zaperberry

What's the youngest you'd be willing to date, yourself?

And the fact that he's sitting down could be taken as poking fun at people with mobility issues

Is eyeliner a specifically queer thing now?

Yeah I was definitely a bit snarky but these days, at least from me, you get the effort you give :) no hard feelings, honestly. Before going further, I just want to mention that I am outside of the US so this is more of an outside view - although the problem isn't isolated to the US.

I appreciate you expanding your point, and I do agree with the general premise of your thoughts, however I believe there is a time and a place. I don't believe it was really constructive in the context of this article. This action by Booker was probably the most action we've seen out of the Democrats in the US. It came across as letting perfection become the enemy of good.

Those who are left leaning within the US absolutely need to do better and be more aggressive in their messaging, but they're up against a behemoth. Democrats (overall) and Republicans both, have, and are, acting against the best interest of their citizens. This isn't meant to be a both sides argument, because they're on different levels, but the rightward shift does not seem like an accident.

The road ahead is a tough one. Progressives obviously can't rely on traditional media to cover their fight, and complaining about not getting coverage doesn't really provide anything new. It is known that progressives are shut out by both parties within the US in favour of the status quo, moreso by the right wingers but also very much by the left wingers (I'd say liberals, but for simplicity's sake used left wing). Nobody wants to give up their comfort despite the system which is providing them that comfort slowly yanking it out, or not resisting those who are, from under them.

We're in a technological world but those who "control" that world are part of the problem. Social media kind of acts as a pressure release valve for all the anger, which though it can be helpful in spreading a message, or preventing anarchy, seems to prevent meaningful action as well. It's a tough spot to be in.

Rather than spreading the message online to build up support in numbers that can meaningfully mobilize, it seems that progressives are in a spot where they need those mobilization numbers before even spreading the message lest they want to be shut out by liberals and conservatives alike. I do believe that the numbers are there, but apathy and fear are total bitches and I can understand why people have felt their efforts would be worthless.

At this point I'm just going off on a tangent so I'll leave it here for now. My final point is this: what Booker did, although not immediately effective in preventing this downfall, was at the least extremely admirable, impressive in terms of will, and hopefully something that starts to get the wheels turning a little bit faster. It's not an action to be looked at in isolation. Your explained point is correct in that there needs to be more than just celebration of this event, but let's not put those who DO celebrate it down.

Based on your other responses I assume that the subtext here is that this didn't actually achieve anything other than allowing for a democrat to hold the floor and talk for over a day? It's performative and all it achieves is online discourse vs. what you'd consider to be action? Did I get that right? Maybe I'm wrong, but I'm not a mind reader and you haven't been very direct, so that's my interpretation.

How about you just say what you mean? Hiding behind these sorts of bad faith engagements is childish snowflake behaviour.

I think you need to watch a video where someone breaks down how to ask a question.

What do you not understand?

Do you not understand what the words mean? Do you not understand the purpose? Do you not understand the context? I don't understand what you don't understand.

If you're going to rail on about how people need to do more to educate others instead of telling you to do some basic reading then you can at the very least put some effort into your inquiry.

25% is even way too low. Factor of Safety is the term you're looking for, which is generally 2x or more depending on the field. Most of the equipment I've ever worked on had a minimum 3x safety factor meaning the actual limits were 3x what the ratings indicated.

A quick search gave me the result of a safety factor of at least 2 for rigging and recovery components on vehicles.

Most people would see it that way, yes.

You can see the AI's process though. It split the query into two parts: [a red ball balancing on] a [white ball with a blue ball on top]. So it threw a blue ball onto a white ball, then balanced a red on top. I'm guessing sentence formatting would help.

If you spelled them right then you'd see they are actual words. You could've even just copied and pasted them from the article. I appreciate that you tried to sound them out and spell them on your own, though.

Sure, we can agree on that depending on your definition of evil people. To target civilians indiscriminately is not a good thing, though. It's bad when the IDF does it and it's bad when Hamas does it. Resistance is not killing random people because of where they live, that's terrorism. Resistance is fighting your oppressors.

I very much doubt that Hamas hand picked their targets on Oct 7. I doubt that those who died, or were taken hostage, were all evil people hellbent on eradicating Palestinians. They died and were taken hostage simply because of where they were at the time.