What you're not getting is that it being that influential is a bad thing and that it's time to pull it from its podium. It's just a religious text and if you're censoring any religious texts, you should censor all of them.

Fuck that, the wretched thing doesn't deserve special treatment. There is nothing about the contents of the bible that are worth granting exception for. You want to ban adult themes? I can think of nothing more deserving of such a ban than the oldest book to incorporate rape, divinely ordained murder (all over the place), instructions on how to perform an abortion, incest, and the severly mixed message of "god loves everyone, unless you don't worship them, then you get tortured forever".

My grandmother was the county coroner for a while. She was a pharmacist professionally. In those places, it's more "give it a quick kick and say they're dead" (she never did that) more than anything else. She only declared death, not attribute cause to my knowledge.

The other part of it is that, for whatever reason, in my county the only higher arresting authority than the sheriff was the coroner. It was her job to serve him with papers when he was being sued and, not that it ever came up, arrest him when it needed done.

Weird system.

Ooooh, big stretch.

Yes, holding a person accountable for their crimes (maybe, jury is still out) is attacking them...

Unless you're talking media coverage. Cause we all know that the media is an arm of the government...

Sadly if you train your AI on racist data, you get a racist robot. So that's not a given.

Proof for the curious. I'll let the bot relink to piped, I'm lazy.

I'd hazard it's both. There are plenty of microtransaction models that explicitly exploit addictive behaviors (see gatcha).

On top of that, some companies handle more benign models better. Grinding Gear Games will lock your account from buying things if you ask them to without question, to help people that struggle with that sort of thing. Many other companies (I want to say Blizzard, but I don't have a source) will throw up their hands and say "the system can't do that", when it's not hard to implement. One enable flag is all you need (I'm aware implementation takes more, but just one variable can control a users ability to make purchases)

And some parents are also more than happy to have kids out of their hair by any means necessary.

This smells like the McDonald's coffee story to me. A headline can make it sound absurd, but I suspect a deeper look isn't a bad thing.

Edit: as for non money based addiction, yeah that ball can go back to the parents court imo

It's a capybara. They look like that at all times, including when a pelican is ineffectively attempting to eat one. I'm sad I don't have that gif saved.

My money is on zero. They'll comment it out and then turn it back on when no one is looking.

I mean, we weren't forced into it. We were just told we'd be homeless (or some other stand in for poverty) if we didn't.

Now a lot of people with loans are in poverty because of them. We weren't forced into them is only technically true.