0xb

Sorry. The topics I know about and find something to share are the same for lots of other people and literally always someone beat me to it.

Plus I get anxious thinking that I’m gonna have to reply to a lot of people.

But thank you to all of you who do post.

The post-incel reactionary trad movement is just getting started. I just hope that there’s less men into it that it seems and they are just very noisy, because if not then we are about to get bitten on the ass like we have no idea. I do fear for future society.

I don’t know the precise answer, but I do know this:

1. Often the kind of measures that are about something vast and complex (like population for example) are really good approximations, not completely exact numbers. So maybe doesn’t matter because the number itself is not trying to be 100% accurate.
2. As far as I know those measures are made from the top down view, like with airplanes or satellites, so no it would not include inclines. To include inclines in a precise way it would have to be measured each one on the spot, which is not the way that is done. There are almost no field surveyors these days, again, as far as I know. And to include inclines in an approximate way takes us to point 1 again so it wouldn’t matter much if there were a small difference.
3. Why would we do that? Almost everything we use land for requires it to be horizontally flat, so we flatten it. For example, an irregular coastline doesn’t matter because we can use the crevices and irregularities to fit in more boats or ports or beaches, since the sea is horizontally flat and that is what really matter to us. But if there’s a hill with a greater area because of the steepness of it we cannot fit more houses or warehouses of streets. We have to flatten it first so we gain noting from it being inclined.

So form my point of view it would be almost as if we tried to include the sides of a ravine or gorge in the measure just because technically it is area space.

Sorry if I cannot give you an exact answer, but I wanted to comment because you raised an interesting point that made me think.

Cheers.

official ‘very cool post’

so much interesting stuff in here

Neither Trump nor his campaign have direct ties, though many former officials and staffers contributed to the project.

So people he hired because of ideological alignment then writing the ideological thing is not a direct tie?

Nah, you are trying to salvage this situation by changing everything you meant. Suddenly you are trying to sanitize every reference you made to political ideology and try to dress up this as concern. Now you accuse everybody else of conspiracies and extrapolation when you used ‘suspicious’ (which has a very clear connotation about a malign or hidden background https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/suspicious) instead of ‘indicative’, ‘concerning’, ‘worrisome’, ‘troubling’. People can read, and they read ‘suspicious’ which along with your references to political ideology really says who is the one thinking about conspiracies.

People who turn conservative or less progressive don’t get into car accidents so if he did that’s unusual?

Yes it is, if you didn’t read the article and also know nothing about anything.

I would say that whoever posted that understands libertarians perfectly, and maybe libertarians don’t understand themselves and libertarianism

True, but it’s not the first time someone has that idea. Germany spent 2 decades appeasing Russia to try to integrate them, and america and NATO basically served their requests after the 2008 invasion of Georgia in an attempt to get them to behave and be a part of the gang. We already know that it means nothing to Putin, we don’t need to try this stuff again.

nah, every little step is good and this ‘perfection or nothing’ attitude is very damaging to anything, including the personal and collective fight for rights and privacy.

oh, sorry this the shitpost community, no need for me yo lecture. good joke then, yes it can be taxing sometimes. that sponge is literally me.