Short version: cable is more optimized for sending everyone the same content at the same time. (And all users connected to cable get all channels all the time, even if they’re only watching one or two at the time.) Internet is made for each user getting what they ask for when they ask for it.

Either technology can be used for either use case, but they were originally built for different purposes and so are optimized differently.

Just like a subway train would make a pretty crappy private one-person vehicle for commuting to work and the grocery store. As would a fleet of cars be crappy for public mass transit.

Nope. Lots of stuff commonly believed by Christians isn’t from the Bible. (Though sometimes they’ll do a lot of mental gymnastics to assert that what they believe is from “the only reasonable interpretation” of the Bible.)

Just a few other things commonly believed by Christians not (or at least only dubiously) from the Bible:

• The seven deadly sins
• The nine circles of hell
• The seven levels of heaven
• Transubstantiation
• The trinity

I’ve seen this happen with coworkers of mine. Folks who never did any work. And slipped under the radar for many years. at least two (and one other to a lesser extent) come to mind.

Hammer’s jumping to conclusions. That’s clearly a self-tapping screw.

“Streisand effect” comes to mind, but like “sunk cost fallacy” it’s just an example of something “becoming more popular the more it fails.”

I feel like we’ve said this to OP already too, but:

…it came off that he was so popular…

However it may have come off, not enough people voted for him to win him the primary. He wasn’t that popular. For reasons mentioned elsewhere.

It’s possible some people who favored Sanders over Hillary voted for Hillary in the primary anyway fearing that she was more likely to win the primary and not wanting to chance unintentionally boosting the chances of someone other than Hillary or Sanders getting the nomination. I don’t know of any polls or anything that might have indicated that was or wasn’t the case. But that still means people didn’t vote enough for Bernie.

…because fewer people voted for him than for Hillary?

Not quite sure what kind of answer you’re fishing for here.

He just wasn’t “as popular as you believe he was.”

Yes, but how do you think candidates get “popular?” With Hillary’s and the DNC’s thumb on the scales, Hillary’s campaign had an unfair and underhanded influence on the public.

I’m not sure if anything Hillary’s campaign did was “illegal”, but it definitely broke things like the DNC’s own bylaws.

No president has tried it before. Whether he can get away with pardoning himself has yet to be seen. For him not to get away with it would require someone to bring some sort of court case challenging it. And to bring a case, they have to have “standing.” (That is to say, they have to have some credible justification why the self-pardoning action the president took wronged the petitioner in some way.) Which would probably require some legal argument that has never been made before.

I’m guessing Trump probably could get away with it, but given that no president has tried this, we’ll just have to see for sure.

In some states.

I doubt the term “time tangled in knots” is sufficiently well-defined for any reasonable answer. At least in terms of real-world physics.

If you’re talking about scifi technobabble time tied in knots, my answer is “Looper.”

Yeah, good answers. Thank you.

Are you expecting someone to provide you with all the answers?

Only to explain the answers that they’re already bringing up.

And, honestly, your answer and OP’s answer are exactly the sort of answers I needed. Thank you.

I guess the short restatement is something like “work with others to create an alternative to depending on the capitalist/fascist system for crumbs and then protect that alternative system on a self-defense basis with firearms. (And be ready to before you actually have to.)”

SNL, too!

Seems like you’re advocating:

• “Get organized/involved” - What’s that mean in more practical terms? Start attending social gatherings put on/hosted by radical leftist organizations? And maybe start ones if they don’t exist in your area?
• “Get armed” - So, acquire firearms. To use in some particular way? (You mentioned you’re not advocating for “acts of violence or an insurrection like January 6th”, so not that, apparently.) Or just to have for when “something” happens? If so, what specifically?
• “Don’t wait until troops are rolling down the street to stage a resistance” - 'K. Not really helpful until I understand more specifically what you’re advocating for people to do.
• “Start organizing” - Same as that first bullet?
• “Get involved in mutual aid” - Yeah, ok. I’ve read Eisenstein. I know his book Sacred Economics has some tips for how to get involved with existing mutual aid organizations. I definitely need to re-read that bit and read other sources about that. But at least I have an idea where to start with some of that, I guess. I’d still like more specifics on what in particular you mean by this, though.
• “Get involved with resistance” - So, let’s say you’re a respected voice in a mutual aid radical anarchist collective with guns and enthusiasm. What do you suggest they do?
• “Stand, fight, and maybe even die” - How? Not January 6th, but… how then?
• “Don’t do nothing”/“Don’t lay down and accept our fate” - Not really helpful on its own if we don’t know what you’re suggesting we do instead of “doing nothing” or “laying down and accepting our fate.”

I don’t really know if this is a “I can’t really say what I’m advocating for because I’ll be banned, so I’m dancing around the issue and hoping you’ll stochastically pick up on what I’m not saying” thing either.

Without knowing more concretely what you suggest we do, I don’t really have a take on whether I agree or not.

I’ve heard so many contradictory explanations today. And thought more still. I guess the idea that Kamala and/or Biden and/or Democrats in general didn’t engage enough with media (didn’t sit to be interviewed by Joe Rogan or whatever) is as good a theory as any. But I don’t think anyone knows WTF just happened.

I don’t think it would phase me that much.

In 2016 it was so out of left field. So completely unexpected.

If he wins tonight (surely he won’t, but if he does…) I’ll be kinda pissed and scared. I don’t think I’ll be moving to another country or anything. It would feel a little “been there, done that.”

Don’t get me wrong. I voted. I voted for Kamala. And I hope the final figures show her winning in a landslide. And I would love to see a blue majority in congress along with her victory. But I’m not expecting good things. And I’m not investing too much in the result emotionally.

If Trump won, I’d probably plan to be a little more shut-in and keep to myself more.

This makes me think of the commandment “thou shalt not make a machine in the likeness of a human mind” from the Dune series.

Seriously, though, I suspect a lot of technologies we currently experience in society only in the context of oppression of average people and widening of the income gap might be able to be put to better use. Not even necessarily because we have rules in place so much as because people won’t be baking their selfish asshole agendas into the tech they build.

That all kindof assumes that humanoid robots would be “tools” for humans to “use”. If of course they (or at least some of them) are more like sentient creatures with hopes and dreams and emotions, that might make for a much different conversation. And that feels like the kind of conversation that’d be hard to even comment on today.

What’s worse is when that asshole tickles my sinus nerves just a little, never actually letting me sneeze, but still being an annoying piece of shit.

Right?!

I’ve dabbled in learning Japanese enough to know that learning a second language as an adult has a way of driving home to you how little I really understand about my own native language. And learning what little I have of a second language definitely has taught me more about English.