illuminerdy

Of course it's not true. It's not like we have them on video literally saying that.

Who am I going to believe, you or my lying eyes?

I think if what the lawsuit's pleadings allege is true, then it is as serious a violation of the Constitution as if the government had sent police to a street corner to shut down a speaker directly. The marketplace for speech may be changing, but the protection for free speech does not.

The beaurocrats in the government should not be allowed to circumvent the Constitution by using 3rd parties.

So they've already embraced "you will own nothing, and you will be happy."

Although the "happy" part is looking more and more unlikely.

False information such as "we don't know if the vaccine will actually prevent infection" when all the beaurocrats and "scientists" (the only ones who were allowed to speak) were falsely stating that if you took the vaccine, you absolutely would not get the virus?

So when are they gonna punish those doctors?

Plot twist: we accidentally destroy the moon by mining it and the oceans get rekt anyway.

This is an update to a story that appeared last year. I searched and didn't find this update. I'm on the bus, but I will type up my thoungts in a bit.

My AC is on 24/7 during the summer months.

Come at me, bro...

Well, I actually agree with you to some extent. I've been saying for a long time that everyone is prejudiced in some way. But that is never going to change. Human beings are, by nature, tribal. Even if we do it only on a subconscious level.

To that point, some of the most racist people I know are black people. Growing up as a black person myself in Brooklyn, and hearing it spoken often, I can tell you that there is no one that black people around here dislike more than Jews. It's an irrational kind of hatred based on the normal nonsense "they own all the banks, they own all the property", etc. If you messed up your credit and can't get a loan, it's the Jews fault. If someone gets evicted because they didn't pay their rent for 6 months, its' the Jews fault. That kind of thing. Racism and prejudice exists in all of us.

But you're right, I probably don't really understand how racism works. Because I have never actually experienced real racism. But, to be fair, neither has 99.9% of the people you see on your TV, social media or in the streets screaming about racism because a white person put their hair in dreadlocks or some other such nonsense. What was the most recent one, Drew Barrymore frolicking in the rain was somehow "erasing black people"?

Look, no one denies that there are actual racist people in the world. But the current state of discourse on this topic is a complete joke. REAL racism is largely a thing of the past. The problem is that what people are trying to classify as real racism these days are just wildly over exaggerated claims based on there being a racist boogeyman around every corner.

The truth is that the 'everything is racist' mantra, or the overexaggerated claims of racism, is actually funded and promoted by global elites and politicians who would very much like to create as much division as possible to keep us focused on non-issues like race instead of the fact that every time one of these "crises" occurs, their net income doubles. We are sadly being played as pawns.

> "I do solemnly affirm that I will faithfully discharge the duties of the position of..."

So I assume those "duties" they're referring to don't include investigating when they are assigned a call. Perhaps you think "duties" just refers to sitting in their car eating donuts?

> "No, seeing a black guy watering flowers is not grounds for anything, even if they are someone else's flowers. I cannot believe I have to make this point."

Again, you have to pay attention to the actual facts when you participate in these discussions.

The police were not just driving down the street and, upon seeing a black man watering some flowers, say to themselves "he must be up to no good". They were specifically CALLED by a neighbor to the property to investigate a suspicious person on their neighbor's property (you know, the typical 'looking out for your neighbor' thing). Your position seems to be that the police should not have done anything. Simple looked at him, shrugged their shoulders and walked away.

Because that's exactly what you would want the police to do if YOU were away and your neighbor saw someone on your property and called the police to investigate. You'd absolutely want them to not find out who that person was or why he was on your property.

I have no idea why you think what you posted has anything to do with what I said or the interaction that is being discussed. The Due Process clause is not the only source of the state's power to enact laws and regulate the conduct of citizens. The police powers of the government existed long before the Due Process clause was enacted.

But even if you take the position that the police are not REQUIRED to do anything (and I would disagree with that position), that does not mean that they CANNOT do anything. In this case, the police CHOSE (to use a term more suitable to your position) to investigate. And nothing precludes them from choosing to do so. Or do you take the position that the police are neither required to, nor can they choose to investigate when called?

I agree that what happened to him should not have happened. But we're the ones who let this stuff happen. We're the ones who vote in the people (or neglect to vote them out) who put these policies in place.

It really has nothing to do with race and everything to do with upbringing.

How come black people (specifically African-Americans) are the only people who seem to have these "racism" issues with police? What about other minorities? How many Indians do you see on TV fighting with police or getting shot? What about Hispanics or Asians? Hell, what about African immigrants? It seems quite strange to me that for all this talk of "systemic racism", none of the other minorities seem to have these issues.

It's almost as if the racist police don't have any issue with any minority OTHER than black people. Which makes me think that it really has nothing to do with race and everything to do with what some people are being taught.

There was a video a few weeks ago of young black children (probably around 5-8 years old) taunting, cursing and HITTING police in Minnesota.

https://nypost.com/2022/07/12/video-shows-child-hit-and-swea...

Now, you tell me, who taught that child to behave that way? And when that child grows up, what possible interaction could he have with police that DOESN'T end up with him being beaten, shot or killed?

Everyone wants to look at one side of the issue and ignore what is going on everyday in black families and communities that leads to these confrontations.

> They're aren't mind readers but they made a decision that he was commiting a crime or about to commit one. They escalated it, not him.

No, actually that's not what they decided.

They decided that, before they just walk away from their SWORN DUTY to investigate without knowing who he was or whether he actually belonged at that property, they would actually do their jobs and find that out that information by doing a simple thing like asking him to identify himself.

I know some people really don't like police officers, but, in the future, you should try to make sure that that dislike doesn't make you completely irrational.

I have major problems with using stories like these to promote the idea that the police did something wrong.

The police don't know who that man was, or why he was on property that didn't belong to him. They're not mind readers. If he had provided the identification (or at least his name/DOB) that they had asked for, then it probably would have become clear to them that he was telling the truth. But by REFUSING to give them any information that would prove his story true, he escalated a situation that could have been resolved without his arrest.

People seem to forget that we ask police TO INVESTIGATE. Not just walk up, accept whatever story they are given and then drive away.

> It taught me a serious lesson about the law: They exist only for power and profit.

I understand your frustration, but the law does not exist ONLY (or at all, if I'm being honest) for power and profit. The law exists to provide each person with a baseline to guide their interactions, whether it be between them and other individuals, or between them and their government.

Now, obviously you have abuses and especially when some in the government/beaurocracy find out they can get funds by abusing their authority (e.g. civil asset forfeiture), but that's not why the law exists, and it doesn't happen everywhere. That's just a symptom of a lack of oversight by we, the people (chiefly).

There's also crowd-sourcing, which can be a viable option for a self-publisher. It seems like, if you have an interesting story to tell, people are willing to give you money to see it come to fruition.

I think the "in the wrong hands" part of your statement actually backs up what he was saying. The information by itself is useless unless someone ACTS upon it.

This is just more of the same of what we have seen over the last few years. People claiming that science should somehow be filtered to not offend or to promote the "approved" agenda and goals.

And it's all nonsense. If the science (actual science, not the beaurocratic science we've seen of late) shows X, then I don't care how it can be interpreted. Release the data and let the conclusions be discussed, which will ultimately sprout more research and more data to clarify and guide the conclusions being drawn.

Otherwise, you're just picking and choosing what is considered science based one your own biases.

I bought an old HP server for $150. It came with remote management built-in. Coupled with a cheap FQD and you can access it from anywhere.

That won't be enough to fool anyone. Anyone who has dealt with foreign csr and local (American) csr knows the difference is night and day. Foreign csr basically just read a script and never deviate. If you ask a question that isn't on their script, they're lost.

> "And it's not like we can just elect a president who actually supports reducing the power of the state"

There's one guy who's pissed off enough at the beaurocracy that he might just do exactly that.

Can't seem to remember his name at the moment though...

I started using DDG because I thought they were about privacy, openness and being the antithesis to the likes of Google. Slowly but surely, they proved that that wasn't the case.

I'm not using DDG for anything.

Meh, I predict there will be a rise in 3rd party OEMs, resellers and restorers of "classic" gas cars.

More annoying than the push for electric is the trend towards computers in cars. Cars used to be fairly easy to diagnose and maintain yourself. But nowadays you need more and more sophisticated troubleshooting equipment. I'll probably end up having one cool 90s car and one cool 60s car.

Interesting read. As someone who had just turned 20 around the time of 9/11 and was in college in upper Manhattan at the time, I went along with all of the "Patriot Act" nonsense because I was angry and because I didn't yet fully understand what happens when you give the government more power. It never gives it up and it almost always ends up abusing it.

I think a lot of people regret their support for the various responses to 9/11. Hopefully that means that we (in the immortal words of The Who) won't get fooled again.

As a former Oculus device owner, I refused to upgrade as long as anything Facebook was required. I don't have a Facebook account and I never plan to get one. Same goes for Meta.

> A $2.7T business dictating terms to labor isn’t entitlement?

Um...you mean the terms under which the labor originally agreed to work for? How would that be "dictating" when it was literally what they agreed to?

Also, I don't know if you know this, but employers generally have the right to decide the basic terms of how their employees do their jobs. If the employees don't like how the employer wants them to do the job, they are not being held hostage. They can leave anytime.

When you agreed to be employed at the company, it was under specific terms. Those terms were that you would come to work (physically) X days a week to do your job. You don't just get to change that whenever you feel like it. They're trying to take advantage of a situation that has ended because they feel they can.

That's why they're entitled.

I understand what you're trying to say, but the people who the corporate media trot out as "scientists" aren't really scientists. They're beaurocrats wearing lab coats. They are the ones twisting actual science to push agendas.

A perfect example is when coronavirus started, people were told by the scientific beaurocrats and the corporate media that they could not go to work or school, that they could not go to visit family, that everything would shut down. And they were told that this was the only way to prevent catastrophe.

Fast forward to the Black Lives Matter, Inc. "protests", which began a couple of months later, and those same scientific beaurocrats and the corporate media were literally saying that "social justice" was more important than social distancing. That thousands of people marching shoulder to shoulder should in no way be seen as a "super spreader". Because we all know that "the science" shows that the virus doesn't affect you if it knows you're fighting for "social justice".

So don't confuse the beaurocrats in lab coats with actual scientists. No actual scientist talks about science in terms of 'trust' and 'believe'. Science is about questioning, testing hypothesis and trying to verify as best as you can. Trust and belief is the realm of religion. They might as well start telling people to "have faith in the science".

People should be able to have confidence in the methods and motives of the science and health professionals. But that will only happen if we get to hear from the actual scientists whose only agenda is actual science.

I can't read the article because paywall, but I did see one group of Apple employees saying that forcing them come back to the office, even part-time was somehow anti-diversity. They'll say anything to get what they feel they deserve.

It's amazing how entitled some people are.

My most recent build was a micro atx case. The hard drive cage was especially a pain to work with. I've been thinking about a mini ITX but I'm not sure my poor knuckles could handle it.