lux-lux-lux

I’m sure this would be a lot more compelling if the site wasn’t unusable.

Mainly I pay a lot of taxes to cover the settlements from the inevitable lawsuits these kinds of incidents cause.

Looking at the video I’m not seeing the ‘put herself in harms way’ part other than in the ‘you put your face in front of my fist’ sense

The only people who can do anything about this are either actively involved or allied with these groups, so no real surprise it sank.

> Would a reasonable jury determine this to be Attempted Second-degree Murder?

No, because it’s a law enforcement officer doing it.

Not sure what you’re talking about, most of the real criticism of EA came in the wake of SBF and that was across the political spectrum; if you look at the ‘Debate’ section of the Wikipedia entry the critics and their positions are very grounded. David Brooks is not a ‘literal extremist.’

Look up ‘earning to give’ and think about the implications of that when a few thousand worth of mosquito nets buys a human life.

A big part of EA is earning to give, i.e. making the big bucks at Torture Nexus, Inc. so you can buy more mosquito nets than you could as an EMT or whatever. It’s not hard to see how this can excuse some pretty terrible behavior, especially if you never actually get around to the buying mosquito nets part.

The case centers around a road rage incident in which the defendant claims to have shot the victim in self-defense, with contradicting eyewitness testimony and prior issues in the trial over texts which indicated the victim had severe anger issues and was suicidal.

Gen Z men are having less sex than ever, so not sure this is making the kind of point you think it is

Redpill is ‘working’ as it always has, as an obvious red flag

We had two amendments to the constitution about exactly that lmao. Alcohol is highly regulated.

“Very little of the economy belongs to people who are ‘born wealthy.’ They’re actually just born into wealthy, connected families.”

Have you ever ridden an Uber? Then yes, they absolutely can. You agreed to it when you installed the app.

When I saw Ratsphere types pushing these kinds of markets years ago getting insider information was the primary selling point.

It’s not inherently stupid - I’d much rather that some lowly analyst sell out an impending stock hit for a few grand than well-positioned insiders soak the market for 10,000x that. There’s obvious moral hazards, though.

‘It’s different today.’ Buddy, the Me Decade was 50 years ago.

If you go far into the user you’re replying to’s post history, you’ll find them unambiguously referring to the Jan 6 crowd as terrorists. They are very aware.

I know there’s a pretty strong norm against dragging people for their posting history here, but that’s in service of maximizing light vs. heat and I feel like pretending to be ignorant of recent events in order to relitigate something unrelated in the comments is wholly unproductive.

Not just massive, they were the largest single-day protests in US history, each exceeding the last.

The problem is that they didn’t move the needle at all, politically - the Oct 2025 protest, for example, was followed immediately by the embarrassing capitulation by the Dems on the shutdown. This is the real reason protest in the US is relatively rare: the political class has thoroughly insulated itself from it.

> Well, we defunded the police, and let political axe-grinders fill our DA seats with hyper-progressive activists.

When did this happen?

The fare gate redesign was cost-neutral; that’s the kind of solutions that should have been on the table, not setting money on fire with cop salaries.

I much prefer targeting more pressing antisocial behaviors while not excessively wasting public funds, something the Mamdani administration has been doing quite efficiently e.g. with the pied-à-terre tax. You seem angry about that, for some reason.

Per dollar recovered. Paying law enforcement officers overtime and directing police attention away from more significant criminal behavior (as opposed to redesigning turnstiles or pursuing alternative strategies like no-fare systems) is extremely expensive and time-limited in terms of impact.

It does shovel a lot of dollars at law enforcement and let the Adams administration pretend to be tough on crime despite engaging in a lot of it, which was the actual intent.

NYC ended up spending $1,440 per dollar in fares recovered on stopping fare jumpers, which is probably why the decree came about in the first place. Is there a particular reason why you think setting gargantuan amounts of money on fire over trivial offenses makes sense?

“Every news source lies equally and is equally untrustworthy” does not sound like grown up analysis, Mr. Caulfield

I feel like drawing an equivalence here is morally dubious

Going back over every president over my lifetime the deficit has trended down during Democrat presidents and up during Republican ones, so I’m not sure this is true!

There’s a difference between the abuse potential of ‘a car’ and ‘a nationwide surveillance network that tracks your location any time you’re on a public road’

Then that danger is going to have to be balanced against the reduced danger to the general public

Unfortunately we’re not real good at rescinding bad laws, so you just get tyranny (and a lot of mysteriously voided tickets for cops and politicians)

Systems should be built so abuse isn’t allowed in the first place, in addition to monitoring for compliance.

Offering ‘just don’t use modern communication’ as a solution when ‘ban data collection and retention’ is right there feels like a way to derail the conversation rather than an honest proposal.