TheLurker

Brownouts are not the same as shutting down the grid mate.

SA has rolling brownouts because the grid cannot handle the demand. My example is that the whole grid shuts down. No country has ever done this.

Literally every part of critical infrastructure has been connected to the internet.

No internet means no water, electricity, emergency services, financial services, waste management…

It’s the digital rod for our modern back.

This is literally impossible to do without total economic and social collapse. It’s like saying you are going to shut off the electrical grid.

Moronic statements made by moronic people who don’t understand what the internet is and think internet = websites.

This shit will continue to happen until Americans accept that democracy comes with at least a basic level of responsibility. That being mandatory voting.

You are an idiot if you really think that in three days the dog went from a healthy weight to overweight.

No he hasn’t. After he left his role in the state department he went into non-profits which try to influence policy.

That’s so far removed from policy making I may as claim I set policy because I know my reports are in briefings which go to policy makers.

Which by association, I’m a mass murderer based on the sentiment of Lemmy at this moment.

I’m just over the dogpile. I’m rather short in my approach right now.

The fact you lot are more concerned about a guy who had no political influence for 40 years and is now dead, while turning away from the cunts that are fucking up our society up today shows how weak as piss you lot are.

Omg here is a guy that we all agree sucks and died. 🥳🥳🥳

I don’t want to fight against the real problems of today so let me dogpile on an easy dead target. I feel good now.

Thank you for the clarification. I appreciate your help.

Winning a debate should not be the goal. It should be to progress disclosure and help finding some resemblance of “truth”.

Hence why I asked which of the two possible ironic statements I made you were asking about.

I’m wrong all the time. But discourse helps us all to learn.

It’s the leopard’s ate my face business strategy. 😆

However I would counter with the point that those with a binary view point must be debated in like.

How can I debate the grey with a person who cannot see it?

I think I should have stated “whom” to remove the qualifier ambiguity.

I hate using whom but in this case it was probably needed.

On review I think this is one of the few times that “whom” would be more appropriate.

Because I would only support religious education if it adhered to my viewpoint while claiming conservatives can only see binary viewpoints?

Or because I have a binary view point of conservatives while at the same time levelling this against them?

Both are ironic in some sense.

I mean if a woman wants to marry a person who is a Trump supporter, then while I question her sanity… Okay I guess? 🤷‍♂️

But this idea that women are not marrying Trump supporters because of “social pressure” just sounds to me like another of the long line of “women are weak and can’t make their own decisions” arguments.

But then again what can you expect from conservatives who can only think in terms of binaries?

I mean he has all but announced the fact Twitter will go into administration soon.

He literally said this latest move by advertisers will tank the company. He then blamed them for this.

My guess is he wants to get the narrative going that other companies killed twitter and not his mismanagement of it.

I said it back in 2001 when the war on terror started.

First it will be the “terrorist”, then the “extremists”, then it will be the “dissidents” and then finally the “undesirables”.

Seems we are at the dissidents stage.

The idiots behind this shit really should have paid more attention in history class.

Perhaps this is what they are referring to? 😆

https://youtube.com/watch?v=eirq4laOhcU&pp=ygUnaXJlbGFuZCBiZWZvcmUgdGhlIGludmVudGlvbiBvZiB3aGlza2V5