You’re seriously saying “they deserve the ‘eye-for-an-eye’ treatment” while Israel is actively escalating the conflict?

I have never defended genociders

Oh okay. So where have I done that? In assuming that 3000 civilians who were harmed weren’t exclusively Hezbollah? Which would be an utterly ridiculous claim seeing how many literal children there are involved.

So… you’ve never defended genociders. Then let’s see if you will. Is Israel committing a genocide in Gaza?

You think only military personnel were killed in WW2?

I’ve actually been in the military and have had training on what is and isn’t legal to do in armed conflict. Have you?

https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/customary-ihl/v1/rule12

Rule 12. Definition of Indiscriminate Attacks

Rule 12. Indiscriminate attacks are those: (a) which are not directed at a specific military objective;

(b) which employ a method or means of combat which cannot be directed at a specific military objective; or

© which employ a method or means of combat the effects of which cannot be limited as required by international humanitarian law; and consequently, in each such case, are of a nature to strike military objectives and civilians or civilian objects without distinction.

I think they’re implying this mostly hit Hezbollah members, not than none of the victims were innocent.

Based on… what exactly?

The clear implication is that “number of Hezbollah member > victims = no innocent victims.”

And then you instantly jump into defending genocide. Holy fucking shit I honestly can’t communicate with words how disgustingly pathetic I find that.

No, I’m not gonna engage with your whataboutism and start arguing with you about how “Hezbollah deserved this absolutely pathetic terrorist attack.”

“Brought it on himself brought it on himself”

You fuckers still haven’t realised that Hammurabi’s law makes the whole world blind, huh? That was almost 4000 years ago, ffs. Read a book, preferably a modern one and not some tome of propaganda from thousands of years ago.

You’re literally defending the death of a 9-year old girl. You have to be sick in the fucking head to do that. Honestly.

You’re genuinely pathetic enough to try and imply that none of the victims are innocent?

I loathe “people” like you.

Hey @oberstoffensichtlich@feddit.org, you were saying that “these were extremely surgical strikes, people in the vicinity weren’t harmed”?

Thousands of people injured, all guilty of something ofc, because Israel would never do an attack which might harm innocents. Right? /S

He specifically mentioned “in the context of the US”.

If he had been talking about any other English-speaking country, I’d say it would be somewhat irrelevant.

But it most certainly isn’t when talking about the US, especially southern US.

Well written. To add: “Boy” coming from a white person to a black man is even more offensive, what with all the chattel slavery history and whatnot.

A almost 50 year old man doesn’t want to look uncool on his bike.

Have you noted to him how fucking uncool it is for a grown man to think safety (especially of children) is uncool?

Takes just one slipup of someone, not even them, but just someone in traffic, and he will never forgive himself his shitty attitude.

I literally laughed out loud. Well, not too audibly, but still. Forcibly exhaled, let’s say.

Amateurs.

It was the late nineties and info on such matters freely flowed on the net.

As opposed to?

Yeah I think the name sort of hints at that, for anyone using their thinking muscles

Well, there’s also a connection between Prometheus and Lucifer.

Prometheus brought fire. “Lucifer” means “light-bearer”.

Forethinkers are usually punished.

Strictly speaking humanity is a part of nature.

I think the easiest thing “plot-wise” is to endow the magical object itself with a sort of sentience. Like not as much as the Sorting Hat in HP, but to the tune of that.

I strongly feel Vision definitely is sentient, as anyone who’s seen TNG would know the arguments made for Data, and they very much apply here. If we assume the first, and there is something in the hammer that judges people, then yeah, it’s hard to explain how some can move the hammer a bit, but not gain the power, despite the wording of the spell. Cap almost moves the hammer, even making tor raise an eyebrow slightly. So perhaps there’s “degrees of worthiness”. And Vision is pretty high up there, but not “have all the power” high. Or perhaps the power just didn’t manifest at all because Vision didn’t even try to “tap into” it. Who knows, comics can explain it however they feel like.

But I would not agree that Vision is “an elevator”.

“Prove to the court I am sentient.” - Captain Picard (from “ST:TNG The Measure of a Man”)

These are fun to talk about but yeah, it does boil down to “take your pick.” Still, doesn’t mean we can’t have fun theorising.

Fair enough.

Although I’d call it the Picard tug or something, perhaps. Huehue

This is the sort of thing that I love reading on the internet.

Sorry to disappoint you, but most of that text is found offline — as it’s an excerpt from Douglas Adam’s “The Restaurant at the End of the Universe” (sequel to “The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy”). I probably should’ve attributed it.

If only doing things from the PoV of the speaker (you), that means 6~9 tenses for what most languages have 2 (past and non-past) or 3 (past, present, future).

And then you’d have to account who knows what, which version of a person you’re talking to. Say you’re having a conversation with someone before traveling in time to a time in which they’ve not timetraveled, so it’s either their subjective past or future, but then you continue the conversation, so you’d have to account for both the speakers perspective and the person being spoken to, who would then be subject to two different tense “totalities” since the conversation with them would have been taking place in two different times at the same time.

I seriously suggest reading Douglas Adams and Terry Pratchett for that sort of thing. I used to use Pratchett books as a substitute for weed when I was a bit over twenty.

Exactly.

The Picard Maneuver was born out of desperation during the battle. The Stargazer, which was damaged, suddenly accelerated into high warp directly towards the Ferengi ship. By doing so the Stargazer appeared to ship’s sensors, for an instant, to be in two places at once.

Do you guys not know that that is exactly what a Picard maneuver is? Seemingly being in two positions at once?

The Picard Maneuver was born out of desperation during the battle. The Stargazer, which was damaged, suddenly accelerated into high warp directly towards the Ferengi ship. By doing so the Stargazer appeared to ship’s sensors, for an instant, to be in two places at once.

Since vision is clearly sentient, couldn’t one argue that his sort of absolute sense of morality just made him worthy?

Might not be a biological life form, but defining life is hard and he clearly is sentient.

Like imagine Commander Data. I think he could be worthy to lift the hammer, if it’s about the lifter being “good”. And TNG had a lot of arguing if he’s alive or no.

Yeah. I genuinely think it’s definitely not most people. And most people aren’t greedy.

But living in a society where the power is with the small insane minority who is greedy and blind to consequences will make a society in which even non-greedy people end up making “financially smart” decuisions (read:selfish gain at the possible cost to others, like cheap items despite knowing they come from countries with very badly exploited workers).

But yeah, I’m honestly of the opinion that we genuinely have only one massive problem on this planet, and it’s the psyche of these money/powerhungry fucks. And while it might be somewhat common — ambition is not be frowned upon, as long as you’re even vaguely moral — the truly pathological version comes when an ambitious psyche is twisted by our already somewhat twisted society.

Here’s a nice piece from a self-confessed money addict, former wall street trader. https://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/19/opinion/sunday/for-the-love-of-money.html he’s also written an entire book about it.

So what could be done about this? Well, it’s genuinely an addiction and lack of empathy. Do we have any medication with anti-addictive and perhaps empathy-generating qualities?

We do, actually. They’ve been under lock and key for almost 100 years, because they’re potentially the antidote to the ills of our world, and the psyches of the powerful fear such things.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empathogen

https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/chemistry/antiaddictive