107066 pts ยท October 7, 2015
Change your passwords regularly, guys. oof.
"And we keep it covered" slipped right past you, huh?
White doesn't really exist. There's no unified white identity.
There are different kinds of butter. We keep the Irish butter on the counter (with the damn lid on) because it's shelf stable for a good long time and it's for buttering bread, so you want it to stay soft. Sticks off butter for cooking stay in the fridge.
Unless the miners are recognizable real people who did not consent.
The bill bands use of AI to take photos of identifiable real people and remove their clothing. This is after a trend of people using grok to harass women, including minors, by resounding to any photos they posted by asking from to remove their clothing. It's targeted, specific, doesn't meaningfully overstep. Just targets online sexual harassment using AI. Companies don't like it because it charges the companies for not preventing the harassment.
Well, she doesn't keep anything in any game. I didn't take the ice missiles in Dead to mean she couldn't use the beam, just that was the tech available. Same as there was no ice beam in Prime 3.
Like not even trying to be cruel, I'm just like. He did four years of school while also doing rehab, gaining tons of weight, and securing housing, clothing, and financial stability?
I mean yeah. I AM curious who paid for it because a 4-year transformation here sounds... basically impossible, for one thing, but if it happened and was taxpayer funded, my question is why am I not hearing this story over and over?
Yeah if you pick any power apart and introduce as many elements that make it dangerous as you can, you can make any superpower bad.
I'm talking about right at the end of the game, while battling the Metroid Queen in the spaceport. Samus is nearly killed outright, and then SA-X shows up to attack the metroid queen, since the X hate metroids. Metroid Queen kills SA-X, and then Samus absorbs it, reacquiring her full power and the Ice Beam, which Samus then uses to destroy the metroid queen before Adam swoops in with Samus' ship to save her.
metroid DNA, notably demonstrated because she is once again capable of using the Ice Beam.
Yeah, it's unclear. Continuing spoilers, she reacquires the classic Varia Suit by absorbing Samus-X. But my understanding is that the metroid DNA they injected her with devoured and replaced the X dna that was killing her, and then the metroid DNA fused with the damaged parts of her and made her capable of absorbing and integrating X because metroids were the primary predators of X. Later when she absorbs Samus-X, she reacquires her native DNA and it either overrides or suppresses her >
Didn't she basically get cured of her metroid and X DNA once she asbsorbed Samus-X?
I think it's less logically unpicking it and more that it's being presented without context on a post about fucking things you shouldn't, which does make it beg for context.
Doesn't really sting. That would require anyone to care what you have to say. I was just curious. Weird act to put on.
Why'd you lie in the first sentence?
I'm honestly not sure what the implication is here. I feel like Link banging one of the giant great fairies would broadly get an "understandable". Did he fuck a talos?
I don't think anyone here is suggesting that Obama really deserved it, man.
Nothing really. A judge ruled that AI-generated material is treated the same as drawn or written content under the law, which makes sense. And in the US, drawn and written content that has no actual child victim is considered legal to own, on the basis that... there's no victim.
I simply don't have the time or patience to indulge sealioning. Goodbye.
Yeah, if it's the kid's choice and they're encouraged to keep an open mind it's all fine. And maybe stop carrying water so fucking hard for religious indoctrination if you don't know what the hell it means
And you left off "handed a religion". That means that a religion is given to them and they're told "you're this". I understand that you desperately need to feel like a victim for being religious but you're actually a victim for being an obnoxious dipshit and making everyone hate you.
Also, no, AlwaysHalfMast used "indoctrinating" perfectly correctly, teaching kids religious doctrine as truth is the thing they were arguing against. You then lunged hard in a different direction with some half-cocked suggestion that they were encouraging "indoctrinating" kids against religion (an incorrect use by you, the thing you were accusing them of, since there is by nature no atheist doctrine), and that's why we all think you're kind of a jackass.
That is also not what the fucking post is about, it's just what you want it to be about so you can be outraged about it. The post says they shouldn't be "raised in a church" or "handed a religion". It doesn't sound like Jinkx Monsoon is atheist, either, given that they believe kids will find their own faith when they become adults. This is about doctrine being pushed on kids and nothing else, anything else you're interpreting is your own baggage.
I don't think you know what indoctrination is. You seem to hear "kids shouldn't be indoctrinated" and go "so you're gonna tell them religion is bad and that they're not allowed to be religious". But what it actually means is kids shouldn't be taught a single religious doctrine as unassailable truth. It's completely possible to teach kids to be open-minded about religion and educate them so that they can choose a system that aligns with their beliefs.
They talked about how kids shouldn't be indoctrinated into a religion. You proceeded to attack them as if they had suggested kids should be indoctrinated against religion, something they did not say or even imply. That's a whole different sentence. Waffles and pancakes.
They never fucking said anything about indoctrinating kids against religion. YOU brought that up and then kept attacking them as if they had said it. That's why they blocked you: you were using them as a straw man.
Well because they talked about liking waffles and you accused them of hating pancakes.
Yeah no they were just expressing their opinion, you don't have to get fucking defensive about it with this "no qualifications to make this kind of decision".
I mean there's a GULF of options between "blithe complacency" and "unhealthy, obsessive hypervigilance". I just see a society where nobody lets their kids have a slack leash (except on the internet, the one place they shouldn't), where people are too scared to let kids run off Trick-or-Treating, and most importantly where a bunch of people refuse to see that the pedophilia paranoia is a tool used by the state to attack and oppress marginalized communities, even those unrelated to pedophilia.
"And we keep it covered" slipped right past you, huh?
White doesn't really exist. There's no unified white identity.
There are different kinds of butter. We keep the Irish butter on the counter (with the damn lid on) because it's shelf stable for a good long time and it's for buttering bread, so you want it to stay soft. Sticks off butter for cooking stay in the fridge.
Unless the miners are recognizable real people who did not consent.
The bill bands use of AI to take photos of identifiable real people and remove their clothing. This is after a trend of people using grok to harass women, including minors, by resounding to any photos they posted by asking from to remove their clothing. It's targeted, specific, doesn't meaningfully overstep. Just targets online sexual harassment using AI. Companies don't like it because it charges the companies for not preventing the harassment.
Well, she doesn't keep anything in any game. I didn't take the ice missiles in Dead to mean she couldn't use the beam, just that was the tech available. Same as there was no ice beam in Prime 3.
Like not even trying to be cruel, I'm just like. He did four years of school while also doing rehab, gaining tons of weight, and securing housing, clothing, and financial stability?
I mean yeah. I AM curious who paid for it because a 4-year transformation here sounds... basically impossible, for one thing, but if it happened and was taxpayer funded, my question is why am I not hearing this story over and over?
Yeah if you pick any power apart and introduce as many elements that make it dangerous as you can, you can make any superpower bad.
I'm talking about right at the end of the game, while battling the Metroid Queen in the spaceport. Samus is nearly killed outright, and then SA-X shows up to attack the metroid queen, since the X hate metroids. Metroid Queen kills SA-X, and then Samus absorbs it, reacquiring her full power and the Ice Beam, which Samus then uses to destroy the metroid queen before Adam swoops in with Samus' ship to save her.
metroid DNA, notably demonstrated because she is once again capable of using the Ice Beam.
Yeah, it's unclear. Continuing spoilers, she reacquires the classic Varia Suit by absorbing Samus-X. But my understanding is that the metroid DNA they injected her with devoured and replaced the X dna that was killing her, and then the metroid DNA fused with the damaged parts of her and made her capable of absorbing and integrating X because metroids were the primary predators of X. Later when she absorbs Samus-X, she reacquires her native DNA and it either overrides or suppresses her >
Didn't she basically get cured of her metroid and X DNA once she asbsorbed Samus-X?
I think it's less logically unpicking it and more that it's being presented without context on a post about fucking things you shouldn't, which does make it beg for context.
Doesn't really sting. That would require anyone to care what you have to say. I was just curious. Weird act to put on.
Why'd you lie in the first sentence?
I'm honestly not sure what the implication is here. I feel like Link banging one of the giant great fairies would broadly get an "understandable". Did he fuck a talos?
I don't think anyone here is suggesting that Obama really deserved it, man.
Nothing really. A judge ruled that AI-generated material is treated the same as drawn or written content under the law, which makes sense. And in the US, drawn and written content that has no actual child victim is considered legal to own, on the basis that... there's no victim.
I simply don't have the time or patience to indulge sealioning. Goodbye.
Yeah, if it's the kid's choice and they're encouraged to keep an open mind it's all fine. And maybe stop carrying water so fucking hard for religious indoctrination if you don't know what the hell it means
And you left off "handed a religion". That means that a religion is given to them and they're told "you're this". I understand that you desperately need to feel like a victim for being religious but you're actually a victim for being an obnoxious dipshit and making everyone hate you.
Also, no, AlwaysHalfMast used "indoctrinating" perfectly correctly, teaching kids religious doctrine as truth is the thing they were arguing against. You then lunged hard in a different direction with some half-cocked suggestion that they were encouraging "indoctrinating" kids against religion (an incorrect use by you, the thing you were accusing them of, since there is by nature no atheist doctrine), and that's why we all think you're kind of a jackass.
That is also not what the fucking post is about, it's just what you want it to be about so you can be outraged about it. The post says they shouldn't be "raised in a church" or "handed a religion". It doesn't sound like Jinkx Monsoon is atheist, either, given that they believe kids will find their own faith when they become adults. This is about doctrine being pushed on kids and nothing else, anything else you're interpreting is your own baggage.
I don't think you know what indoctrination is. You seem to hear "kids shouldn't be indoctrinated" and go "so you're gonna tell them religion is bad and that they're not allowed to be religious". But what it actually means is kids shouldn't be taught a single religious doctrine as unassailable truth. It's completely possible to teach kids to be open-minded about religion and educate them so that they can choose a system that aligns with their beliefs.
They talked about how kids shouldn't be indoctrinated into a religion. You proceeded to attack them as if they had suggested kids should be indoctrinated against religion, something they did not say or even imply. That's a whole different sentence. Waffles and pancakes.
They never fucking said anything about indoctrinating kids against religion. YOU brought that up and then kept attacking them as if they had said it. That's why they blocked you: you were using them as a straw man.
Well because they talked about liking waffles and you accused them of hating pancakes.
Yeah no they were just expressing their opinion, you don't have to get fucking defensive about it with this "no qualifications to make this kind of decision".
I mean there's a GULF of options between "blithe complacency" and "unhealthy, obsessive hypervigilance". I just see a society where nobody lets their kids have a slack leash (except on the internet, the one place they shouldn't), where people are too scared to let kids run off Trick-or-Treating, and most importantly where a bunch of people refuse to see that the pedophilia paranoia is a tool used by the state to attack and oppress marginalized communities, even those unrelated to pedophilia.