It's still ideas the group agrees with. The idea is: that we all disagree with this idea. It's subtle, until you look at the same story on CNN vs Fox. Two bubbles discussing the same issue with two VERY different emotional valences.
To put it another way: the discussion of these ideas that are oppositional to the community, is not with the intention of seriously considering them. It's with the intention of dismissing them in a group act of catharsis. It maintains the bubble and safely dispatches an idea that threatened to burst it.
We also do it to ourselves. Everyone has someone in their life they'd rather mute. But they're forced to coexist with them. Online is so appealing because you can find communities of like minded individuals. Then forget all about those other opinions you don't like.
You grow in this bubble as they grow in theirs. By the next time you're forced to interact, you feel so alien and unpleasant to one another it's confusing and frightening. Corporations are right there to sell you on a story about how the other side are demons destroying the world. We gobble it up.
Actors are not and should not be responsible for gun safety on set. You expect a low IQ former drama kid with a coke habit who worships scientology from a country where it's not even legal to own a firearm to be responsible? When every other scene in an action film explicitly requires that they break every single one of the 4 rules of gun safety?
Trusting actors who studied Shakespeare in college to be responsible for determining if a prop is actually a lethal weapon is absurd. That's why there's a trained person on set where that's literally their whole responsibility. I like Baldwin's acting. I've also heard he's shitty to his daughter. I'm not defending him as a person. I'm defending him because he's innocent of this charge. His job was to point something that resembled a gun at someone and pull the trigger. It was someone else's to ensure that would be a safe action.
I think the copy they're referring to is the initial one that puts it on the Internet without a paywall. Not those that come along after and take a copy.
The best one I've used for coding is the InelliJ AI. Idk how they trained that sucker but it's pretty good at ripping through boiler plate code and structuring new files / methods based off how your project is already setup. It still has those little hallucinations especially when you ask it to figure out more niche tasks. But It's really increased my productivity. Especially when getting a new repo setup. (I work with micro services)
Glad to hear that. The top comment is talking about the people that do think the rich should be killed. And those people co-existing with people that empathize with Paris Hilton on lemmy.
But why doesn't that apply when the guillotine is getting rolled out?
There's projects that fully replace the Google Home Mini mobo. No reason you couldn't do that with Alexa
The only person in this thread who seems intent on pepe being about hate speech is you. I've been asked in some formal settings to avoid using the OK hand sign in case it sends the wrong message. I've been advised by tattoo artists to avoid Nordic symbols despite the fact that I'm of Scandinavian descent. You're enabling the worst kind of people to decide what symbols mean in our culture. Why?
That's your position. Not mine. They can't have shit, because I won't let them 
Just off the top of my head those are a few. And that's with people holding the line and continuing to use these symbols without hate. We don't need more people defending their claims.
It's no shock when a game developer builds a bunch of content on a platform like UE5 and charges for it. No shock that Epic might take a cut. But when it's a game developer building content on a platform like Starfield and Bethesda would get the cut, it should be free? Why exactly? Because you're used to it?
I think people intend it to be a clever undercutting of the person they dislike. But it stopped being clever ages ago. When does something become a cliche? Because it just sounds petty now.
Off topic, but... Can we retire this idiom? It's in this thread like 3 times and it's always used by people uncomfortable by the fact that someone they don't like made a good point.
People are nostalgic the world over, not just in America. So all of the undertones of political issues that you're layering on here isn't inherent to the human feeling of nostalgia. Now The Dukes of Hazzard is problematic for a great many reasons as this post highlights. So it's totally fair to call that out. But it's also totally fair to remember being a kid and liking a show where guys break the rules with fast cars. It doesn't mean that he's a bigot that wants to drag us all back to the '70s.
I say, as long as you're self aware and this feeling in nostalgia doesn't push you in the direction of Trump or Andrew Tate, then go for it.
In my head the batteries would work somewhat like the electric scooters you can rent around big cities. There would be battery companies that pay stations to stock their batteries. Then EV owners pay for the juice they used, plus a little extra for the wear, plus a little extra to make it worth it for the battery companies when they swap to a new battery. So you're essentially renting the batteries.
Food is a category made up of human edible materials, usually providing nutritional benefits. There is a larger social construct AROUND food. Like a burrito is a construct, it being a product of Mexican culture is a construct, it being transformed into a "Cali Burrito", people who have burrito bumper stickers, the type of place you think of when someone says "a burrito joint". All social constructs. But food itself, I wouldn't consider a social construct, no.
Well if you really thought this person was stupid, what was the point of calling them such? You just want them to feel terrible about themselves? That's pretty dumb. If it's such a stupid question, you could share an intelligent answer to help. But it seems like you're just triggered and that it probably happens a lot to you.