No matter what you think of Ubisoft, this guy was the best part of Assassin’s Creed Odyssey, had some very good lines.

The issue that caused this topic to arise wasn’t of other people having opinions we didn’t like. It wasn’t even a case of arguing in bad faith, eg deflecting truth, or disguising real intentions by making arguments the owner doesn’t believe for some other purpose (those are also bad, but generally don’t get such a response).

The issue was specific moderator/instance-ownership censorship. People’s posts were being removed without warning when they were making respectful, good-faith arguments - that disagreed with the politics of lemmy.ml. Worse, they were attempting to be stealthy about this removal so that no one victimized by this censorship was aware of it.

For reference, I’m gonna be a Biden voter. If someone posted “Biden is a piece of trash old man” then I’d disagree with them, but they’d have every right to put that opinion up.

Most people would be fine with this in the case of a home user duplicating one or two copies for his kids to watch and as backups. But we have seen whenever a rule permits something, someone will work out the MAXIMUM way in which they can abuse it for profit. Give them an inch, and they take a mile.

Ideally, we could have laws that are really finely built to be specific to that first scenario. But I honestly don’t know how you write those.

I’m just asking questions

IANAL, but: It circles back to the right to fair representation.

Say he’s convicted, but at a later court, claims “After my totally involuntary psychotic episode, now verified by multiple behavioral psychologists, my lawyer held my unintentional actions against me and did a demonstrably poor job in the remainder of the case. I deserve the right to a fair trial.”

That COULD be enough to get the case declared a mistrial and re-scheduled.

There’s a saying I want to make famous: “One man’s freedom ends where another’s begins.” Your freedom not to take a vaccine only lasts as long as it does not affect your neighbor’s rights to live and breathe.

I can even agree that for a lot of cartoony media, depicting people as animals can give it a really cool/cute style. A lot of people have fond memories of reading the Redwall books, which took that to a logical and mature extension. But, having close association to all of the sexual stuff is where it gets bizarre and unlikable.

I’ll even go out on a limb; I really enjoyed Lauren Faust’s My Little Pony series. I thought there was some fun, inventive writing humor, good VA, and smooth animation; for a time. But there’s undeniably a ton of people that made obsession with that series really weird.

There’s definitely a huge difference in service work ethic in Japan, which probably leads to those reliability stats. I don’t even know if I consider it a good or bad thing, because it’s super-nice when you’re relying on them there, but I can also tell that waiting on people hand and foot wears on people’s mental health, and it often shows across that country.

They also have much more popularized versions of canned coffee than us; I occasionally see bad overpriced Starbucks coffee bottles in grocery store checkouts, but not something small, quick, and convenient like BOSS.

I feel like they’d have a point if we could reduce the standard retirement age. Theoretically, a world pushing increased automation should be able to achieve that - assuming the value generated from automation isn’t going into about 5 or 6 individual bank accounts.

“Good work, 47. Now locate an exit.”

In the gaming sector, nothing has adequately replicated the stylus used by the DS, 3DS, and Wii U. It was the best way to play a few signature games like Elite Beat Agents (now incarnated as Osu) and Trauma Center: Under the Knife. Touchscreens are just a bit too universal and resilient for us to go back to them.

But by removing all the ports and turning them into screen monoliths, we can now safely pee on them.

I wonder if you could contest this under the claim that you disagree with the valuation of your assets.

Say your child made a finger painting that you hung on the fridge. Some kind of crazed, but highly respected/influential, art appraiser sees it on a visit and claims it’s worth $10,000,000. So you can’t have any communal benefits unless you sell it (but you don’t want to, because it’s your kid’s - not to mention actually selling it can be hard). Would there be no avenue to claim that the appraiser is an idiot, and it’s barely worth the paper it’s on?

I don’t think it necessarily needs active enforcement. It can be as simple as:

Richy Rich: “So I claimed unemployment during my taxes, and no one stopped me! Bwa ha ha!”
Moralistic Auditor: “Wait…you did?? That’s illegal! Screw it, I always hated you, I’m going to report you to the IRS!”
IRS: “We’ve discovered you incorrectly claimed unemployment, thanks to an anonymous tip and brief investigation. Your punitive taxes have been quintupled.”

You wouldn’t always catch everyone; that’s fine, as long as the cost of abusers is not outweighed by the savings of not verifying everyone.

I’ve definitely felt the same effect looking at landscapes in person, versus reviewing the same photo on my phone later. Basically an obvious comparison to be made between watching a cinematic movie in a giant theater, versus on that small screen.

I have to admit, this is the dilemma I see; no system - Democracy, Law, Businesses, achieve their goals if a huge number of its participants have ulterior motives. You can’t put 8 people in a room, and give them a “system” where they will move a ball from one side to the other, if 7 of them don’t want to move it.

So while I hate the racists appearing on juries, I’m still not sure I’d use that as a justification against the practice.

Walter White rambles about process for 2 hours