up. The only solution is a whitelist so all new instances are automatically blocked. Of course that works if all “normal” instances also have proper registration policies and can’t become attack vectors.

If the fediverse becomes wildly popular defending the instance can become a full-time job as the open nature gives more attack vectors. Also most instances are ran by volunteers so it’s probably not going to be a good time for anyone.

But it’s broken and unplayable because the developer/publisher renders it unplayable and that’s where the initiative comes in. The initiative wants to make it so that if the developer/publisher wants to turn off their official services they don’t render the game unplayable.

You’re stating it like it’s somehow objective, but it’s not. Battlefield 3 and 4 have been delisted and it’s a matter of time until EA turns off services and those games are left for dead. Battlefield 4 still averages above 1k players a month. It’s clear that EA won’t see value in keeping the light on and will turn off the services in the near future, but do you think the players will go overnight from “I want to play this game” to “This game is worthless”. Don’t you think the people playing BF4 wouldn’t want to continue playing after EA shuts down the services keeping the game running?

I think it’s pretty obvious that there are two groups who decide if a game has value or not, the company and the customers. Right now after purchasing the game the customers no longer have a say whether a game has value or not. Only the company has a say and if the company says it’s not worth it then the people who bought it just have to suck it up. And that’s the idea behind the initiative, to make it so that the company isn’t the only one who gets to decide how long you get to use the product you’ve purchased.

I think if we expanded the idea of bricking software beyond gaming, if companies could destroy any piece of software they made, you’d also be in favor of this initiative. Imagine if Microsoft could brick Windows 10 when they’ve officially stopped supporting it. Or Nvidia effectively bricking their older cards by stopping official driver support. Would you then also argue that the software has lost value and it’s acceptable behavior?

I usually agree with Thor but on this one I probably couldn’t disagree more. Based on what he says I’d say his mindset is completely opposite to what his initiative wants to do. He essentially said he doesn’t see any value in (live service) games after they’ve reached their end of service and from that perspective I can understand how this movement is pointless or even potentially damaging. But that assumes that the (live service) game loses value after the company stops supporting it and I just don’t think that’s the case.

A lot of games continue live despite the company ending official support for them. If anyone remembers there’s a gem called Wildstar that was shut down in 2018. Despite the game being shut down and even trademark has expiring people are still running the game on private servers. People are putting in sweat and tears to make sure a game is preserved. Imagine how much easier it would be if Carbine or NcSoft had released proper tools for it. Even Vanilla WoW exists because private server did it first and Blizzard wanted to get some of that money.

And another point that Thor made how it’s not about preservation because you can’t preserve a moment in time. I think that’s a completely disingenuous argument because it feeds into FOMO. If you join WoW today you will never experience “the golden age of WoW”. Maybe another game you might be interested in is having a golden age right now, better buy into the hype. You can’t argue against preservation like this because it’s literally impossible to preserve a moment in time except in your memory so you have be at that exact place at that exact time to really experience that thing, that is FOMO at it’s purest form. That argument against preservation is an argument in favor of FOMO.

Thors points come for a belief that live service games don’t need to be preserved after official support has ended, and he views this initiative through that lens. Of course he will have issues with the initiative because he’s opposing the idea at a fundamental level. It’s like asking a racist how to be more tolerant with other races, the answer obviously is that you shouldn’t want to tolerate other races. And just like you would ignore a racist I think you should ignore what Thor has to say on this matter because anything he says is against the idea of preservation.

Because in many countries 0.5 is considered non-alcoholic and most countries don’t differentiate between non-alcoholic and alcohol-free, so it’s legally not false advertising.

Also you physically cannot get drunk when drinking 0.5 abv beer which means in terms of drunkeness there’s functionally no difference if people drink 0 abv beer or 0.5 abv beer. Recovering alcoholics can have a response to but that can be due to sensory cues making the alcoholic believe they’re getting drunk and not the actual ethanol in the drink. Recovering alcoholics (at least to my knowledge) are also recommended to steer clear of alcohol free beer due to the same sensory cues. So who really needs the distinction between non-alcoholic and alcohol-free?

And as a follow-up. If there really is the need for distinction should that distinction exist for food as well? Do we need a disclaimer that ripe bananas can contain 0.2 to 0.4 ABV of alcohol?

So is Twitter but that didn’t stop Twitter from becoming wildly popular. YouTube shorts are just tweets in a video format.

Tankies are never in shambles. If Ukraine doesn’t join NATO they’ll say “See, NATO was just using Ukraine” and if Ukraine joins NATO they’ll say “See, NATO is expanding east again”. Tankies are never wrong when it comes to believing their own delusions.

You think immigration is that much of an issue but then lay out right-wing talking points as the issue and offer literally nothing to back them up. And then you act like I’m not asking genuinely and I should give you the stats about things you can’t even properly specify.

I’m going to stick with there’s no actual immigration issue you just don’t want immigrants.

This reads exactly like a list of right-wing talking points, no real numbers and just a bunch of fear mongering.

1% per year is huge

I said less than 1%, you present it as 1%.

By the time someone is born and get into the workforce and look at buying a house the population has gone up ~25%.

Which would also happen if you had high birth rates but somehow right-wing groups tend to promote more births. Why they do it is because the overall population in Europe is in decline. Without immigration and at current birth rates Europe’s population is projected to go down not up.

Yea immigration is an issue depending on how you see it. If you want to keep wages down and house prices up it’s good.

Immigration is not stagnating wages and forcing the cost of living up. Immigration can play a role in that but without you giving any actual numbers I have a hard time blaming immigration for that. You should be asking your government why they’re not addressing stagnating wages and rising cost of living instead of blaming it on immigrants.

If you concerned about increasing wages, having a house, your culture, low crime, less government spending then certain immigration is really bad. People against immigration aren’t usually against a doctor coming from a closely alined friendly country. People against immigration is against how it has become an issue, not immigration in general. People want a say on the matter.

This is literally the “immigrants are ruining our country” argument.

But the stats on immigration. Not just the feels as portrayed by a lot of people on the left show there are significant issues with crime and how it impacts working class people, never mind culture changing drastically. But this isn’t immigration as a whole, this is some immigration.

I love how you said how the left plays on feels and not stats, but I pretty much asked for stats send you’re playing for feels. Not a single number, just a bunch of vague “some immigrants are bad”.

But for a lot of people, even talking about it immediately makes you a Nazi. So people vote for people that don’t treat them like shit for wanting to keep the way of life as is rather than selling out everything in the life for the gain of businesses and the upper class at the expense of themselves.

And this is the crux of the issue. You acknowledge that workers are “selling out everything in the life for the gain of businesses and the upper class at the expense of themselves”, but then instead of blaming the wealthy you blame immigrants? That is literally what right-wing groups want. They take legitimate grievances people have and then instead of pointing at the culprits, who also tend to be their party members, they point at the outsiders, immigrants, and say they’re to blame.

If that’s all you have then I don’t think you have an actual immigration problem, just one propped up by the right wing.

I think you might’ve missed my point. Policy can be taken as “always as issue” in the same as taxation is “always an issue”, because people will always have opinions on how to do things. But my question was more along the lines of there being an actual problem with the current policy or did people just start complaining about immigration because the right wing complains about immigration.

My experience was that people didn’t really mind immigration until the right wing started complaining how the current policy is bad and we’re letting freeloaders and other questionable individuals in.

Genuine question, is immigration really an issue or just something right-wing tries to prop up as an issue? Where I live the right-wing also campaigned heavily on immigration issue claiming that immigrants are coming and ruining the country. Year after year the average immigration was less than 1% of the entire population and in the special occasion where it went above 1% was when we took in Ukrainian refugees. But right wing kept propping it up until some people started to believe we actually have an immigration issue.

With that I mind I think we should always question whatever right-wing presents because they’re not above making shit up. If some right wing politician says the sky is blue I would get a second opinion before believing it.

So tell SCOTUS either they reverse it and add that they’ll never do it again or they get “executive ordered”. If they refuse you “executive order” them, after all that’s what they thought wouldn’t be illegal. Continue until you get a SCOTUS who won’t refuse. If the SCOTUS wants to throw their lives away for their own stupidity, let them.