Alternate suggestion: be tall and wear regular platform boots. Tower over me.

Interesting. I also had only the vaguest impression of the person pushing the ball, but I definitely caught a glimpse before the ball rolled off the table. Slacks and a blue shirt, that was about it.

It made them nervous because someone might put parts of the original source into Wine. You can’t do that in a rewrite in a different language, it doesn’t even make sense. The thing the people in this screenshot are gloating about isn’t even relevant to this license.

You can’t name just one time he lied because if you refer to any specific statement he’s made, it contains at least two lies.

That’s what he said last time. Only two things will actually stop him: the death of the Republican Party or his own

Dean Browning might.

Is this legal?

Yes, it’s called “opposition research” (frequently abbreviated “oppo”) and the political parties do it constantly to one another. Because they’re doing it this much, and because they have a LOT less scruples than you do, they’ve probably already uncovered everything you would. But maybe not all.

In addition, doing this publicly would put the target on alert, so they’d specifically run interference against whoever you hired. This wouldn’t make their job impossible, but definitely harder.

And, finally, whatever new dirt you do manage to gather might not matter. The things Trump has done that the public already knows about should be enough to put him in prison for life, and yet he’s still in the current US presidential election instead of incarceration.

Come on, you were gonna drink and smoke anyway

Not to mention social security. “Not old enough to retire” is extremely literally true for many people.

So let me get this straight: you hate ad companies and want to cast them all into the fire (a position I agree with, fwiw);

but you also think they are ethical enough and competent enough to self-police running against nazi shit.

What

No, you don’t understand.

The advertising entities, who definitely suck ass, would be MUCH WORSE and so would EVERYTHING ELSE if there wasn’t someone telling them “don’t put ads next to nazis”. It’s called harm reduction dude.

The org’s mission was to tell advertisers when they’re advertising next to hate crimes. You really don’t want advertisers to make money from ads next to hate crimes, because that incentivizes people posting nazi shit on social media. And this org would prevent that. It’s not a bad thing.

Its disappearance won’t really matter much because it’s a paper fiction anyway, and there’ll be another one.

Heck yeah hook us up

I’d make it my social media bio.

Accurate.

No matter what question you ask them, they have an answer. Even when you point out their answer was wrong, they just have a different answer. There’s no concept of not knowing the answer, because they don’t know anything in the first place.

They don’t care. At the moment AI is cheap for them (because some other investor is paying for it). As long as they believe AI reduces their operating costs*, and as long as they’re convinced every other company will follow suit, it doesn’t matter if consumers like it less. Modern history is a long string of companies making things worse and selling them to us anyway because there’s no alternatives. Because every competitor is doing it, too, except the ones that are prohibitively expensive.

[*] Lol, it doesn’t do that either

The objection about a “finite planet” is about capitalism, not currency. A 100% communist system can still have fiat currency and function perfectly well, the two aren’t even related.

It’s capitalism you don’t like, not money.

There’s a lesson here for lurkers looking at this conversation :-) Block people all you want. You don’t need a good reason. There’s no Socratic Method Fairy who’s gonna get mad at you for refusing to engage with bad faith arguments, lying, or abuse. Just click on the username, the block button is near the top and pretty big.

About to block a few accounts here myself.

Well I learned about it from a meme, but there is indeed research:

https://www.newsweek.com/kamala-harris-more-liberal-bernie-sanders-senate-record-analysis-shows-1524481

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/members/report-cards/2020/senate/ideology

GovTrack’s methodology isn’t unassailable (they still have to figure out how to score certain legislative actions to produce these report cards), but it it repeatable and impartial.

Something I learned yesterday: Statistically, Harris’ voting record is closer to Sanders than anyone else’s record.