Slop.

https://europe.pub/c/gentle

but this naked display of distilled arrogance in a generous bedding of ignorance combined with the heady almost overpowering aroma of smugness is a perfect example of what makes genocideman engineering so special.

Taken from https://lemmy.world/post/31372138/17686553

I'm gonna be real with you mossad, youll get better return on investment if you filtered for lemm.world users instead

EDIT: Rule 1

Youtube community post links are real screwy lookin

I always love reading about friendships that cross party lines, like Michelle and Dubya or Joe Biden and John McCain. It's a reminder that most people aren't complete partisans

link

Good ol' G Dub, just a big old lovable goof.

I made a mistake browsed Reddit dot com. I regret my actions.

"By your logic, you could justify a foreign armed insurgency against the US government"

link

https://bsky.app/profile/victorshi.bsky.social/post/3lrlmxnra2k24

https://xcancel.com/Natsu_of_Laguna/status/1933760869714010356

It would be much more comfortable for him rather than just becoming an actual communist.

Recap:

1. No, AOSP is not going closed source. They are only releasing the Release builds now, not the dev builds. So he gets downvoted.
2. He then dosent even get why he's been downvoted, goes into rant about AOSP apps being closed source? (No idea where he got that from)
3. proceeds to go into most generic fucking explanation how Open source is against data collection, which, like, yeah? You could have summed that up in 5 words.
4. For some reason now its a rant about eSims???

This is just something someone would generate with ChatGPT and add their own told you so text.

https://bsky.app/profile/audelito.bsky.social/post/3lriaoxgejc2c

https://bsky.app/profile/altnps.bsky.social/post/3lrh7nt2vb22w

They also gonna bring handcuffs so they can cuff themselves for the cops?

50 Gorillion Dead

Also the counter reached 1 mil exactly on Russia Day. Can't make this shit up

Under a review of a book that helpfully informs us that revolutions are authoritarian.

“Authoritarianism,” he writes, “is one of the most striking features” of revolutions. Napoleon was an archetype, followed by a grim parade of successors: “Stalin, Mao, Castro, Ho Chi Minh, Pol Pot … Khomeini.”

...

“The principle of popular sovereignty could be disregarded in the name of the people,” Mr. Edelstein writes. “It was in the name of a future, improved democratic government by people Y that the present, inferior democratic government by people X must be suspended.” Ancient despots had promised order. Modern despots were empowered by the allure of so-called historical progress, to be achieved with terror and coercion. The hiss and thud of the guillotine, the gutters running with blood, the show trials and purges, the inevitable dictatorships of “virtue” or the “proletariat”: These were not failures, Mr. Edelstein suggests, but the necessary if exorbitant price of progress.

...

“The inevitable compromises of democratic governance,” he writes of our present moment, “do not sit easily with either progressives or traditionalists. Liberal democracy gets worn down by historical expectations or regrets.” This general ennui produces perilous effects: a taste for centralized power, distain [sic] for procedural justice, aggressive ideological purity, contempt for moderation. Whatever his intentions, Mr. Edelstein may find that his study of revolutions induces in readers an appreciation for the age-old, Polybian balance of the U.S. Constitution, even as history threatens to overtake it. We should certainly hope so.