That’s not what anarchism is.

I like to call anarchism as neighborliness extended as a political ideology. Consider it libertarianism with a pinch of collectivism

You do it all the time when you organize a group of friends to go to the movies. There is no elected leader.

When Russia invaded Ukraine, they destroyed a lot of public and military comms infrastructure, so the military ended up teaming up with anarchists because they had a decentralized comms going.

Anarchism is compatible with existing political ideologies, however in my opinion works best at small scales.

I don’t think the analogy to Egypt works, because they have a peace treaty.

We all know Israel and Saudi Arabia have a shared adversary in the form of Iran. The US wants them to normalize so they can take care of that front.

As for getting impaled on the stick, I’d say Pakistan got impaled on the stick, because its likely they were the ones hiding Bin Laden.

As for Saddam falling on the stick, that was due to Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait over several reasons: a desire to reunify, oil, and Kuwait debt. That’s on top of having a history of using chemical weapons for mass murder.

And as we know, the US loves oil, but so does the world. Globalized markets want to be stable, and the US helps with that

A lot of people dont understand US foreign policy. Do not interpret my post as taking a stance.

US foreign policy is all about 3 key issues, carrot and stick diplomacy, containing China and Russia, and protecting the global market.

Carrot and stick diplomacy is using positive reinforcement to make changes in totalitarian governments.

Containing China is all about making friends with countries near China and putting a base there, along with allowing companies, military arms deals, and joint intelligence to happen in that country.

• That is why the US wants Saudi Arabia and Israel to normalize. And do to that, the US turns a blind eye to tons of bullshit done by countries in the Middle East. If they were to normalize, then a solid logistics chain from Europe to the Gulf can be established, and the two countries would bolster the front there. Then the US could pivot its power projection over to Taiwan.
• The US is powerful, but its not tactically sound to manage three fronts at the same time.

If you remember how pissed off the US got when Russia put missiles in Cuba, then you can see why China and Russia will team up with everyone they can to foil this plan to contain them.

Since the world is now globalized, the US has to protect lots of boats carrying oil, chips, and food. If something fucks up, then everyone pays for it. Of course, if youre resisting western imperialism then its in your best interest to make people suffer by blowing up the boats.

Now geopolitics makes sense.

From here, then if youre an idealist, you can make an informed opinion on US foreign policy. Should the US continue its world police campaign at the expense of people suffering under its allies?

Can you achieve US foreign policy goals without suffering?

Will a reversal of US foreign policy lead to more domestic suffering in the West due to economic turmoil?

These questions should be debated and examined thoroughly.

Nah it’s because they decided to use cameras instead of LiDAR and then try to make it autonomous instead of driver aid.

AI is at its best when it’s opening up productivity and freedom to think critically or leisurely, the same way sticky notes help someone study.

They have an official app LOL. You have to get it from their telegram. (I wouldn’t do it tbh)

Let it be noted that this is an opinion article.

Editorials and Opinion pieces do contribute to social discourse regarding news, and may be correct, but unlike their normal news, they can say whatever they want about the news from the authors they hire.

Opinion pieces allow news sources to use sensationalist and inflammatory articles to drive engagement without harming their credibility, because of that giant OPINION label.

NYT and WSJ’s editorials and opinion pieces tend to be quite left and quite right leaning respectfully, to an almost satirical level. In my opinion, the WSJ’s comment section under its editorials are much worse.

I’m not disparaging the article in any way, just saying for those that may not already know.

Al Jazeera had been live streaming and live reporting the entire thing, and there are multiple angles and phone videos from them and other sources that show the entire incident, from the rocket barrage, to the booster failure, to the hospital explosion.

The Associated Press has the complete analysis to your question, including the videos I mentioned, posted yesterday.

Alot of the videos in there were confirmed 8 hours after the incident, this is the first mainstream media outlet that put it all together.

The AP was one of the first to report what the Gaza Health Ministry said, “Israel strikes hospital, killing 500”, then edited their article 3 times in 1 hour, with new titles and recharacterizing the report as “they said” to try and cover the increasing uncertainty of the situation. Along with the casualty number dropping. Now some might say “But any death at all is bad, 50 or 500!”. That’s true, it’s still really tragic, but it’s also a 90% error, which is a disaster for journalism.

The article covers the JDAM theories, the Israel warned them, the Hamas announcing their launching rockets a little after the incident. All things that would make the situation more murky.

I admit I do sound like I’m defending Israel with this. This particular event is a flashpoint for me personally since I’m heavily invested in the state of journalism in an age where the flood of information can overwhelm news and lead to innaccuracies.

The rocket turning around video is a different video from last year.

Unfortunately I got banned from World News on lemmy.ml because posting this was “War Crime Denial” apparently.

And that’s why you would never be put on a jury Mr. “Hunt the predators and rapists down and kill them violently”.

If I were in your position, I might be getting equally angry at the meer suggestion that privacy is important, but I would be wrong for being angry at the wrong topic.

Anyway, this fight against encryption is going to lose, for the sake if journalists who report in hostile countries without freedom of speech, for the sake of kids with parents who’d kill them if they came out as trans, and for people in the intelligence industry.

Well it’s understandable that you think the predators are random men in white vans texting your kids, grooming, and abducting them, but in actuality, a ton of the major produces of CSAM are parents or family members.

This doesn’t account for a smaller, but significant percentage of self-producers that post online because they’re following online sexual trends, innocently self-expressing, or self-exploiting.

Having the goverment ban encryption will only undermine the privacy and security of law abiding citizens, and jeopardize national security. Parents don’t have to send messages to their kids really.

The police won’t protect your child from your spouse.

Banning encryption won’t do anything to curb this concern of yours, its like banning car locks because people could hide heroin in cars.

I can empathize with your stance, but I have to tell you, that the “protect children” argument has been used to justify genocide, racial segregation, and so many other violations of civil rights within the last 100 years.

Well yes, because it’s not up to the government to take care of or protect your kids. And it’s your job to make sure they can protect themselves online. That’s just common sense.

Additionally, the government is still effective at catching bad guys without backdoors to encryption, and this stuff doesn’t stop you from monitoring your kids devices.

Yes in the US, Texas for example has used publicly available information to jail moms who travel for abortions.

If the government were to trample on the freedom of privacy, it would affect the right to protest, it would affect freedom of assembly, it would affect freedom of opinion.

China literally monitors most of their citizens communications this way.

We do NOT want governments to invade privacy for the sake of security.

Because, if the government can see what you do, then criminal actors can also see what you do too.

What do you mean deprives us of freedoms?

Everyone has a right to lock their bathroom door. Crime might be comitted behind the bathroom door, but usually there will be other evidence of that without looking in the bathroom, so there is no need for the government to legislate that all bathrooms should remove their locks.

No one ever questions the right of locking your bathroom door.

Rightfully so.

On the bright side, this means that Republicans may have to stop playing hardball with Ukraine, in order to not appear hypocritical.

Most support Ukrainian support, and most Western countries need Israel as a foothold in the middle east.

Well to be quite fair, it’s better to judge a country by it’s progress and current state of affairs than by its past actions. Because if we judged every country by their actions in the past, not many countries would have clean hands.

From 2016-2021, I was ready to move away. I was quite disillusioned by everything. What changed? Soccer 💀. Soccer made me comically nationalist for our national teams.

Honestly being in that environment of being able to be innocently prideful of my home without thinking about the past helped put things in perspective.

I’m now prideful to be American, and proud that my home heavily invests in NATO. I’m an adult now, and I’ve been working to push for some more improvements in things like infrastructure. I don’t cringe at 4th of July celebrations anymore, and I feel great that I’m making an impact.

You probably won’t see me putting a flag outside my home, but I have a lovely high quality flag.

Our national park system is the best in the world, our ecosystem, nature, and geography are spectacular and diverse. And NASA is phenomenal.

Don’t allow yourself to wallow in this cynical disillusionment. It’s not good for your mental health to focus on the terrible parts of America without having the ability to change those parts.

I just made a comment about that, hopefully that explains the current state of affairs about it.

Guns are one of those things thats really hard to restrict. It’s a freedom that most enjoy, and some abuse. Most that own guns responsibly don’t want their guns taken away due to law changes.

This was actually the case with automatic firearms, automatic firearms were legal to buy until 1986, ironically with the support of the NRA, which is the largest gun lobby in favor of less gun control. In this ban of automatic firearms, they allowed existing owners to keep their automatics.

You can count self defense cases and crimes with those weapons on one hand, most crimes are committed with handguns.

Another argument is just banning “assault style rifles”. This is basically the blanket description of an AR-15 style rifle, that is generally the same design as an M4 carbine in the military, with it’s adjustable stock, 16 inch barrel, black color, with a comfy pistol grip, the automatic function removed, and an MLOK rail for attachments like lights, lasers, or sights.

The reason that this description is silly, is because a normal semi-auto hunting rifle is functionally the exact same as an “assault rifle”. It has magazines and you can fire it rapidly buy pushing the trigger rapidly. You could ductape lights and lasers to it. Gun manufacturers could simply sell the same gun without the “tactical” features which are convenient for all users, and it would change nothing about crime.

Additionally, if there’s a huge gun buyback and all gun owners turn in their guns because the second amendment has been repealed, criminals are not going to turn in their guns, and it would leave many defenseless.

Often times, guns are necessary for those living in rural areas, because there is a great number of threats from wildlife in rural areas, from Alligators, to Mountain Lions, to Grizzly Bears and Brown Bears and Black Bears. Hunting is required to control the ecosystems of large game and small game. Additionally, many hunters opt to use the “tactical assault style rifles” due to their modularity. (Not always, many still use bolt action rifles, when it’s for sport).

Nobody in America actually has a problem with responsible gun ownership. The disagreements between states go down to magazine sizes, barrel sizes, concealed carry laws, concealed carry permits, etc.

Yes school shootings are a problem, with some troubled person shooting up a school with an “Assault style rifle”. But the fact of the matter is that it makes up an extremely small minority of gun crime.

The only difference between the US and Switzerland for example, is the fact that we are allowed to use the weapons in self defense versus animals or human assailants in our homes or in public. The other difference is the process to obtain firearms.

The last reason you will see resistance against gun control comes from the left. Gun control was originally pushed by conservative Republicans in the mid 20th century as a response to the Black Panther movement, civil rights group that operated as a militia and open carried rifles around town.

There’s an argument that gun control would be systemically racist agenda, because it would restrict gun control only to those with the money and time and clean records to complete the checks to complete a purchase of a firearm. It would leave minority groups less armed compared to conservative white males.

Weapons are inherently a check against violence in this way. Similar to how the world uses the fact that it can destroy each other as leverage for mutual and relative peace.

As for being able to relate this to someone from Europe who has never handled firearms or can’t understand the need for them, or people stubborn about them, I can relate as someone who never felt the need to own a weapon until recently. It’s quite similar to the freedom a motor vehicle gives you. You get used to the autonomy and independence that a vehicle gives you. Being able to take apart the machine, customize it, optimize it, make it yours and express yourself through that construction.

I’m not trying to draw a false equivalency, but it’s the closest one I can portray.

I hope this answered your question!

:3

Self defense laws are pretty weird in Europe. I am spoiled on our second amendment laws, so let my bias be noted.

However, some guy can break into your house and if you defend yourself with a bat or knife, the laws there from what I hear (this isn’t fact, I could be mistaken) can get you in trouble with the law. I remember reading that somewhere.

Sure it’s like that in the US too but there are many protections for those who clearly have acted in self defense.

I’ve seen USB-C flash drives, do you think those would help too.

How easy is it to transfer a file from one device to the other? For example, let’s say you had to transfer photos, a pdf, an epub, and a video file. How easy is that?

And then do you think it’s going to be much easier when USB-C comes out so I can use a flash drive to do all the work?

Do you use Apple News at all?

Do you carry both on your person or does one go in the bag.

I think that covers most of my curiosities.

Edit: Also thanks for answering politely!

Outside of the popular streaming apps, I’ve found streaming apps to be a lot better and less buggy on Apple devices.

Waze has some of its functionality taken away on Android Auto.

And since I’ll be uninstalling the phone app on my Pixel, I was going to use the Phone and Messages app for regular texting, that’s a preferential thing. I’d use Signal but it doesn’t do SMS anymore.