Eh, in all honesty I think Trump isn’t that far off from the mindset of most corrupt politicians around the world, he’s just more blatant, less smart and has WAY more power. If you try putting yourself in the mindset of “I benefit from doing this and I have a HUGE cult of people that like that I’m doing this”, it makes sense.

The only reason I think rehabilitation is not viable for him (besides, as I said, him being in a position where it’s impossible to make him face consequences), is because he’s really old and I don’t know if his brain is still capable of completely reshaping his thoughts. But I’m convinced that all the other “younger” terrible people (Musk, Tate, Shapiro and so on) could actually change if the whole world stopped giving them attention/praise and started saying “Hey, what you’re saying is fucked up and nobody likes you. We don’t want you in our society”. Of course, that’s a gigantic “if” because unfortunately they all have their own cult of people thinking they’re the messiah which constantly boosts their ego, but one can dream.

Oh and people from epstine’s Island have faced justice, outside of the USA and isreal…

Eh, the only one that comes to mind is Prince Andrew, apparently Peter Mandelson too but I just found out. Every other person on the list has barely been questioned to my knowledge, and while most of them are American, it’s not all of them.

In any case, it’s just an example of how, even given clear evidence of “something being wrong”, the law ultimately does nothing to most of the perpetrators. And it happens with the police, with giant corporations, with world politicians… I just don’t think anything would actually be done even if it was apparent that the test was discriminatory.

And then of course, as you said, I don’t think this can realistically happen either with our current landscape, we’re just “whatif”-ing on the internet and that’s fine.

I… don’t know how I missed that parentheses, sorry if I basically reiterated what you already said lol

In any case though, I still don’t believe in the existence of people physically incapable of empathy (well, outside of some mentally ill ones who lack more than just empathy), it’s just that some people are in a position where they’re never gonna realistically need to learn it in their entire lives.

I’m not really confident in what can or cannot be tracked considering there was an island where most of the world’s elites were flying to have sex with little girls and we started having the smallest idea after like 10 years.

The fact that it would be obvious wouldn’t really matter either: first, reality itself has already been denied plenty of times (see the above “my abortion wasn’t an abortion”), and second, even if we all agreed that a group was being targeted… what of it? Would anyone be able to do anything about it? We have a huge list of people who have 100% been on Epstein’s island and therefore at minimum knew what was going on. How many suffered consequences? Is anyone arresting or prosecuting them yet?

Sorry if this comes off as defeatist but recent years really made me lose most of the little faith I had in law and common sense. It feels like people in power WILL exploit any tool you give them for personal benefit and there’s gonna be nothing to stop them.

I in no way believe we couldn’t make a comprehensive intelligence and decision making ability test using international standards to prevent minority group targeting and peroperly sort out the stupids from everyone else

I do believe that. Especially since whatever organization you task with that can still be bribed or manipulated.

I’m personally partial to a different, more objective mechanism: we already restrict voting and eligibility for office for people that are too young, don’t we? Let’s do that for people that are too old too. Take the life expectancy of a country and anyone that’s beyond that can’t vote or hold office. You’ve already done enough to shape the country, now leave it to people that might actually get to keep living in it.

Personally disagree. Empathy doesn’t necessarily mean agreeing, it can also mean understanding why the other person is thinking like that, while still disagreeing with them.

Being clear, I agree that shunning is the correct path, but it’s not because “you can’t have empathy for people who lack it”, it’s exactly because you understand that if you don’t shun them, they’re never going to change. The utopic end goal is that people understand why they’re being shunned and start rethinking their choices. Of course, if they don’t and they want to keep being shunned that’s still a positive for society, but we should still hope for them to change. It’s sort of like the (stated, unfortunately not factual) purpose of prison.

That got enshittified too, anything marked as NSFW is not accessible without an account right now.

And from personal experience (might be just me being dumb though), old Reddit doesn’t work anymore if you’re not logged in, so you’re stuck with the new interface which auto-translates stuff and makes comment chains impossible to browse through on mobile.

Man, she really knows how to pull at our heartstrings.

Something that got me thinking after I’ll Still be Here, and now even more, is that a lot of Holomems (or VTubers in general) usually have a very “standard” first Original Song, with a bit of lore and maybe memes, depending on what you’d expect from them (it’s also good marketing, in a sense) but Gigi, the “chaotic gremlin”, subverted expectations not once but twice, putting out very intimate and emotional songs instead. I could see a lot of people unfamiliar with her being caught off-guard by the choice and maybe discovering her more introspective side, and that’s probably one of the things she was aiming for.

To borrow the theme of the song, she’s both the overexcited goofball that people might find out first from clips and the introverted, insecure and caring girl that she tries not to show too much, but still comes out in more personal talks and anecdotes from her friends. Neither is “a fiction, a fright or a trick of the light”, she’s just “her” and that’s more than enough.

(Even more blatantly in sight from the community post constantly flipflopping between talking about self-acceptance and yuri selfcest lmao)

Also, the library is still out there. You still can ignore the rent-seeking middle men and use it directly with your own natural neural network.

…but you have to jump between a billion hoops to get there because now it’s all buried between AI results and SEO crap.

Assuming it’s even still there and accessible in the same way, if its site was enshittified (did someone say Reddit?) you might need to go through additional hoops even after you actually find it.

The Bau Bau has brainrotted us all. There is no escape, not even in the deep ocean.

I very much suspect he’s going to run for President in my lifetime and win.

Isn’t he born in Uganda, disqualifying him from being a candidate for President?

Unfortunately, these are all young people with a vast following of young people. Not to mention Charlie Kirk, Andrew Tate…

Young people skew left and that’s a fact, it’s not a supermajority like it might seem on places like this.

Genuine question, is the article posted painting the wrong picture as well? Its conclusions for example:

It’s unlikely to fully deliver on its universal promise by 2028 unless funding, staffing, and state-level coordination improve sharply. But even so, the most likely outcome is meaningful improvement in access and coordination, especially in emergencies and underserved areas. It likely won’t be a seamless or fully equal national health service in the near term, but if things go according to plan, there will be improvement.

Still, without sustained increases in public health spending, universal access could become a bottleneck rather than a breakthrough. Mexico also has to improve its labor retention, and lastly, ensure digital execution.

If it works though, it could be a remarkable achievement. It’s a pivot away from the US-style employment-tethered chaos and toward a unified, digital-first “National Health Service” like in Canada, the UK, or Europe (but with more biometric tech).

To me it seems like it raises concerns similar to the ones I’ve seen here, but still has a kind-of-hopeful outlook. Am I missing something?

It’s a play on this Simpsons scene/meme

deleted by creator

I’n familiar with Libertarian Socialism, what I’m perplexed at is a different matter.

…why are you a Libertarian Socialist if you think “Socialism is using other people’s money to solve problems that never will be solved“?

I’m a social capitalist with libertarian socialist views.

Socialism is using other people’s money to solve problems that never will be solved

Excuse me what

It shouldn’t be treated as absolute truth but that doesn’t mean it’s not news or newsworthy. The title should’ve been less clickbaity though, sure.

I mean… I get your sentiment (and admittedly, I’m not really knowledgeable about the situation over there), but if the cartels’ influence is really as pervasive as you say… is there even anything that can be realistically done to address the problem directly? Has any candidate (even minor ones) proposed a plan to deal with them and they got messed with? Or is everyone just too disillusioned to even try?

Genuinely asking, because the way you described it, it sounds even worse than the Mafia situation in the nineties in Italy, and that was really bleak.

I generally hate the principle of subscriptions + ads + paywalling stuff to viewers but not to crawlers, it’s pretty much double-dipping while baiting people for SEO.

On the other hand, I understand that in this day and age keeping a news outlet afloat without “outside influence” requires doing stuff like this. It’s a hard thing to balance but in either case I appreciate the insight from your comment, I admit I didn’t look them up and I figured they were just another money-hungry megacorp-owned outlet.