Iteria

All I can say to that is that I hope people who didn't vote or voted for republicans enjoy this outcome. Regardless of what anyone thinks when it comes to the general election, you are voting either for someone or against someone. If you don't vote you're saying that you're perfectly fine with either option. The time to whine and be philosophical about candidates is during primaries which most people don't even participate in. That's how you can get your mythical perfect democrat.

Anyone who didn't explicitly vote for a democrat this past election I'm blaming for what the GOP is doing. The democrats are feckless cowards, but they don't accelerate everyone's ruin and sometimes that's the literal best outcome.

My mantra now is have the day you voted for. Not voting is implicitly voting for the winner. I hope that all the petulant people who sat out because their favorite wasn't on the docket or voted red because they have some shiny single thing they care about is personally experiencing everything that the entirety of the GOP platform stands for. I truly wish that they get everything they voted for.

Please, these are just the volunteers who either have years until reelection or are retiring. We know they are just a front because Warner voted yes and then mysteriously changed his vote to no. Couldn't be because his reelection is coming up next year. No way.

Segregation is not mass murder. That's how they could live with themselves. They just didn't want Those People living next to them. They could be over here. Away from them. They would unironically think they were better than nazis.

As a black person, I'll say that of the choices, I do think that segregation worked out better for black people. There is simply more POC wealth in historically segregated areas than areas there that's not true. Turns it, it was actually better to keep racists away from you than letting them torment you while you were trying to establish your community from an even from horrific situation (everything abojt Jim crow and slavery.). I think the battle for integration was a good one, but it was done once there was such a thing as middle class blacks.

I don't want it because I want to expose my kid to things early and gradually. My kid as had a tablet since 1. No one would know that if I didn't tell them. She doesn't use her tablet as a pacifier because of strong parental controls, boundary enforcement and general parenting. She doesn't have unlimited access to YouTube because I learned that 30 mins is about all she can handle for short form videos. But we are working on tolerance and personal boundary settings with it. She started at about 10mins a day.

She's in elementary and we are slowly dipping into social media. Right now she's locked into platforms where she can only interact with a white list of people.

I don't want the government to scream at me that my way is wrong because shit disengaged parents exist. It's like at the stuff about screen time. It turns out the one study i read was correct. I don't harm or hurt as long as it doesn't replace human interaction.

Letting it be a free for all at 16 isn't going to do anything but make it worse because then kids at that age will get no guidance and it'll just be binging now with less societal care since nothing with be made to onboard children at all.

It's not shitty parenting. Kids at a certain age just don't take correction from people who they don't feel have a right to correct them. Sometimes that person is no one. My kid refuses to believe the sun is not a planet. She will argue until she's blue in the face. She has argued that she's a boy. Later that she's a girl. She misgendered people all the time and wasn't open to correction from anyone including me for a while. You think, "call people what they want to be called" is an easy lesson to teach. It is not. It took over a year to make it stick. Kids are just dicks sometimes.

I mean... the Japanese who as a nation are mostly non-Christian and don't know much about it beyond pop culture, celebrate Christmas. I mean it's a couple's holiday there, but they do all the superficial things around it. Plenty of non-Christians celebrate Christmas the way that many people celebrate Halloween. It's just a fun little tradition cooped because a dominant culture enjoys it and doesn't care too much if you don't adhere to the heart, but just the ritual of it.

There are plenty of people who don't know the first thing about what Christmas actually is that celebrate it.

Ads are super effective. If you have something to buy, but you don't know much about it, you will tend towards buying the thing that was advertised to you more often than not just because you are more familiar with it over other things. You might not stick with it, but being the first thing someone tries is huge.

It's not good. Sometimes the only computer a kid has is a chromebook because their parents got it for them for school. I'm seeing more and people just don't have computers at all. PC isn't moving fluidly to the next generation as a result. I've told parents about steam deck hoping they'll pick that as their kid's game console, but it's not as easy as when I was a kid where you just had a computer anyway and it was about if it could play the game you wanted to play. With the indie scene that concern when away a lot, but now a lot of kids just don't have PCs

I don't see why. I grew up with those systems as well, but Nintendo is actively hostile to videogame culture, so there is no reason for my child to develop a love of Pokémon or Mario. She can be nostalgic over new things.

I'm doing my part by never exposing my kid to Nintendo and capturing all my kid's friends before they leave tablet gaming and convincing their parents to look into PC gaming and steam decks. It's an easy sell to their parents once I show steam's parental controls and how every game isn't full price all the time. Plus remote play makes the initial cost low if they have a computer. Their kid can just play my kid's games. I've already converted 6 kids. My kid just started first grade, so I expect to convert a lot more.

Every company has learned that any friction to using your site is a bleed of customers. There are a lot of people who will just not use your site if it requires a lengthy validation process. If there was some kind of identity system that sites would integrate with like login.gov, then people would ignore this, but I don't think the UK has such a thing that every site can use, so a lot of people will not use the site and over time fall to piracy or illegitimate sites.

I'd be interested to see if that ruling would apply with video evidence and no illegal fire arm or reasonable suspicion on the part of the officer. That case seems to uphold the idea of a search on the grounds of reasonable suspicion. That's not the case here.