volkris @volkris@qoto.org

@bronakins I don't think y'all realize how well that played with Trump's audience.

He's not afraid of 60 Minutes or fact checking. He doesn't really care. But he did enjoy using that to score political points with his base.

@aureliano

@info No, neoliberalism didn't say there was no alternative. It said there were certainly alternatives, but you won't like the result.

And now we see people going down the alternatives on the left and right ends, and they don't like the results.

No uncertainty there. Just conformation that the results would indeed be pretty negative.

@breedlov people are allowed to have different opinions... even different from their spouses.

@spytfyre talking about solving the problem of people doing things you don't approve of.

We can solve this you say. Solve what? The problem that people like a thing you don't think they should like.

@wiredfire

@HarriettMB information that could have ended Russian attempts to invade Ukraine? What?

That's not possible, so whoever told you that is not someone to be believed.

Trump is invested in Project 2025? No. That was a different group, and Trump has roundly rejected it.

Not that a president has power to end democracy even if they wanted to.

Sounds like you're falling into a trap of trusting some folks really out to spread misinformation.

@wiredfire you're still approaching this as a top down task whereby you engineer humans to your suit personal preferences instead of appreciating the diversity and humanity of the situation.

These are people we're talking about. People have different drives and opinions, and that's part of the beauty and strength of society.

We don't need to "fix" these humans that simply have different values than your own.

@spytfyre @trumpet

@ravirockks keep in mind that ground-based antennas are far, far more efficient and effective than even low orbit satellites.

This is a matter of physics that cannot be overcome by advancing satellite technology. Everything from the speed of light through bandwidth limitations restrain satellites from performing as well as ground-based antennas.

It might be possible that services like starlink will become ubiquitous fallbacks, but they will never be able to compete with ground-based transceivers just because of the physics involved.

One way to think about it is comparing Wi-Fi to wired ethernet. There's a very good reason that data centers continue to use wired ethernet instead of just going wireless.

@SherBeareth What double speak?

Yeah, Harris is awful, but beyond that it's important to realize that both sides believe that the description you provided applies to the other side, so it doesn't really get anyone anywhere.

It's just the exact same rocks that both sides are throwing at each other. So what progress does it make?

Anyway, it's important to realize what your enemy is saying if you want to contest them. Or else you're just preaching to the choir, and what's the point?

@BrodieOnLinux Even more context.

Linus is saying that he's submitting code that fails and seems untested, so that sounds like a pretty substantial point.

https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/172816780614.3194359.10913571563159868953.pr-tracker-bot@kernel.org/T/

@SherBeareth The problem is, everybody thinks this description applies to their opponents and not to their own favored candidates.

The problem is, this isn't helpful in such a world.

@steter Free ride from mass media? What in the world?

Media has been pummeling the guy for all of these years, and rightly so! NYT specifically has been incredibly critical of him.

It's ridiculous this story that he's been getting a free ride month after month we've had the statistics showing how much mass media has been against him.

@europesays Musk is a troll.

And in the troll way, just the fact that you're thinking about him means the money was well spent.

If you want to get back at Musk, ignore him.

@ShingoMouse this is a matter of law, not democracy.

They need to be following the law regardless of how popular or unpopular it may be, as our lawmakers set down the law that we are all to follow.

When you talk about signing petitions to the court like this it's about putting people beyond the law, and that's not okay.

@europesays kind of authoritarian there...

@PDFlynn You're missing the important part, though. It's not about the justice system: we don't need to lock people up for lies. Particularly politicians.

The question you should be asking is, why don't people care? Why does the general public just not care about Trump lying? They know he's lying, and they don't care, and why is that?

It's because the institution that is government has lost so much of the faith of the general population that no one cares, and how did that come to be? How did the government fail the people so badly that they don't even care if politicians are overtly lying?

So this isn't about the justice system. This is about the interaction between the government and its people. This is about a government that failed so badly that the people just don't care anymore.

This is the people responding to a failing government.

You have to approach it from that direction to try to figure out solutions.

@monkeyninja I mean, the data says otherwise.

We definitely see younger people doing all of those things that you say they're not doing.

Don't buy into the lies, the sensationalized news stories, the propaganda meant to deceive.

@MediaActivist I mean, it's just looking at the definition of pandemic and noticing that the the current state of affairs doesn't match that definition.

@moira but you are saying things that are factually incorrect, repeating stories that are so easy to debunk, so it's not going to get anywhere.

It'll just come across as gaslighting.

No, the president can't set up concentration camps. Presidents don't have that power. And we've heard that cry of wolf before. It didn't happen last time because it's not possible, and it won't happen this time because it's not possible.

No, the Supreme Court did not geant the president such immunity. You can pull up the Supreme Court ruling for yourself and see that those claims are just false. The Supreme Court's opinion is public record, you can read it for yourself and it says the exact opposite.

I could go on.

So you're not going to get through to anyone who's actually informed about this stuff. You're just going to sound like somebody who has been misled by propaganda from politicians who are counting on you not knowing any better.

That's exactly why you should stop trusting such liars.

@LilHulkQ No I don't hate Harris at all.

She keeps saying things that show that she doesn't really understand even what branch of government she's working for, that show that she doesn't know how any of this works, that shows that she's completely unqualified, and all of that adds up to potentially letting Trump back into the White House.

I don't hate her. If I hate anything, it's that the Democratic Party decided to ignore voters and nominate such a compromised candidate.

I don't care about Harris. She's just another unimpressive candidate who slept through courses on civics and economics and just being a generally good human. Just another politician.

I hate that her undemocratic nomination puts Trump within even the possibility of election. It didn't have to be this way.

@AnthonyBaker Harris has already promised to bypass Congress and do things that presidents don't have authority to do.

And we know from Trump's track record that he will.

So yeah, they're both going to be setting themselves up for impeachment if our representatives have the guts to hold them to the law.

But I don't think it's about media holding candidates to a much higher standard. It's about voters. We keep reelecting candidates, particularly representatives, who keep screwing us over. We keep giving them power.

We should stop.