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
@eilah_tan but "offloading" implies that it was appropriate in the first place.
Id go the other way.
@3dcandy competitive in terms of what it can do, separately from user count
@3dcandy competitive in terms of what it can do, separately from user count
@tdverstynen so much of that simply isn't consistent with the opinions the Court handed down.
Yes, it's the story told by so many special interest groups and click-bait news outlets, but it's debunked when you read the actual rulings and understand how the US system actually works.
A lot of people simply aren't taken in by the misinformation.
@Nonilex he didn't try to ban Mifipristone nationwide.
He tried to have the FDA follow the law in its drug approvals, or at least call them out for breaking health safety rules.
That story of bureaucratic process just isn't as sexy, though, so reporters found a different angle.
Keep in mind that Elon isn't really doing half the things breathless reporting is claiming. He doesn't have the authority to do much at all.
Everything he's doing is legal because he's just not doing much.
This is all trolling from him and a PR stunt from the administration. We need to emphasize that to avoid actually giving him more of the influence that you're worried about him having.
It's a Streisand Effect sort of thing.
Terrorize their citizens by... asking them to pay normal tax rates?
That's not what this dismissal means. It's basically saying that the SCOTUS is taking no stance, not agreeing with either side.
But really, this is all based in the misunderstanding--widely distributed in the press--over what happened back in CA.
In reality, CA didn't steal user data. Users handed it to them. I was there, and back in those days users were happily handing over information to these third parties.
But that doesn't make for such a sensational story, so as usual, the drive for click-bait lead the investigation.
This is still cleaning up that mess.
No, that's not what the Supreme Court said in Bruen v. NY Rifle Ass’n, and it's not how originalism works in general.
For one, much of the amended Constitution was not written at the time of the founding. It would go against originalism to interpret text in a context besides that from which it originated.
But more importantly, this sort of analysis is only needed when there's reasonable dispute over what the text means, as in the 2nd Amendment cases but not as in such free speech cases.
That's not the right read on it, though: it's not taking the institutionalist path but taking the only legal path.
After Trump's election the DOJ had no practical legal path forward.
Rather than waste everyone's time, including his own, he filed the appropriate motions to the court.
You say that as if Garland wasn't the one who appointed Smith.
It's not as if Smith acted on his own. Yes, things were being done behind the scenes before Smith, including the behind the scenes work to make that appointment itself.
There are questions about why Garland moved so slowly, and arguments that it was strategic timing that didn't work out.
As for Cannon, we can be pretty certain that they DID move in that direction internally, but the removal of a judge in a situation like this is nearly impossible, so they were still building the case.
That's not quite how the Supreme Court works in the US system.
The SCOTUS doesn't *do* or undo anything outside of the judicial branch. It only writes opinions, for what they're worth.
It was intentionally deprived of actual power on its own, and it's vital to understand that.
SCOTUS can't change the Constitution, for example. If it rules in opposition to the Constitution, then the ruling is invalid; it doesn't change it.
If the other branches want to act on an invalid ruling and the general public wants to stand behind it, well, we'll do what we do.
@TomWellborn@universeodon.com
@NBAnthony2k There's so much misinformation about what the SCOTUS has been doing.
Based on that? Sure.
But when you actually sit down and read their actual rulings, it tells a much different, often opposite story, that's actually fairly reasonable.
At this point mainstream #Republicans are saying that they know Biden didn't get all those votes legally when he ran against #Trump not because they have evidence of any particular conspiracy, but because come on, Trump is awesome, how could anyone not have voted for him?
I don't have a dog in the fight between Republicans and Democrats, but geez, I really hate to see how far down the #GOP has fallen in the last couple of years.
That kind of imbecilic argument is fit for drunkards at the bar and fifth rate media personalities, but at this point some of the preeminent conservative talkers are laying that down.
This is going to be a hard four years in media.
@steter That's a weird way to describe a democratic election and your strong opposition to letting people vote, democratically, for the people they want.
I'm sorry voters didn't vote the way that you would have commended them to vote? Is that really what you want to hear?
The Democratic party acted. They ran a worthless candidate. And the people voted to reject her. Democratically. This is democracy. This is how democracy works.
I'm sorry you don't personally like the way that people vote, and you're demanding that we throw democracy out the window to fix democracy, but do you realize how insane you sound?
@europesays forgiving money owed is not giving people money.
Rather, it's depriving the creditor.
I really wish more people would realize that Biden wasn't giving anything to anybody, he was just defunding the US government, whether you think that's better or worse, it is what it is.
@Cochise I mean that's just not true though
@FantasticalEconomics You've known mainstream media is owned by right-wing billionaires? Is that similar to how you know the Earth is flat?
No, that's a dumb thing to say. Anyone who knows that has been listening to the wrong echo chambers, the wrong conspiracy theorists.
@shellsharks I mean you say it's not possible but you link to an article talking about the possibility.
The article says it's possible.
So there you go.
@DoomsdaysCW That's not what the legislation would do, though.
I really wish organizations like this would not spread such misinformation.
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
