Which country do you think the people masscred in Tiananmen square were from? Were the people massacred there people known for making silk?

Why would they be referencing silk at all? Yeah they referenced silk thinking “I’m sure people will get get the connection from silk to textiles to Palestinians.”

The Ghorman massacre was referenced in Star Wars Rebels in 2017 and was referenced in the EU in the 1990s FFS. Do you really think the people making Star Wars are clairvoyant? Tianamen Square would’ve been fresh in the minds of people in the 90s I think it’s more likely referencing that event than events that hadn’t happened yet.

See, again, people like this are exactly why we need the protagonist to look directly at the camera and explain things to them.

Indeed.

Thanks for the link!

I was aware of it being referenced in 2017 in Star Wars Rebels, but I wasn’t aware it was in Legends in the 1990s.

Yeah if I were on that jury, it would be jury nullification all the way. Can’t have the government killing a guy for political reasons, and that’s what this is.

Be honest have you ever watched Chuck Schumer on CSPAN or do you only see him in the clips Jon Stewart shows?

Not enough people voted for Democrats so Chuck Schumer currently has less power than Jon Stewart. Jon Stewart has a much larger audience on his show (and therefore more influence) than Chuck Schumer has on CSPAN yet he devotes a significant amount of time complaining about Chuck Schumer.

It’s weird.

Sure… we’d all be better off if only the Ottoman empire continued to exist forever!

SMH

Yes, Star Wars Rebels is so brilliant that they were referencing the Isreal-Hamas war in 2017.

https://starwars.fandom.com/wiki/Secret_Cargo

Y’all are sounding like qanons with your numerology now.

So there’s a planet famous for producing silk where peaceful protesters are massacred in a public square and you only think of Gaza? There is definitely no place on Earth like that other than Gaza!

I’m pretty sure the Israel Gaza war kicked off with terrorists masscring people in villages and taking hostages, but it wasn’t the IDF doing that shit. Did Andor portray that at all?

I tried to find clips to see what it’s referencing some more but holy shit that show is 90% pretentious speeches. But even then it’s pretty obvious.

You are correct there are some people that need things spelled out for them or they don’t understand it. Some even resort to Qanon style numerology to try to prove weird connections between things.

Anyway, which silk producing country massacred peaceful protesters in a public square? Come on… .you can figure it out! Somewhere where vehicles were used to crush protesters? Maybe someone made a memorial and an authoritarian regime took it down… Hint

Wait, I thought the Jews ran Hollywood and controlled all of the media? How is it possible a movie like this exists?

PETA has killed more animals than I have LOL.

It’s not about a sovereign EU, it’s about government controlling the media. There is too much temptation for a politician to use that control to make the media say only good things about them and negative things about the opposition. See Russia for an example of how bad that can get.

Are all of the newspapers controlled by the EU? Do you think it would be better if they were.

Anyway, yeah I’m talking about social media. The primary problem of social media is that it’s an oligopoly. Create regulation so people can have choice without being cut of from their friends that are on a shitty platform and people will leave to be on better platforms and companies will have to compete to provide a better product.

Very few people actually like Facebook and Twitter, they just can’t leave because they wouldn’t be able to communicate with their friends and family if they did. And their friends and family can’t leave for the same reason. What if you could go to a Friendica site and still be able to chat with your friends that are still on Facebook and they could see your posts you make and vice versa? How many people would stay on Facebook if there was no longer a barrier to leaving? How many people would put up with Elon Musk’s antics on twitter if they could leave and still communicate with the people they like that are still on Twitter?

If there was no major barrier to leaving these sites, they’d have to compete to provide quality moderation, make it easy to find the things you like, improve algorithms so they aren’t shoving shit you don’t care about into your face, etc. Having a single government entity doing this wouldn’t provide this and the site would probably just be constant bickering about what the government should and should not allow on social media.

I gonna intercept here for a bit. The Problem with “shutting down single farms” is, that this virtually has no effect at all. T

It would save the animals you claim are being boiled alive. Why don’t you care about the suffering of these animals?

Yeah I know about TV licenses, but aren’t they incredibly unpopular? And a government could eliminate them and replace them with subsidies (which gives them influence) and many voters might agree with that given the unpopularity of TV licenses.

Yeah, you just have to know yourself. Personally I feel like I need to go into the office once per week otherwise work starts becoming an abstract thing. But I’ve known some co-workers I wouldn’t see for months at a time that were really on the ball. Ask an obscure question about something really technical on slack and get an answer within seconds kind of thing. I knew another guy that said he had to come into the office every day because his family was too distracting.

Everyone needs to know what works for them and be a responsible professional about it.

And yeah managers that want 100% RTO are just admitting they can’t handle working from home. Ok that’s your thing, but it’s not a thing for everyone else.

Anyway I got out the the RTO thing because I told them of the times some computers were having issues and I had to work the whole weekend (from home) to fix them. If I’m going to be 100% RTO then I’m 0% WFH and the next time something like that happens I won’t be able to start working on it until 9am on Monday morning. So I’m still in the office one day per week, weather permitting, which is my preference.

Yes it’s also serves as a litmus test to determine whether or not someone has any real problems in their life.

If you’re upset at the PM about policies, there might be a real issue. If you’re upset at the King because of symbolism, you don’t have any real problems.

Well you’re in a politics community on lemmy, so you’re going to hear about all of the leftist populists constantly. But I don’t think lemmy is an extremely popular web forum.

In a monarchy you can criticize the Prime Minister or any other minister in government, but it’s treason to speak out against the King. If the King does something bad it’s because he got bad advice from the PM. Even the opposition party is called the Loyal Opposition, as you’re meant to maintain loyalty to the King even while expressing opposition to the government.

Nowadays most monarchies are constitutional and the King’s speeches are written by the Prime Minister so it’s actually correct to criticize the PM for the things the King says.

It’s interesting how the MAGAs are behaving in exactly the same way people behave in a monarchy. Unfortunately the President isn’t constitutionally limited so King Trump can do whatever he wants.

I really do think that a constitutional monarchy is better than a republic now. We have people in Canada that also believe that you prove your patriotism by being loyal to a guy that surrounds himself with gold. But they can bow to King Charles and it doesn’t matter because he has no political power. Gotta have a King so the subservient part of the population can feel happy without fucking things up by creating a King that has power.

What if the government tells a social media site they have to ban people from criticizing them or they’ll lose funding?

Open source sure, that’s fine. But someone’s gotta pay for running the servers and if the government can cut that funding they have influence over it. That’s a level of government control over the media that’s a little concerning.

Better to have the the government make regulations requiring companies to make it easy to switch to another company. Like changing to another phone company, you can keep the same number (because of regulations) so people can still call you without even knowing you changed companies even if they have a phone from a different manufacturer using a different phone company.

You can do the same with things like social media, just need to have regulations requiring protocols to allow people to change services easily and connect with other services so there’s not a network effect making people stay on shit services because it’s what all their friends use. People should own their data, own their contacts and companies should compete by providing better services rather than by making it difficult to leave the services they’re currently on.

Handing over your date to the government isn’t a better solution than handing it over to a private company. The real solution is to ensure people own their data.

Could we perhaps consider ways of making software that doesn’t involve killing hookers?

Why are you so obsessed with the source of my meat? If you must know comes from a little French town called Dublé Entendré.

Turns out he’s an undocumented immigrant with a weird foreign sounding name (Kal El) and he was going around acting like he was an American by the name of Clark Kent. We can’t have that!