You need to try and read first before replying, then maybe I’d have better things to say about you. You can’t expect me to praise you for either being thickheaded enough to not get what people are actually saying or for misrepresenting what people are saying because you don’t have an actual argument, can you?
I’m comment stalking you by replying to two of your comments in the same thread? Really? Don’t flatter yourself, bro. That is textbook narcissistic behaviour you’re showing right there.
All doctors have degrees, yet nobody with common sense would say trust all doctors without doubt. Some would even say a doctor that tries to diagnose people through a few comments online are definitely in the category of those that shouldn’t be trusted.
Should we trust someone called Angry_Autist on how black and white we should treat the human psyche? Probably not.
Bro, please actually read what the comment you’re replying to are actually saying. You’re just embarrassing yourself at this point.
Its finitebanjo, that’s all he does.
I mean, that extra line does make it look like a plate, so I understand the confusion.
Are they? Damn.
Why 3 Doors Down?
What makes you think this doesn’t apply to Mastodon instances?
But they already lost the advantage they had. The point of the retaliatory tariffs are not to make money, but to send a message.
They’ve already sent a message that they can tolerate Trump’s bullshit as long as it doesn’t hurt them too much when they backed down on the digital service tax.
Bringing it back now is a lot less effective than implementing it the first time around while still hurting Canadians the same amount.
Sounds like a good thing, honestly.
You should tell these people that they should deal with those things for decades to come because you prefer to have the moral high ground over winning over the voter base your party lost. I’m sure they would be happy to lick the Democrats boots along with you if you tell them that. Go on.
That article has a lot of reaching between the proof it claims and its conclusion.
As always, unsafe never means 100% chance to kill. Not wearing s seatbelt while driving is unsafe, but it doesn’t mean that you will not be able to survive to 90 is you’re lucky.
What did they got out of that, though? Violence without a goal is just as ineffective. I’d argue they bring more harm to the movement than doing nothing. If you have a specific goal you’re trying to achieve, violence could be a legitimately good way to obtain that goal.
Yeah, it does make it racist, but which party is performing the racist act? The AI, the AI trainer, the data collector, or the system that prioritises white patients? That’s the important distinction that simply calling it racist fails to address.
This here is why you never see me say good things about you. You literally can’t argue in good faith and always rely on calling the other guy a label that doesn’t fit what they actually say so that you can claim the moral high ground.