What actions does that involve? Which treaties would that break? Which other treaties can we then be ready for others to assume we’ll break? How will we respond to that in a way that prevents cascading trust collapse? Is there any way to guarantee to other allies that we won’t turn on them when expedient? How can we guarantee peace is even on the table if we’re suddenly regarded by the whole world as a betrayer? As even less reliable than we’ve already become?

One of the options is “unilaterally subject another country to our will”. I take it that’s what you want?

You’re not going to jab me into thinking you’re contributing in good faith. You aren’t. There’s only a few reasons to dig at Harris and Democrats for something an entirely different country is doing.

None of them are good. None help those we do have the power to help. None deescalate.

Worse, you use the lives of those we can’t help as shelter to make your horrid stance against those we can help seem like it’s somehow a bad choice.

It’s awful. I can’t imagine how you got there, and I don’t want to.

It only comes up with Harris because you don’t care as much about the genocide as much as you do about scoring political points. It’s horrible of you.

I don’t think “kill fewer people” is splitting hairs. I think it’s gross to leverage Palestine for political points but only against Democrats.

Arkansas?

I disagree that it’s “goddamn sad” when people get mad about others refusing to mitigate harm through votes, and cause irreparable damage instead. Loads of people have been using votes as a way to mitigate harm for decades now. They don’t have the luxury to do otherwise. What makes you so special? Why are you above reproach?

I think it makes sense to be mad about that. It’s awful to see a chance to prevent harm and refuse to. I won’t pretend it’s okay just because you think you can chunk up my post to dunk on select blurbs from it.

I do think they can make a better effort in their posts. I think you can, too.

Thanks for linking something actionable!

Also: it’s wild how many brands are just outsourced to these folks. It’s got to all be the same waffles, right? But I know the price difference between some of these brands is a stark one.

Stein can run AND you can be a dolt for voting for her AND we legally permit you to vote like a dingus, but (also legally) you go on a vote tally and we know how many dolts there were and we get to mock you as a small comeuppance for your ruination of everyone else’s attempt to improve our daily lives and those around us.

Not to suggest that we get to mock you specifically! Because we protect everyone in that way. SO FAR. But you’ll know who we’re mocking. Because we protect that, too.

SO FAR.

Hope that helps you make a better comment next time.

I agree and I’d take it one step further: it’s undesirable to play games with elaborate exploit / abuse guards. Those systems suck! They’re boring, same-y, and labyrinthine. I literally don’t care about pvp, or balance, or “winning”. It’s not that kind of game play

I have an idea. Why don’t I put a bunch of my website stuff in one place, say a pdf, and you screw heads just buy that? We’ll call it a “book”

It’s not extreme to seek their prosecution, it’s an extreme leap to jump from a post about how they should’ve known better (they really should have!) to “They should be prosecuted by the DOJ”.

I’m not sure they need to be prosecuted to have these funds seized, though. The government doesn’t even need to ask them for it I don’t think, depending on how the case proceeds. If the money is part of the case it is probably part of the verdict.

No. My god, no. What sort of nonsense is that?

You’re taking the position of a catastrophic extreme in response to someone saying they should have been more circumspect about where their money came from.

They should have been more circumspect, though. There’s leagues between acknowledging that and saying that they should be prosecuted by the DOJ.

I’m most excited where it’s most open. Clear training process, legal data sets, fully open code bases, published reports, etc. I think we’re going to see the local models boom in sophistication once that’s more common.

Do you know of any good local models that fit that kind of description?

Case law has been established in the prevention of actual image and text copyright infringement with Google specifically. Your point is not at all ambiguous. The distinction between a search engine and content theft has been made. Search engines can exist for a number of reasons but one of those criteria is obeisance of copyright law.

This is what springs to mind for me as well. OP, you should try to remember this: the people around you are not as concerned with you as they are their own lives. And their own lives are probably pretty intense for them to deal with!

• Understanding other people’s lives might have intensity you don’t know about or understand is empathy. Displaying empathy will help you establish bonds with others and this is a good place to start.
• Say they do ostracize and dislike you. So what? Can they really even do anything about it? Should you even care? Probably not. It probably doesn’t matter at all. So you’ll have to deal with it for now, but they’ll move on and so will you.

Oh. My. God.

It sounds like your wife is in deep grief. MS is torment, and she might be processing that grief for the rest of her life. She may not have space for a romance at all. That may never change. Sometimes, MS doesn’t let you get “back to normal”.

It is deeply crucial that you get everyone to counseling now, and not just individually but in spouse and group sessions. As much as you can afford. You have already started a new dynamic and grieving your old one is natural. But you can still support each other and it’s important to do the work and figure out what that looks like.

Partnerships can be loving and supportive and caring and not romantic. Sometimes it’s a phase that comes back to romance, sometimes not. But you need to be ready to relearn a lot of things and that starts with counseling.

Edit: And oh my gosh, I should have led with this - I’m so sorry y’all are going through this. It’s incredibly hard and I hope you get the help you need.

Losing your sense of self in response to criticism is one mark of a man who’s been failed by his upbringing. Mistakes aren’t flaws if you learn from them, and so an identity can only become fragile if it is too brittle to endure change.

Matt doesn’t have a good idea of who he wants to be at the start of s3. He doesn’t like himself anymore as Murdock or as the Devil. He also wound up in a situation where he didn’t have easy access to his armor, and he kind of resented it anyway. He wants to get hurt, and he thinks he deserves it. So he doesn’t bother trying to salvage it, he decides it isn’t worth the effort. And then later this choice comes back to haunt him.