lord_pizzabird

lord_pizzabird t1_j94s4xi wrote

Tbf it has historically been a both sides thing. Republicans often stand in the way or de-regulate, while Democrats have been notorious for just not doing 'the thing' whenever in power.

If we don't stop trying to shy away from the reality that both parties are ruining this country we'll never be able to fix these core problems.

Change is going to require what's known as a realignment election, which is where a major third party emerges, or the parties ideological alignment is redefined.

1

lord_pizzabird t1_j60l79v wrote

I just straight up don't think the broadcast TV situation is as bleak as broadcasters think it is, more than anything.

To me, they just have the wrong mentality and weak IP (content). Both can be corrected.

Literally everyone with a $5 antenna has access to their network. There's just nothing that attracts consumers to them, other-than the NFL.

6

lord_pizzabird t1_j5zkl6k wrote

They do this because their core business, running a TV network with ads is being squeezed out. They can sell IP, but without a Network creating new IP (to license later) then they're effectively dying.

That's just their perspective though, a sort of battle for survival. Being honest, I personally think broadcast tv is massively underrated as a platform.

They should have spent this money lobbying to change FCC guidelines instead, allowing them to curse and show nudity. That would open the door to producing content that's more in-line with consumer demand.

39

lord_pizzabird t1_j456xkl wrote

I’ve honestly noticed it’s gone quite a bit, after having gone from a windows laptop with it to MacBook.

It just makes your laptop feel more natural. Most of the time you use your trackpad, but on occasion you just want to poke at the screen.

There’s also an entire generation of people coming who expect every screen to be touch enabled by default. It’ll soon be like shipping a black and white tv in the 90s.

1

lord_pizzabird t1_j29903y wrote

I don't think the concern is hiding box cutters in water bottles, but liquids used in explosives or for acid attacks.

Like yeah, Saudi Arabia should be held accountable for their involvement in 9/11, but those security restrictions on flights are just random to annoy you.

There's thought behind why they ban certain things from flights.

3

lord_pizzabird t1_j1kvez5 wrote

There are separate rules, but the suggestion is that there should be.

As you said, history and context matter. Historically speaking, having different rules for different races is how our legal system became what it is today. You're making the same mistake, just going the other direction.

Creating legal priviledge defined by race; That's what you're unintentionally advocating for.

Or what I suspect: You and the rest do.

1

lord_pizzabird t1_j1kh4nx wrote

>Would you feel guilty if the cops came and killed someone you suspected was stealing your bicycle? I

He didn't steal a bicycle. He shot her intentionally.

You're trying to conflate to completely different situations, one where it's more understandable and another where it was absolutely ridiculous given the seriousness of the crime.

>In our world the victim/suspect’s race plays a part in thinking about calling the cops. Until the cops and justice system are trustworthy to minorities they will always hesitate to call

The point I was making above is that this mindset doesn't address or help the problem, but spreads the victimization and

Again, I fully understand and believe that you guys have the best of intentions with this and I totally understand where you're coming from, but it's just not helpful and it's really a lot of what's wrong with our legal system.

Fixing this requires people at an individual level doing what they're supposed to do, from people who witness a violent crime to the officers that respond.

0

lord_pizzabird t1_j1kg2jf wrote

>But more importantly, you are effectively suggesting that it is racist when race influences a decision or action.

No, I'm saying that having different rules for different races is racist, because it simply is.

I understand that you mean well and that she probably did to, but the issue is the damage that you're doing to society by further spreading victimization and by giving others a pass to do so.

This wasn't a case where a person said something mean to another person, or littered, or tresspassed even. This was a grown ass man who shot a woman in the foot while yelling, "dance".

You guys are absolutely being racist when you decide that there should be two different sets of rules and regulations for different races. If it were flipped around, you'd be pissed.

1

lord_pizzabird t1_j1id0yb wrote

The situation already went downhill. You had a man with a gun, shooting at a woman while yelling "dance".

If the police weren't so afraid to react to people like this, then maybe he wouldn't have felt so emboldened to do what he did.

He literally 'knew' he would get away with it. That's actual privilege. And if it weren't for prosecutors (who weren't afraid of him) he would have gotten away with it.

−10

lord_pizzabird t1_j1i3nub wrote

I just wish she had the sense in the first place to call the police, it would have helped her a lot on that front.

Her explanation about fearing how a black person would be treated by police (after shooting someone in the foot) was idiotic at best.

I believe she believed it, but it's a perfect example of how victimizers get away with victimizing others and how it spreads through society.

EDIT: The people downvoting this are racist, whether they realize it or not. Treat all races the same. If you see someone shoot another person or you are yourself shot: Call the fucking police and get help.

−31

lord_pizzabird t1_j1c8y95 wrote

Let's hope that their plan isn't to go by IP addresses alone, given how completely inaccurate that is.

People on 5g home networks are going to be getting these warnings constantly, maybe every single day as their IP's change and routing bounces around.

I'm one of those people and within the same say mine fluctuates multiple times between 3-4 cities that I live more like 800 miles from. (I'm on tmobile 5g)

10

lord_pizzabird t1_iyf747f wrote

No, but you'd think so given their naming scheme for spin-offs.

6666, Pronounced "four sixes" follows another ranch in the Yellowstone universe that specializes in training horses. It's also a real ranch IRL that the Showrunner, Taylor Sheridan recently acquired for $320million (he's doing pretty well financially lol).

3