Hitler’s flak towers are not going anywhere. There’s other 20th century buildings which can last a thousand years with occasional maintenance, but those flak towers, nothing will take them down.
Most very old buildings that survived to this age, survived because the locals had a use for them and maintained them, or because they had a pyramidical shape. The colloseum was a castle, the parthenon a church, … Without that usage, we’d only have the foundations and a few basements left.
Personally I’m ok with discord for private social communication, imo not everything needs to be archived or searchable. But there’s people/devs who use discord as a knowledge repository and that’s the recipe for disaster imo.
The recipe: Old problem questions, solutions, how to guides, … All hidden behind a login wall and if you do get in, then you still have to contend with the crappy search engine, so you might just as well ask the probably already answered question yet again. And one day it’s probably all going poof or behind some kind of paywall. Basically also what quora has been trying to do for years, but I don’t think any people with more than a few braincells complain about quora being hard to access, since most of their content stinks anyhow.
A quote from Netanyahu: “Anyone who wants to thwart the establishment of a Palestinian state has to support bolstering Hamas and transferring money to Hamas… This is part of our strategy – to isolate the Palestinians in Gaza from the Palestinians in the West Bank.”
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_support_for_Hamas
I already knew that Israel facilitated transfers of funds from other sources, but I didn’t know that they also did direct funding and transfers. According to that wiki article, Israel was at least certainly doing that in the 1980s and 90s. Not that it really matters, Israel soliciting other parties to give money to Hamas or Israel directly giving money to Hamas, there’s little difference really.
I can’t find anything right away about video evidence, but I wouldn’t be surprised at this point. I’d love a source for that as well.
It’s a bit of a stretch, but Netanyahu used to allow Qatari funds through to Hamas and Qatar is home to the largest USA military base in the middle east. So the USA government spend money in Qatar and Qatar send money to Hamas, so one could argue that some USA tax money ended up with Hamas that way.
But in the same way all economies and trade are interconnected. It’s not because my garagist gave money to his addict child, who used part of that money to buy drugs, that I’m now suddenly guilty of funding the drug trade. Money goes around.
Yeah, that seems to be the point. He’s again appealing to his macho fascist supporters by further enabling abusive behaviour. Domestic violence has been decriminalized for years already in Russia, violence against outgroups is allowed/encouraged, they have a national snitch on your neighbour system, … It’s become a true fascist society.
Yeah, I think the joke isn’t working sorry.
Running a ship aground is something the crew does to their own ship. It does not involve other ships, only their own ship + the ground of a landmass.
I can’t say that I’m surprised that the pope is endorsing someone who so eerily fits the description of an antichrist, which in this framework makes the pope a false prophet.
An article with some reasonings as to why Trump fits the bill: https://www.commondreams.org/opinion/is-trump-the-antichrist
Are you doing research for a personal project or just asking for a friend?
Or the policy where they separated children from their parents and then didn’t keep track of who was family of whom, so that it was very hard and sometimes even impossible to reunite the family again in the future. Pure evil.
Reporting what questionable government sources say without enough due diligence is not the same as supporting the actions of that government. If I say that Davy was beating up Mark because Mark stole his cookie according to him, but then it turns out that there never was a cookie, then me wrongly reporting about the cookie does not mean that I ever approved of Davy beating up Mark.
I found that the NYT editorial board opposed the war in an opinion piece that was released just prior to that war, so I’m of the opinion that they opposed it. Probably as one of the few media outlets in the USA.
And I find it funny that the first and most prominent article in the pbs link is the NYT criticizing the reporting of the nyt, that’s promising at least. The smh article reads like it’s written to lay the blame for being dragged into the war with someone else, a narrative of “we were all duped, if only we could have known beforehand and we would have acted differently”, conveniently ignoring that there were enough other international sources that called out and demonstrated that the wmd evidence was very flimsy.
Do you have examples of that support? Or an article/report that lays it out.
When I looked for it, I only found the opposite; https://www.nytimes.com/2003/03/09/opinion/saying-no-to-war.html
So I’m thinking out loud here and this is probably going to be controversial … But what if Harris took on a comedian (or an oaf) as communications director, to purposely do gaffes and create controversies, so maybe the for profit media might like her more. Basically a modern court jester.
I always thought things like Sean Spicer hiding in the bushes were very funny. A bit embarrassing for sure, but also pretty funny.
Apart from that 1 diner, she is also openly supportive of several talking points of Russia, such as saying that … nato expansion is to blame for Russia invading countries; the USA shouldn’t support Ukraine; after the euromaidan revolution neo-nazis came to power in Ukraine …
And she also has geopolitical goals of Russia that she thinks are good ideas, which she basically shares with Trump: supporting Brexit, disbanding NATO and saying that the USA should abandon smaller nations to Russian and Chinese aggression for appeasement. Worded differently of course, but that’s what it comes down too.
And she must also know that Russian agencies have massively promoted and aided her in the past. She’s more than a useful idiot for Russia imo.
This makes a lot of sense. I do indeed stick to all on lemmy and the ignorant downvoting that often happens, reminds me of what would happen in default reddit subs like worldnews. My opt in reddit subs indeed had a way better crowd. The frontpage of Lemmy didn’t used to be this way when I first joined though.
After hiding behind an adblocker for years, it’s easy to forget what a hellscape a lot of the internet is. Thanks for the reminder.
For surfing and opening links, I use Firefox + ublock origin + noscript on my pc & android devices. I still use chrome for logging into services because more and more sites depend on popups and scripts for no good reason. It works pretty well most of the time.
That was all before Musk. Since musk took over, twitter gives in to all demands for censorship by governments. It went from about 50% to basically 100%. I expect that the information of users isn’t safe either.
My scalp condition is that I have too much hair. Too dense and thick, it gets greasy after not washing it 1 day, so I don’t even dare to replicate your experiment.
I also used to have a cold weather dandruff problem, but that was solved entirely when I started always air drying after every shower. Thanks to a random tip years ago on reddit. My dandruff problem was apparently because of humidity.
I’m sorry if I come across as preachy in the below post, but I wanted to try and explain to you where the critique is coming from. And also that it’s not personal or any widespread resentment.
I (and many others) get what a thankless and also necessary job moderating is. It’s not easy to do it well, it’s frustrating, it’s thankless and without it the community would be dead. But being a moderator and sticking out your neck brings you exposure and you are guaranteed to meet more asshats than you ever thought existed. But the users are not one homogenous group, it’s not because one user has flung abuse at moderators, that all users are now suddenly resentful of moderators.
The person you are replying to, put a good bit of time in listing what comments were most up voted, which are probably the comments that found most support amongst the users in that thread. In the same way that we should not be dismissive of what you do or say, you shouldn’t be dismissive of what others do or say (or up vote). Mutual respect and all that.
Self reflection is also important, it’s important to realize and accept that it is possible to be wrong about something. Doing a mea culpa and moving on is far easier in the long term than doubling down and digging a deeper hole, yet it’s a lot rarer because it hurts our ego in the short term.
Their final point about a problem with handling feedback rings true to me:
You (not you personally, but the team that did that feedback thread) have apparently treated up- and down votes on a thread as a poll and a popular mandate for action, but up- and down votes are not a poll and most (probably most) people don’t use them as such.
Up- and down votes on comments are useful for finding which remarks resonated with or turned away other users. They are not a poll either, and most upvoted are not automatically most correct at all, but they give you a chance to read the room.
You (now you personally) have thrown shade on the people that up voted comments against the bot, by insinuating that those people might have been bots themselves and that therefore their opinions are irrelevant. Yes it’s possible that there are some users using alts, but all those users? Not very likely.
The best feedback I saw in that thread was not in the up or down votes, it was in the comments themselves. There were some very compelling arguments as to why using a biased site to display bias, was a bad idea. Those comments also had quite a bit of upvotes, so the way I read the room, that was a popular sentiment.
The person you are replying to made a few arguments and one scathing critique which they probably hoped that you would improve on in the future. Imo a polite disagreement with your previous statements. You respond by being dismissive of his arguments and acting like it’s a personal attack. They were sticking to facts, you’re making it about you as a person. I really don’t think that was their intent.
This seemed like such an arbitrary law that I went looking for it and apparently it’s a small committee (4 persons*) rule that was poorly substantiated. The rule itself has been shot down by an appeals court in 2023, but the industry obviously had already set plans in motion to change their product line ups.
“On September 13, 2023, the U.S. Court of Appeals vacated the CPSC’s rule on custom window coverings. The court agreed with WCMA that CPSC failed to provide an opportunity to comment on the underlying incident data, conducted a flawed cost-benefit analysis that ignored the enormous harm that the rule would have caused the multibillion-dollar custom window coverings industry, and selected an arbitrary effective date for the rule. The CPSC acknowledges that the industry will need at least 2 years to develop completely new products. So the six-month effective date would make it impossible for the window covering industry to create proven safe replacement products.”
https://suncoastblinds.com/understanding-the-cpsc-rule-on-window-coverings-and-the-appeal/
Edit to add: that rule that lost in appeal in 2023, was from November 2022, so maybe it does go in effect in november 2024, since it seems like that timetable was the biggest issue for the industry. Just speculating though, can’t look it up atm.