

Allies? Trump doesn’t have alliances, he has people who say whatever it takes to keep him on side and people who say truths he doesn’t want to hear.
Hence Kim Jong Un turned trump into a supporter by stroking his ego.
Allies? Trump doesn’t have alliances, he has people who say whatever it takes to keep him on side and people who say truths he doesn’t want to hear.
Hence Kim Jong Un turned trump into a supporter by stroking his ego.
Sadly very true.
Username checks out.
You know that that also did not work, right?
The upside of that was that it put his fellow conspiritors off trying to follow in his footsteps.
If the biometric ID is collected and stored by someone else, not only have I lost my anonymity, I’ve also lost control of my identity and there’s no way for me to stop that happening.
This is unequivocally bad for privacy.
Biounique id is an advertiser’s wet dream and I don’t think it’s theoretically possible to prevent it from being exploited for profiling by Google. If the hashed encrypted token retains the uniqueness then it points to you as an individual across time, devices and location changes. There is no escaping this ID. You can’t change it, you can’t get a new one.
Google and other multinational corporations WILL know where you live and can figure out all your personal characteristics with a little time. Your anonymity is gone forever.
Sam Altman saw the film Minority Report in which iris scanners on holographic billboards trigger the advertisements to address you by name, hampering the escape of the central character who was being set up, and thought “Cool, let’s make this. I’m going to be rich! The other dystopian aspects of the film are fiction, but this one I can make real.”
Terribly sorry for the interjection, but you misspelt bo’w’o’wa’uh and arse.
Scan your biounique eyeball to provide ID whilst retaining your anonymity???
Anonymity and the ability for someone else to prove it was me are nearly opposites.
This is the cold, cold solid logic and definitely the right answer. Negative consequences mean absolutely nothing to right wingers unless it’s them who are harmed.
Dude, you don’t understand truth number one about becoming a parent or you somehow got ppd and didn’t bond with your theoretical children that winked into existence when I called you out on not knowing about parenthood.
I can’t tell if you’re mad about Trump or the gop because you spent days badmouthing someone who publicly criticised them on utterly spurious grounds and have come up with not one single substantive criticism of the current regime until I call you out on it, when it suddenly turns up but is really really vague compared with your irrational, specific and sustained ire against the effective and vocal critic of Trump’s authoritarianism. I can tell who you hate, and it’s this historian who spoke out against trump.
Criticising people who leave their home country because they fear for their safety is, yes, just like the right wingers. They do that all the time. Like you, they take emigration to be a moral error.
Trump would be delighted with your “she’s a coward” stance. It’s exactly the sort of purile hypocritical undermining and deflecting name-calling he would do himself.
You sound like you don’t understand what a straw man fallacy is with this comment.
You lie particularly transparently about having kids. You don’t even know why it was obvious that you don’t have kids. Your lie just for argument’s sake is emblemic of your disingenuous approach to the whole topic.
A sensible, intelligent and knowledgeable historian not only told us the lesson of history that once they start coming for the ethnic minorities and locking them up extrajudicially, the intellectuals and the well known socialists are next before anyone who is prepared to be publicly critical. She couldn’t have made her point better than by emigrating.
You’re hating on her needlessly. Hate on trump. Hate on the GOP. Hate on ICE and the judges who enable trump and his goons. It’s honestly as bad as the tankies saying that the Democrats should lose because of Gaza. It’s a stupid and counterproductive purity nonsense that everyone has to oppose the exact same way you do or it’s not real opposition. No they don’t. Yes they can. You’re wrong.
I’m certain of one thing. You’re not listening for content, you’re just here to discredit a knowledgeable historian making an important point from history in the most compelling and true to herself way that she can by starkly drawing attention to the parallels with the original Nazi regime.
Your political purity nonsense is nonsense and your nonsense garbled exaggeration of what I’m saying about that is wrong either deliberately to mislead or accidentally through lack of careful thought.
I was pointing out that reposts aren’t reposts for everyone and some new people enjoy old posts fresh.
Nope nope nope nope nope nope nope.
Nah, we all knew very early on that gb news was meant to be the fox news of the UK.
If you’re joining an organisation that took Andrew Neill off the screen in its first week of broadcasting for being too left wing, and replaced him with Nigel Farage, you have to have had your head firmly in the sand if you don’t realise they’re right wing nut jobs.
He’s also a regular at the Conservative cool aid fountain, founder OF LGBT Conservatives