Honestly what are you talking about?

It was a long time ago and only briefly, but I agree this does not sound at all like what I recall from a CBT session.

There is no way that these two didn’t talk about how to answer that question before the press event. This isn’t the president of El Salvador saying he doesn’t want to return Kilmar Abrego Garcia, it’s him saying that he is on Trump’s side.

If people think the big risk of AI is fake nudes… man, I wish that was the worst that could happen.

Criticism is not censorship. You’ll just have to learn to live with the fact that people can tell you when they think you’re being an ass. Free speech, you know.

I for one agree that kind of sexualized criticism is inappropriate. I think a reasonable person would read it as trying to demean Schumer by associating him with other-than-straight behavior.

I dunno pretty sure they consume groceries

Yeah but how do you get the information from the IRS into the systems that manage this hypothetical program? How do you get your parents’ and grandparents’ IRS data correlated with your own? What about people who don’t file taxes? The risk is that all that work falls on the applicant. Or if the program administrators do all that work, that’s where the overhead costs come in.

This is something which happens with existing public assistance programs, where so many requirements have been put on the aid application that people give up trying to to prove they made less than X dollars in the last 12 months, or lived in the state for at least 5 years, or have passed a drug screening, and so on. Too often that’s done intentionally to stymie a program, but the phenomenon exists regardless of motivation. The more complicated the program requirement are, the more people will fail to get aid they should, and the more it costs to administer.

Has it worked well for France? I’ve been arguing that such an approach would work much better for the US.

Using self-identified racial identities for aid programs is too easy to argue is itself racially biased. Even if you can make good contextual arguments that race-based aid is a compensation for race-based oppression, either current or historical, that’s not a winning political position.

Using metrics like generational wealth, income, education is a much easier argument to make, even if in effect it would disproportionately benefit these identity groups.

The primary downside seems to be that administering such a program is more complicated, which means more of the expense goes to overhead, and more people will not get the benefits they could because of the difficulty of navigating a more complex process.

I didn’t see anything about a violation of election law. All it said was she was known for pro-Kremlin, and anti-Semitic positions. I hope there’s more to this story or Romania is going to damage the credibility of their elections.

Even a socialist command economy has to reason in terms of inputs and outputs. The difference in value between the two is a pretty good indicator of whether the given economic activity is successful or not. In a capitalist system the positive difference is called profits and the capitalists get to keep it. That fact doesn’t discredit the entire concept of “profits” as a net gain in value.

Anyway, just because the capitalists may win most (the whole system is called capitalism after all), doesn’t mean that ramping up European arms production isn’t a huge benefit for Ukraine.

You guys are only working on one project at a time?

The permanent veto holding members of the security council are specifically those countries capable of starting a nuclear conflict. Those vetos are expressly for reducing the risk of that happening. Not saying the world can’t do better today, but let’s remember why it is the way it is.

deleted by creator

It’s up to you now, Europe.

Yeah leaked data stays leaked. You can often find out what was leaked tho.

I imagine this looks a lot like what people in the cyber security sector do after a breach. Audit all the code, scan all the servers, monitor everything for several months. It’s a ton of work and very expensive, but there are people with lots of real-world experience unhacking systems.

I think the idea here is that, as Republicans have repeatedly demonstrated, the minority party can do a lot to simply break the government.

If the Democrats had the intestinal fortitude to be real resistance against an authoritarian takeover, they could start filibustering everything, and using every procedural trick to delay or block every Republican action until some set of demands are met. Perhaps removing Musk from every government system, or reinstating all of the DoJ personnel who have been retaliated against.

Here we see Democrats basically unanimously going along with the Republican agenda so that they can feel like “the adults in the room,” rather than fighting for the life of our republic.

This mirrors how I’ve been thinking about the broader world trends. The neo-liberal world order is dying. It has solved all the problems it has the capacity to solve, and the people have run out of patience with the problems it can’t.

The groups that have been best positioned to fill the gaps created by these retreating institutions are the ones that had always been excluded; nationalists, authoritarians, xenophobes of all kinds, et al. The left? They joined the neo-liberal coalition to try to change the system from the inside, or refused to participate and languished in obscurity.

IMHO if we’re going to avoid a century of oppression, the left needs to abandon the neo-liberal coalition, and get into the fight for what comes next. We’re already two steps behind.