volkris @volkris@qoto.org

@strypey The biggest criticism I have about this is the continued focus on instances instead of users.

@Parnikkapore No the flight data recorder showed that pilots regained stable flight once they turned off stab trim as per per standard operating procedure, but for some reason they turned it back on, and that action on the part of the pilots led to the tragedy.

@Linux_in_a_Bit

@aureliano but again I'm trying to emphasize here that Republicans don't actually want to win, really. Trump doesn't really want to win. He's too stupid and lazy to really want to be president, to actually do the job.

He's looking for attention, and we're giving it to him.

He needs to appeal to swing voters? Nah, because winning isn't the point. If the point was winning, then you would be right, but it's not.

He wants to stand up in front of crowds and cosplay this guy everyone likes. And he gets that regardless of winning, in fact he gets more of it if he doesn't win because then he gets to pretend he's such a victim, and he gets more attention from it.

And to repeat, the biggest indication of all of this is that Republicans didn't nominate someone with a better chance of winning. Because so many of them don't actually care about winning.

You can hear this every single day in mainstream conservative media.

Trump needs conservative attention, not popular support or electoral success.

@bronakins

@wiredfire No that's not at all what I mean.

You say Facebook should not be giving people what they want? Well maybe it should maybe it shouldn't. Whether it should or it should not is a matter for our values.

@spytfyre @trumpet

@wiredfire No that's my point: you seem to be talking about values without realizing that you're talking about values.

I'm not saying whether that's good or bad or in keeping with my own values. I'm just saying that when you talk about what should be and what we should do and what Facebook should do and what should or should not be kept away from other people, you're making an argument based on values, and it doesn't sound like you appreciate that.

Well I will say that in my opinion, based on my own values, I think it would be better if you realized that you were talking about imposing your own values on others. But... this is social media, so that's not a requirement 🙂

@spytfyre @trumpet

@gooba42 It's probably worse than that.

I'm not bothering to look it up (correct me if you know better) but I imagine it's a municipal water supply. I've seen this in other places. It's not just about taxing the use of water for purposes other than drinking, but the city itself choosing to charge so little even for industrial purposes.

I even have in mind a case where the governmental board that sets the water price had a bunch of industrial Representatives on the board voting themselves low prices.

I consider it one of those examples of governmental action that impacts people pretty directly, but that people are generally unaware of because they're distracted by national politics that don't actually make that much difference in the end.

@aureliano he needs to score points with them because he's an idiot who lives on attention. He needs their attention. It's what fuels him.

And in return that's how conservatives are using him to troll the rest of the country.

You're probably saying he doesn't need to score points with his base in terms of winning the election, but this is critical, it's not about winning the election to them. It's about fighting, not winning.

If Republicans wanted to win they would have nominated someone with more of a chance to win. No, nominating Trump is not about winning, that's not their priority. They want to fight, to throw their punk tantrum against The Man that they think has failed them.

And that's why Trump needs to score points with them: to get the attention that they're using to get him to be ugly to the rest of us.

@bronakins

@SmudgeTheInsultCat from what I hear from conservative media, Republicans have been feeling like fiscal responsibility has taken a backseat on their priority list behind a lot of other issues they have with the directions the institutions have gone for a while now.

They feel like they'll talk about fiscal responsibility after they first sort out things like their perception of corruption in the government.

Also: Harris doesn't make a good case for fiscal responsibility anyway, neither in her track record nor in her campaign promises.

So it's a loser coming and going. Republicans don't really care about fiscal responsibility at the moment, and even if they did Harris wouldn't be the candidate for that.

@gooba42 they can. If they don't it's because society didn't incentivize them to do it.

If you under price drinking water then it's going to be used instead of more expensive purified water.

@Catelli Well it's not so much willful ignorance as willful confirmation bias.

Give people access to a ton of information without the discipline to approach it logically and this is the outcome.

@moira and Harris has openly said she was going to ignore the democratic process and claim authorities that she doesn't have to implement policies without legal backing.

The problem is that, while Trump is impotent with a track record of failure, Harris might actually be able to act on those promises.

Unfortunately the two parties both settled on authoritarian candidates. We don't have a choice for reasonableness in this election cycle.

But I'm happy to try to keep power away from the authoritarian that might actually be able to succeed even if it means going to the authoritarian that's going to screw it up.

@knittingknots2 outsmart the Court? No. He obeyed the Court.

The Court pointed out that this administration was overstepping its legal authority with the prosecutions it was bringing, and Smith dialed it back to stay on the right side of the law.

That's how it's supposed to work.

@Laukidh exactly, on paper there was a ceasefire, and yet people didn't cease firing, which goes to show exactly what I'm talking about, how impossible it is.

It's just not a realistic option. It was tried over and over again and here we are, it doesn't work, it's not a viable option.

@Laukidh No not at all!

I'm not blaming the dead Hamas negotiator for anything. He just wasn't relevant anyway. He doesn't have blame because he couldn't have stopped it no matter what. He did not have the ability to stop those outside of his chain of command.

He doesn't have blame because he never had the ability to stop it in the first place.

If you want to say Israel killed this guy for no reason, well I wouldn't go that far, but there is some element of truth to it.

@Laukidh he could.

And the rockets would continue to be fired.

Both sides are aggressors here. The problem is, one side doesn't actually have the ability to stop aggressing. It's literally not possible because of the organization, or lack thereof, of the belligerants.

@munin because people with skin in the game decided that these people offered something worth paying them for.

That's why.

@Laukidh Yeah that's my point.

With out a reliable command structure it doesn't really matter what Hamas agrees to since that never has been a way to stop the rockets.

It doesn't matter what some public official agrees to if they're not actually in charge of the situation, which we saw over and over again, is the case here.

Yeah Hamas can agree to a lot of things. That's never meant that the agreements would be worth the paper the headlines are printed on. It's just posturing at that point.