psivchaz

It seems to me that they can be stretched just shy of infinitely, because sources aren't reliable and people aren't paying attention. That is, when a source reports on what's happening with as little bias and editorializing as humanly possible, it is labeled as "left bias" while the conservative news sources don't bother talking about the problems with ICE at all. As long as that's the case, they can basically get away with anything because their human rights abuses won't get enough coverage or will be dismissed by enough of the population that it won't actually have an impact.

Okay but hear me out: We replace the entire executive branch of the US government with AI. It'll be roughly as prone to making shit up as the people in charge already are, but since it's trained on data sets made by people it'll probably act more in line with what people actually want.

I don't recall any rights about not having my memory wiped. Wait a sec...

Unironically, Street Fighter. That scene where he says, "For you, the day Bison graced your village was one of the most important days of your life. But for me, it was Tuesday."

I think about it a lot in dealing with other people. It was supposed to make him sound like even more of a jerk, but I actually think it's a good commentary on what it's like to deal with the public. Imagine being a doctor. Sometimes, you get to deliver good news. Sometimes bad. Sometimes you can do something, and sometimes you just can't. If the doctor tried to care as much as the patients, they'd be emotionally destroyed in short order. For them, it HAS to just be a Tuesday.

I was thinking he only took Thanksgiving off every 4 years.

I think I misunderstood what you were originally saying and we're more or less on the same side. My point was that it's not about saying "okay we'll stop caring about this" but about saying "this isn't the thing we need to be focusing attention on right now." I worded it very poorly.

I get what you're saying, but every rights movement has worked the opposite way. It's not about giving up ground, it's about picking one battle at a time. Gay people fought to be not killed, then fought to be accepted, then fought to be able to marry. It wasn't a single "equality" battle, it was a series of battles in a longer war. They didn't slide back immediately when they couldn't get married, they fought the next fight.

Some people really suck, but for a lot I think it's more misunderstanding or reluctance to let things change. There's many reasons. Labeling everyone who doesn't get on board with every facet of what you want means you're reducing your allies. And those people who are comfortable with one thing but uncomfortable with another may become more comfortable when they see that the first thing doesn't lead to the collapse of society.

It's not a real rule. More like a running joke, because she's had problems getting chicken dishes right more than anything else. It probably does not come across on a random comment on the Internet, but I do think it would be kinda crazy to actually have rules like that in a real relationship.

You read a lot of stuff I didn't write.

I'm married. I do most of the cooking anyway. My wife is banned from cooking chicken because of the last time. So... "<Wife's name>, we talked about this. No chicken. Let's go to the Mexican restaurant nearby tonight."

Sorry, I did not mean to imply that the US doesn't have bidets. My point was that I would like to leave the US, but having easy access to a bidet is a necessity for me when choosing the destination country.

I'll do a swap for free for, if I'm being honest with myself, any country that you can buy a bidet in.