cAUzapNEAGLb

a Democrat In Legal Designation Only, if you will

Awe, thank you :)

Oh don't be so condescending, it was an attempt by all common definitions. And further, the FBI themselves is investigating the issue as an assassination attempt.

Not only do I think you are confused, I think you're being a bully about it and should check yourself.

It's one thing to think about, and even to write about it publicly (which he did)

But this guy, also went and brought his gun, scope, and armor to the place trump was known to be, waited for 12 hours, and then was finally caught one hole before trump would've been in sight if the early reports are to be believed.

If it is not an assassination attempt, what else could've it been? The guy made explicit public posts about assassinating trump, then went to where trump was with a gun, and then waited for trump to be in the sights of his gun. To me it sounds like the security agent interrupted his attempt at assassinating trump, not anything else.

I think it would be easy to suggest that, had that agent not interrupted that guy, he would've tried shooting at trump.

By no means do I support trump, but, my hate for him isn't so strong for it to deform reality I hope.

Oh damn, I totally missed that lol, I take back that part of my criticism - I also found the source from a yelp review I think and linked that as an update

This site is worse than a repost

The source is a reddit post it seems and Hindustan times is just doing a highlight reel of that post without linking it. Hindustan times has a low credibility score from https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/hindustan-times and didn't add any journalism

~~Searching it's quote's (being forced to use Google, since they pay Reddit to index them ...) it comes from this article https://www.reddit.com/r/antiwork/comments/1fb097q/where_would_you_report_this_kind_of_behaviour/~~

~~And doing a quick skim of comments there was no additional clarity.~~

~~So... Probably not real~~

UPDATE: I found the source, from yelp, with the name uncensored: https://www.yelp.com/biz/maxines-sparta

It's a small restaurant in Michigan, there's already people giving them flak and bad reviews, so please don't add to that

Fuck Kroger

They killed Lucky's. It was the best damn grocery store I've ever had. It had such potential.

Roughly 12,600 7/11's in the US, so a 0.01% chance of any individual 7/11 getting a car on a given day, or a 1 in a thousand chance.

According to this https://slate.com/business/2022/06/car-crash-buildings-how-many.html about a 100 cars crash into buildings each day, so 7/11 makes up 1% of building crashes, but that tracks since a lot of people go to there for quick needs with distracted minds.

I don't have much of a point, but the statistics don't paint a some scary point that I think the lawyers are trying to make.

That's not what I am saying.

In my opinion the forum is a altruistic area. Is the value I provide tailoring the posts by up voting and down voting not valuable? Is the value I provide by summarizing and or giving interpretations of the articles posted here not valuable? Or engaging in thoughtful honest discussion not valuable?

I believe they are.

Do I feel entitled to some profit because of my input on this forum? No I do not.

I give this work because I provide my value to this site voluntarily, honestly, many hours of my day, altruisticly, to build a better community and discussion. I don't demand money because I receive a community in return.

What I am saying is that this kind of stuff will segment our community, by creating a profitable segment of the community and an unprofitable segment of community, implicitly creating a "correct" and "incorrect" way. Beyond that it will introduce people to our community who care less about furthering this forum, and more about making profit.

Remember YouTube before the partner program and video responses and how much more engaged and equal that community was? And what it is now with most every prominent channel being sponsored on top of ad breaks and product placement?

Obviously, if a person wants to dedicate their full time to some art and wants money for it, they should, and I'm excited for what they produce, but this is not where to do it.

But you don't have vibrant thoughtful debates about world events in target, you don't purchase microwaves at the library. You go to stores to buy stuff, you go to forums to discuss stuff.

Content creators can create their own site, their own patreon, or whatever - they can freely submit their work to our forum for feedback and an audience, and they can even link someone the link to their store if they ask - but introducing the profit angle directly to our forum and integrating it in will be the beginning of the end for this community as it is. The first crack of enshitification.

Fuck the commodification of culture.

Fuck full time content creators.

I don't want people working full time on social networks. I don't want to read your ad, your secret knowledge, your product placement, or sponsorship, or your oh so subtle pitch for VC funding. I'm certainly not going to give money.

I want people who do their own thing in the real world, and as a hobby and show-and-tell, submit their work freely to the Internet to hone and expand their craft and field, and gain organic enrichment altruisticly.

If you want to sell stuff and make money, make your own website and store. Not on our forum.

Don't pollute our forum. I want to be inspired, be in awe, be entertained, be informed, and to give back in my own way that continues this cycle and fuels the forum.

We've fled so many greedy sites - fleeing this capitalistic parasite in hopes of finding honest discussion untainted by greed. I'm tired of fleeing.

It's a well written article worth reading in full

In the government's telling, the school routinely missed compliance obligations in large part because the researchers found dealing with security protocols "burdensome." And when the researchers complained, admins gave in.

This is a good motivator, security is important, and there will always be a spectrum between convenience and security, and it's easy to drift too far down to the dangerously convenient side of the spectrum.

This Georgia Tech lab got dangerously convenient security policies, lied about it, got ratted out, and now is the government's displayed example.

Now it's either getting pwned or getting sued, instead of just risking the former. Hopefully this will motivate more people to take security more seriously, especially when hosting sensitive data, and especially when accepting federal government money.