volkris @volkris@qoto.org
I think the most pressing and fundamental problem of the day is that people lack a practically effective means of sorting out questions of fact in the larger world. We can hardly begin to discuss ways of addressing reality if we can't agree what reality even is, after all.
The institutions that have served this role in the past have dropped the ball, so the next best solution is talking to each other, particularly to those who disagree, to sort out conflicting claims.
Unfortunately, far too many actively oppose this, leaving all opposing claims untested. It's very regressive.
So that's my hobby, striving to understanding the arguments of all sides at least because it's interesting to see how mythologies are formed but also because maybe through that process we can all have our beliefs tested.
But if nothing else, social media platforms like this are chances to vent frustrations that on so many issues both sides are obviously wrong ;)
Joined Dec 2022
@Kozmo Well that's not quite the process.
The court basically agreed to consider whether to agree to consider the question.
After it hears arguments it still might not agree to consider the question.
But to be clear, the reason sitting presidents are immune from legal action is because the legal action would be done in their own names so it would be a president charging himself, with a giant obvious conflict of interest.
That isn't to explained nearly often enough.
@wjmaggos Well that's simply not true. @dangoodin
@dangoodin I guess you could go on and on but if those are the best arguments you have, they're not really making your case.
You're generally describing the site taking a neutral approach to content, which is arguably anti-fascist.
You're complaining that the site isn't imposing its values, isn't dictating and strongarming, and that just doesn't jive with your claim that there's fascist things going on.
You can stand by your description all you want, but your argument undermines your claim.
@brian Well do you know any people living in Texas? You could ask them.
I know a bunch, and they are pretty happy there. That's why they continue to live there.
@1dalm I mean yes, that is the general concept of an independent Supreme Court.
@BathysphereHat bingo @irenes@mastodon.social
@johnlogic I couldn't see past the paywall but based on the glimpse I got I found this related account of the issue:
https://www.edweek.org/teaching-learning/texas-gop-no-more-critical-thinking-in-schools/2012/06
@m_artigiani Yeah I don't know about other people's experiences, I just know that a lot of people talk about the importance of instances as if in their experiences they were very important.
In theory I can picture what they are saying.
They're not important to me, but maybe for some people they are.
@irenes@mastodon.social an awful lot of people end up getting promoted to positions that they are entirely unprepared to execute based on backgrounds that really say they have no business being there.
It's really an idiocracy situation.
(The word I'm looking for is escaping me. The word for systems that end up promoting people who are completely unqualified.)
@shoq Oh it's very often true.
You can look at rules and standards from everyone from OSHA through UL through various national electric codes to see just how micromanaging they are.
It's the kind of thing I personally deal with everyday, that if I build one way then I only have to deal with one set of codes, but if I do something like have a detachable cord then I have to deal with two different sets of codes, getting them both certified separately, and that adds a whole lot of hassle and expense.
@crooksandliars in the clip he never said otherwise, so it's not calling out a lie.
If anything it's confirming the claims and agreeing with them.
Yes, Trump was president at the time that this stuff went on. That confirms that this stuff went on.
us politics/israel
@Jason_Dodd between his fumbling of positions on the war and his fumbling of prosecuting Trump, well, both of those guys are screwing up and have no one to blame but themselves, no matter which wins.
@BathysphereHat I imagine it's straight up political posturing, with somebody who is not good at it not really knowing what answer to give.
That is to say, I don't think it represents any particular ideology, it's just a person trying to play politics when they're not good at playing politics.
@ChemicalEyeGuy oh ha!
But really I prefer to describe Musk as a troll.
Reply guy comes across to me as sugar coating his presence on social media.
@BlueWave_Surfer@mastodon.social it's also a lie.
That's not what they ruled.
@johnlogic what was the platform statement opposing the teaching of critical thinking skills?
@ChemicalEyeGuy so their apples and oranges...
Like saying the difference between the planet Earth and a cheesecake is that one hosts a habitable ecosystem while the other can be eaten as a late night snack.
It's a weird comparison to make.
@MugsysRapSheet not crimes, prosecution.
The court system cannot prejudge cases like that.
I think the most pressing and fundamental problem of the day is that people lack a practically effective means of sorting out questions of fact in the larger world. We can hardly begin to discuss ways of addressing reality if we can't agree what reality even is, after all.
The institutions that have served this role in the past have dropped the ball, so the next best solution is talking to each other, particularly to those who disagree, to sort out conflicting claims.
Unfortunately, far too many actively oppose this, leaving all opposing claims untested. It's very regressive.
So that's my hobby, striving to understanding the arguments of all sides at least because it's interesting to see how mythologies are formed but also because maybe through that process we can all have our beliefs tested.
But if nothing else, social media platforms like this are chances to vent frustrations that on so many issues both sides are obviously wrong ;)
Joined Dec 2022
volkris's choices:
