Do EVs have connecting rods? The article does go into right to repair, sounds like the company is pro DIY repair so that's promising at least.

FUTO also has this feature thankfully cuz I guess switched to Colemak two weeks ago myself

Hey, I work for canon in tech support right now. Trying to find a better job though haha

The craziest part of that article is

Vice co-founder Shane Smith stepped down as CEO in 2018, but has remained the company's (...) The Canadian-born journalist’s focus seems to be trained on the southern border, with an editorial line closer to Trump campaign fearmongering than hard news reporting. (Smith is not to be confused with Vice co-founder Gavin McInnes, who left the media company and established the far-right militant group the Proud Boys).

So two of the three Vice media founders are now far right? I tried to find out more about Suroosh Alvi, the third founder, but didn't see much. Though on his X (🤢) he posts and reports a bunch of pro Gaza stuff.

I shouldn't be surprised cuz it looks like they all got rich off Vice, but still.

I signed up and got an email with a link to the apk. I'd share, but it looks like it's personalized to my email maybe? and it doesn't work anymore

Zeezee already has a great reply. I'd also like to add that gender dysphoria isn't the same as being trans, it's possible to be trans and not have dysphoria

Kinda random but it also broke Canon scan software

Your neighbor says women wearing dresses isn't transphobic, but not respecting pronouns is?

I think you're just chronically online. Just say female if you're in a conversation and want to exclude trans women. Most trans people won't care as long if the context isn't transphobic. I really don't see why it's unacceptable to have an adjective if you're describing a subset of women. Like there's not a singular noun for "tall men" but if you're actually not being transphobic then whatever.

Again with sexual orientation, it sounds like you're saying that because chronically online. There are people who say it's transphobic to say straight but exlude trans people. Again, context and intent matters. You can just say straight. This one is tricker because not all trans people have surgically transitioned, genital preference matters, and orientation is a spectrum.

And it's a tough subject within the trans community itself, because it's frustrating to present as a gender, transition in every way to that gender, be accepted and pass for that gender, only for someone to say they aren't attracted to you only after they find out you're trans. What other conclusion would you have other than transphobia? And it doesn't help that it often is accompanied by blatant transphobia.

So if someone is calling you transphobic, either the context is also transphobic or they're misunderstanding your intent.

The first article doesn't say he's not fascist (unless I missed it somehow or it got lost in translation. I'm an English only pleb)

And I found the second article (in English 😅) since your link has it paywalled. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/oct/29/trump-rally-fascism-politics

I understand the argument, but don't find it overwhelmingly convincing. They even start the article mentioning how well respected historians believe he's fascist, as well as former White House staff.

I'd argue that just because he's not been totally supportive of violence doesn't excuse the times he was promoting violence. And I think his actions show he would be more openly supportive of violence if he knew he could get away with it

Because crimes should be handled in a criminal court case with real consequences, not a civil case. But that's not likely to happen.

So if someone did sue them, and against all odds they won, and the money they received somehow properly compensated for their loss (i.e. a loved ones preventable death), then the company that extracts billions of dollars from Americans every year would lose a couple million. The company would be unaffected and have no meaningful consequences for their willfully unethical behavior. We'd have to have thousands of successful lawsuits to have meaningful consequences.

That's not implied by their logic at all. Not every person is in a position of power like this CEO was, the majority of people don't have a job that denies people necessary healthcare, and many people will not make the choice to be unethical like this CEO chose.

I understand, and disagree with, the argument that vigilante justice is completely uncalled for but you're not doing your argument justice here

Pretty sure it means

Galaxy Nexus (the smartphone): Android (OS) Ice Cream Sandwich (OS Version) Guinea Pig (Test Subject)

(So the new Android OS version, Ice Cream Sandwich, is being tested on the Galaxy Nexus phone)

It's a bankruptcy auction, and he's bankrupt because he was sued by Sandy Hook families. Some of those families gave money to the Onion to buy InfoWars so Alex Jones is losing his platform and his money.

It sucks for him more than it helps him really.

Hold on, is the straight person arguing for the gays, and the gay person arguing for the straights?? (I'm pansexual and I think we should all just get along)

In the comic she isn't picking a fight, she is confiding in a friend her frustration that sometimes men can have fragile egos. That doesn't mean men are the root of all problems. The comic is saying that often criticism, no matter how small or in what context, can be met with an overblown reaction that derails any potential conversation and spirals into name calling and whataboutism.

It would be sexist to say men are the root of every problem, but I'm not seeing anyone claim that. Not in the comic, not in these comments, not in real life, really only in certain toxic Internet spaces. A woman pointing out a common problem they experience with men ideally would be met with self reflection, not deflection. It is not a lack of empathy from women, it is women not understanding why men struggle to identify an issue that seems so clear to women. And men not understanding why women would make a generalized statement that seems to criticize individual men.

But women are often talking about a systemic issue with men, not trying to personally insult individuals. And the deflection and insults that they often receive just furthers the frustration between sexes. You're saying that the issue would be prevented if women didn't say things that have negative messaging. I firmly believe that would make the issue worse, as the first step to fixing an issue is identifying it and facing it head on.

Men often have fragile egos. That does not make men evil. It is barely even an issue unless an individual man lets it define his actions. If a criticism from a woman doesn't seem true to you personally, congrats! You have self reflected and don't have to worry about it because she's not talking about you.

If it helps, I have empathy for you. I'm pretty sure I'm not cis so I don't call myself a man anymore lol but I had the same feelings as you do until a couple years after I met my wife. We had long talks and disagreements about the divide between men and women that form from miscommunication and misunderstanding. And I expressed frustration at the criticisms women often have of men. And she explained that it's not meant to insult, just vent from personal experience. That it's not a way to make men feel bad, not malicious or looking down on men. It's just an attempt to communicate an issue they see. And after a while I started to see how true that is. And then I realized I might not be a dude so it kinda was a waste of time lmao

Sorry about the wall of text, tl:dr when a woman is critical it's meant to express a frustration and communicate an issue, not insult or put down every individual man. If you're a man and hear criticism, it's not likely applicable to you. But it helps to self reflect and have empathy

So the people in cities should just be worth less when they vote? It's a federal vote for a federal office, everyone in the country should count the same.

The individual states already have their own powers which make sure the federal government doesn't make decisions that are bad for those states. And each county and town have their own governments that pass local laws.

I've also heard this argument so many times but I haven't heard any actual examples.

Wrong thread, this is postal workers withholding mail

Yes, they are not the same thing. That's what a comparison is. If you think it's a bad comparison, feel free to explain why you think so

What do you mean "doesn't like"? The federal government "doesn't like" citizens sending bombs in the mail, and they would deny you that, yes. I'm not sure what the point of your reply was, it doesn't argue against anything I've said. Sounds like a straw man.

There's a difference between individual mail carriers and the organization USPS or Canadian Post. And there's a difference between dislike and illegal. I thought we already established that, is that something you disagree on??