

You can ignore politics, but politics will not ignore you.
You can ignore politics, but politics will not ignore you.
Negative value property? Easy. It’s called a timeshare!
If you can afford to, you should go for liability only coverage. We recently bought a new car and have comprehensive on it. But for years we just had a single old Toyota as our only vehicle. And we didn’t keep comprehensive on it. Instead we purchased the highest liability policy the insurance company sells. A car that cheap is a small part of our financial world; we can afford to replace it. But the potential damage a vehicle can cause? It’s very easy to cause a million in damages with any vehicle. Long term care and medical bills add up quick.
I recommended just sticking to liability if you can otherwise afford to replace a vehicle. It’s a lot easier to figure out what you’re buying when you’re buying liability coverage as well. If I cause an expensive accident, the company will be liable for it. They can’t easily weasel their way out of paying a fake amount. If I have a $1 million liability policy, and I lose a judgment for $1 million, there’s not much the insurance company can do but pay for it. In fact, their lawyers will be fighting the case for me, as they’re the ones who will ultimately have to pay if it fails. From an insurance purchase point of view, liability insurance is a pretty good deal. It’s easy to know what you’re purchasing, and it’s hard for the company to weasel their way out of payment on the back end.
I want a car that has a rear windscreen that can turn into a mirror at the push of a button. Really useful for dealing with men with tiny dicks who drive giant trucks
Sure, but no need to engage in bean soup discourse.
Not really the same. There’s a reason most folks don’t stick to sex toys and actually go through the effort of finding a partner. Hell, people do that even if they have no intention of forming a long term relationship. One night stands are a thing. For most people, vibrators and flesh lights clearly leave a lot to be desired. They can get you the O, but they lack the intimacy. I would say a robot could never provide that, but people are already falling in love with LLMs. As in, literal romantic love. When they change their models, OpenAI gets death threats from people acting like they just killed the love of their life. Because, well, they kind of did.
We have been using mechanical sex toys, but there is a difference between a simple machine and a robot. Assumedly, a robot could fulfill the intimacy needs of a flesh and blood human, not just facilitate a climax. Sex robots and vibrators will fulfill fundamentally different human needs.
Here’s one way to imagine it. Some insecure guys object if a woman uses a toy while she and he are intimate. But what about a robot? Assuming you’re a straight male, would you sleep with a girl that insisted that her (male) sex robot joined in? And this thing doesn’t just perform basic mechanical stimulation. Imagine all of the words, touches, and caresses you like to use. Imagine all the ways you like to touch a woman while intimate. Imagine all the things you say to her. Imagine it all. Then imagine there’s another dude next to you doing all those things and more. And he’s better at them than you. He just happens to be a literal machine. If you want to sleep with this girl, you need to let this other guy join in.
Having a robot join in would be like having another human person join in. Sure, if that’s your thing, go for it and live your dream. But most people don’t live like that and don’t want to live like that.
You have to post anything a fascist would hate. Fascists love undesirables killing themselves.
I actually did the paint job myself. Bought an old saw that needed some new paint, so I decided to have some fun with it.
I’m actually working on a PhD in the field. Whether that officially makes me a “scientist” I cannot say. But I have actually studied and done research in the field. Ask away!
Does a Hello Kitty bandsaw count?
Why were they kangaroo courts? They were established by an International Charter.. You can point out that the Nazi’s crimes weren’t illegal under German law, but who cares? Multiple jurisdictions can exist simultaneously. Sure there’s an element of ex post facto in making crimes against humanity a legal charge after the fact, but the ex post facto protections are something we democratically agreed to adopt. And maybe we can just agree to not let genocide be subject to ex post facto protections under international treaty. Yes, this was all just made up by people, but ultimately all laws and legal systems were first dreamed up by people doing a lot of improvisation.
Seriously. The idea that they’re just words and they have no meaning is historically ignorant. We executed Nazi propagandists, even if they never killed anyone with their own hands. Inciting others to genocide is still a crime against humanity.
Kirk was openly calling for the extermination of a group of people that represents the same portion of the US population as the Jews did in Germany prior to WW2. It is not all hyperbole to place Kirk’s death in its proper historical context. We literally executed people for doing what Kirk made his whole career doing.
Sure. Even if the raw numbers said that say, trans people are 1% of the population, and 1.5% of shooters, that would still be a meaningless figure. The sample size is too low to make any meaningful conclusion.
But the point is even if you don’t apply statistics, even using the sample we have, trans people are vastly under-represented among shooters. We represent about 1% of the population and 0.1% of shooters. You don’t even need to apply statistics. The numbers on their face show that there is zero evidence that trans people are over-represented.
Now, statistically, I would say that there is insufficient evidence to suggest that the rate of trans shooters is any different from the overall population, higher or lower. But there is less than zero evidence that trans people are over-represented.
The trans shooter myth is simply blood libel.
It was more anti-trans hate mongering. 2 or 3 trans shooters out of 5700 is nothing. If you can whittle down the number of “mass shootings” to just a handful of incidents, can make it seem like trans people are vastly over-represented among school shooters.
He was engaging in hate-mongering right until the end. Just like the Nazi propagandists of the WW2 era, he was spreading a message of a demonized minority group being responsible for countless crimes and social ills. He ran literally the exact same playbook against trans people as the Nazis did against Jews.
I have no more sympathy for him than the Nazi propagandists we hanged at Nuremberg. They’re guilty of the exact same crimes against humanity.
At the end of the day he is a human being, that’s why.
Julius Streicher was also a human being. He was hanged at Nuremberg for the same kind of hate-mongering that Kirk made his whole career doing. Kirk was guilty of crimes against humanity.
Neither did the children and families of Kirk’s numerous victims.
You’re right. He wasn’t Hitler. He was Julius Streicher.
Charlie Kirk’s life ended on September 10, 2025 shot in the neck by an assassin’s bullet.
Julius Streicher met his end on October 16, 1946, hanged from the neck in Nuremberg Prison.
Exactly. I’ve been saying this all day, but we literally hanged people at Nuremberg for doing exactly what Kirk made his whole career doing. Kirk was guilty of incitement to genocide.
We should ban mention of Christianity in public. We should also make it illegal for anyone to teach their children Christianity. Practicing Christians should be declared mentally ill, and if they practice their faith in front of children, they should be put on the sex offender registry.
These freaks actually put giant statues of a naked bleeding man up on full public display in buildings. And they believe the most holy book in the world is one that features incest, murder, rape, genocide, and often fully endorses these horrors. Their main ritual is a form of public ritual cannibalism.
Christians are too dangerous to be allowed near children.