Not the seat. The rim. The seat doesn’t create a seal.

It’s not hard to clock a thesis as wrong and ignore the rest of the essay. Pretty arrogant of you to assume the problem is me.

Either way, have fun yelling at people on the internet how wrong they are about something abstract and purely theoretical.

^ did not read past the question. Guarantee it’s alarmist garbage about how we’re definitely going to die because of some imaginary numbers were living fine with.

Hey man, get off your high horse a little and I might start taking you seriously.

You really like the black and white arguments, don’t you?

Controlling a source of money doesn’t mean the only option is to print so much of it that inflation eats the whole economy.

Let me ask you this: if the US is so bad at managing the debt it owes to its people, how come we have functioned as an economy under that debt for the last several decades?

That’s the point. It’s entitlement when poor people do it. It’s “the fair share that they deserve” when they do it. If conservatives didn’t have double standards they wouldn’t have standards at all.

Not for the corporations that make money off of extorting a basic necessity from poor people! Won’t someone think of the corporations?

News used to be 60 minutes just after prime time. Now they have whole channels with news 24/7/365. Have to fill all that air time with something

A true man of the people! With the right connections, you’d do quite well in 14th century Europe!

My argument was that you can’t claim the moral high ground based on legality alone. I understand that nuance exists in the context, but moral high ground does not come from whether or not it’s legal.

I see what you’re getting at, but I think ‘moral high ground’ might not be the phrase you’re looking for.

Laws and morals are explicitly different. That’s why juries exist, so that a law may be put against the morals of a situation and the morals may prevail if need be.

Breaking the law isn’t necessarily immoral. It’s just illegal. So it isn’t like someone breaking the law is seeking to take the moral high ground in the first place, nor does that mean that someone who only ever follows the law always has the moral high ground. Lawful-evil does exist.

Maybe that’s the point. Unity caves immediately to the big lawyers and says “Sorry guys, we tried. Looks like all you little studios will have to pay up after all. Blame Sony/Nintendo/Microsoft”

I bought my oneplus 10 pro for sub $500 during a sale, and it has usb3.1. It’s last year’s model. You can get a pixel 6 with usb3.1 for less than $400. A Galaxy S21 has usb3.2, less than $500.

That’s almost every major android brand for $500 or less with 3.1 or better. The cheapest you can buy an iPhone 15, the one with usb2.0, is $800. What are you on about?

You’re a housing provider, not a landlord. If you aren’t making anything off of the houses you lease then you aren’t the subject of the ire of renters.

Ignore those goons saying you’re a bad investor. It’s noble of you to not leech off of the people who you rent to, and at the end of the day, the equity of the house is still yours.

deleted by creator

And soon, the carrier pigeon breeders will start tagging them with tracking chips…

Removed by mod

Removed by mod

Removed by mod

Removed by mod

Easy to say if you have several thousand burning a hole in your pocket.