mffnbs

I love this argument because it exposes that voter legitimacy is not based on any sort of logic or evidence, but based on feeling more secure about it.

It's especially ironic.

I had my license suspended once and at the time I lived in a city with mild public transit. To go get it renewed was a 6 hour ordeal that I can't imagine having to do if I were living paycheck to paycheck. Spend an entire day not making money so you can spend another days earnings so that you can go vote, all because of a political agenda, not any real issue.

As long as you acknowledge that you're implementing this explicitly to suppress American votes, sure, go ahead and try. I'm tired of the misdirection with election safety when anyone in the game knows what it's actually about.

> The U.S. sounds more and more like a dystopia to me.

> Germany having an ID is a matter of fact

Having an id as a matter of fact sounds more dystopian than a country where you aren't required to identify yourself at any given time.

Voting does not have the same privilege level as driving. Also thought your argument equating voting to voting was snarky dismissal, not a typo.

We can afford to do that, easily. Can we achieve it politically? No. Is it worth doing? No.

You can achieve the same result by not requiring an id to vote.

I'm being manipulated and the way you go about explaining this actually used the phase "Bill Clinton in a dress" and I'm just supposed to listen to you with a straight face?

The US does not have a law requiring you to have an id. Requiring people to have one is making the assumption that every person in the US can afford the time and money to obtain one, as well as the physical ability to do so.

If you cannot make this assumption, then you are actively disenfranchising people.

> It's a cult built around feelings and imagination at this point, not logic and reality.

Sounds like a cult that would use memes and social media to indoctrinate children, start crazy conspiracy theories about pizza, conspire with foreign governments, and suppress opponents votes though arbitrary requirements.

Not directly racist, but it costs money and time to obtain a passport.

I find it interesting that you've deflected their entire argument and made up a straw man to burn.

Depends on what you mean by voter ID.

Cloudflare making the decision not to serve specific customers in a legal fashion that does not discriminate against any protected groups is a non-story as well.

You don't often see private businesses making decisions like this on the front page of the new york times, but this one is a hot topic. They have no social, moral, or ethical obligation to serve these customers, and one's disagreement with that does not mean we should be forcing individuals to cater to everyone.

A ponzi scheme requires fraud. If you've evidence of fraud going on here then perhaps you should report it to the SEC.

And yet it does not seem reasonable to me.

Turns out he doesn't enjoy being tagged in the racist comments.

Steve's take on Reddit these days almost seems like he's doubling down on the whole "free speech" thing for better or for worse.

I personally left the site after eleven years. Steve actually permanently banned me after I had pointed out a few instances where racism was not only allowed to live, but seemingly encouraged.

Do you often find raid attacking people in the wild?

You went and did a whole thing there, eh?

Why are developers mindlessly upgrading major versions of dependencies and expecting everything to be okay?

The marketing slides? Ye

The fuck kinda metric is that? Politicians have no say in the legitimacy of climate change. You're calling bullshit on facts because a dozen people don't have a clue?

The "hyperirony" excuse is complete bullshit. It's not redeeming when the defense is that they only support, encourage, and enable terrorism because it's a joke. That would make it more despicable, even. Instead we have incredibly racist and hateful people who don't see themselves that way making excuses. They're still shit humans. You don't murder people and say it was irony as your defense.

I only question it because of the risk of attributing these changes towards predispositions to specific gender stereotypes. I'm not trying to place scrutiny on the subject because I unilaterally disbelieve trans people, but rather I believe these claims are dangerous. They can give trans people misconceptions on what medically transitioning will do for them, present medical transition as a method to become a "real" trans person, or give ammunition to opponents who use the hormone topic to dismiss women as a whole.

I do understand that these things are different for everyone and it's basically impossible to prove, but you can understand my skepticism. I definitely experienced some of the emotional elements you mention, but they aren't new to me. I don't cry or get upset now where I wouldn't have before. It does feel different though. I do not think this is the same as some of the behavioral changes that the parent is describing. My behavior hasn't changed. I'm still just as much of a nice/mean/thoughtful/forgetful/etc person that I was before. I had ADD before, I have ADD now. My political views haven't changed, I don't treat my friends differently, my hobbies haven't changed. I can't think of anything special about autism that would allow for those symptoms to change because of HRT.

What experiences did you have while on HRT that lead to you to believe this?

In general, I'm specifically skeptic of claims of behavioral changes associated with HRT, as I feel as if a lot of those claims have roots in gendered preconceptions of women that have nothing to do with biological differences. People going through HRT will associate personal, unrelated, experiences with the medical transition, but cannot be corroborated through any studies or research.

So these aren't symptoms that the individual is exhibiting but symptoms that are perceived differently by others? I could definitely see that being the case but I also feel as if that's moved the goalpost on what the parent said.

This publication seems to be relying on the reader to have a preconceived negative bias on GMOs in order to establish some of their arguments. I understand why a casual reader who's been led to believe that GMOs are malicious or toxic would find this disturbing, but knowing that GMOs are basically how we are able to consume most if not all modern food safely, it's immediately sensationalist to me.

I don't know about the other two topics they address, but I kind of question the motive altogether.

I find that difficult to believe. Estrogen isn't known to cause large behavioral changes like you've described. The changes in hormones can result in some emotional changes, but I cannot see how they would reduce symptoms of autism.

What reports are you referring to?

For most people it goes something like: Take off the earbuds and never worry about charging them because the case they go in does it for you and continue on your day without thinking about it or being concerned about imaginary scenarios where one of your random products fell down a gutter/drain in the middle of the office because who has the time or energy to worry about storm drains stealing from you?