They were starting by putting a finger in zero and then dragging to the number. And for zero they were dragging all the way to the stop.

You’re supposed to dial by putting a finger in each number hole and then dragging to the stop. So they dialed zero correctly, but only zero.

I had one in my room! Such a good feel to it. Same with picking up and hanging up!

This was in the early 2000s, btw. They were already relics, but landlines were still commonly used when I was in high school, and it had such a handsome look to it and felt great to use. I have long thought that a product that would do incredibly well would be a cell phone charging dock where you put your phone in and while it’s charging it just acts like a landline rotary phone. The user experience is very, very gratifying, and if you’ve ever tried to hold a call while your phone is plugged into the wall you know how much better a solid headset with a coil wire would feel than that.

I’m 38. I remember a few times when I was a kid needed to call a classmate urgently. Like, maybe i needed to know what math problems we were assigned as homework. For folks I knew well, I might have their number written down in a book in a desk drawer, but for anyone else I would have to look up their last name in the white pages and read down a list trying to find the right number.

Was their dad’s name Prescott? No, that’s not an ethnic match. Here’s a David. That sounds right. Oh! And it’s on Beacon! That’s the right neighborhood! That’s got to be it!

I think about it all the time. You could find your teacher’s house and just go drop off a fruit basket or something if you wanted. It was crazy! It was just assumed that if someone wanted to find your house it was probably for a sensible reason. Why otherwise? If you’re paranoid or a public figure then maybe you’d choose to be unlisted, but for anyone else there’s no point in it.

Simpler times, for sure. I’d still like to go back. I think it was worth it. The alternative doesn’t seem to work. We’re all getting constantly harassed with robo calls and stalked on line. At this point, the only people who don’t know where we live are the ones who might drop off a casserole. We’ve gained nothing.

I will also add that I think in the long run, as we try to figure out how to differentiate between humans and machines, the only real reliably solution I see is to focus on elevating the individual. Having people with long histories validate their reality by living and documenting it.

I don’t upvote something that I’d be ashamed for someone to see I upvote. I might make an exception for pornographic content, but even with that, if it’s pseudononymous in that it’s not attached to my personal public life, I don’t mind if someone can trace through and see what a specific account I use for those purposes has liked and disliked.

If I can be frank, I’m reading from your tone that you’re not here for polite, factual persuasion. But if I’m wrong, or someone else sees this, I gotta drop a fact check on the ‘Lina can’t win cases’ myth:

https://www.thebignewsletter.com/p/out-with-a-bang-as-ftc-beats-the

More practically, this loss discredits the main argument from Wall Street. Dealmakers, and thinkers like Larry Summers, have often said that while Biden antitrust enforcers are aggressive, if corporations are willing to go to court, the government is likely to lose because judges won’t let them rewrite the law. This narrative was so strong that Lina Khan and Jonathan Kanter were questioned in Congress as to whether they were even trying to win. It’s always been a narrow and bad faith critique, but this victory, plus, the win in the Fifth Circuit over Illumina, should put that narrative to rest. Antitrust lawyers will tell their clients to go to court at their peril.

It’s kind of a deep dive, but it’s worth it.

While I don’t traffic in such forceful language, I can answer what @criitz means:

Bernie Sanders raised millions of dollars on the promise to lead a political revolution. For many supporters, that proposition was taken literally. They thought that his campaign was not simply a vehicle to give him the power of the presidency, but was the organizing structure for a persistent movement of activists reengaging with democracy each and every week BETWEEN elections. And when he dropped out, a lot of those people lost their connections to social and organizing structures that were giving them hope and an outlet for meeting like-minded people to find ways to make their communities better. So when he ended his campaign and all that money and infrastructure got instantly packed up and taken away, they felt like they’d been misled.

Some found their way into activism through the DSA or climate groups, but for many, the way in which he disbanded his campaign without following through on the implied promise to transform it into something durable was a very unexpected and painful surprise.

Pete needs to go mayor some more. He had a few good ideas during the primary, but as Transportation Secretary I’m astounded at his lack of ambition.

There are a handful of administration officials – Lina Khan first among them – who’ve learned to use their power assertively to make changes to broken systems. And Pete… he seems like he just pops up when another piece of infrastructure breaks to let us know that he’s on it. Maybe he’s doing something more, but if so he’s doing it very, very quietly.

I like Porter. AOC needs a rest, I think.

I used to be really captivated by her leadership, but in the last few years, I think things have gotten complicated. Perhaps I’m being too forgiving, but during Biden’s presidency it seemed like she lost her nerve to stick her neck out for what she believed in more and more. Maybe I’m inventing things, but I get the sense that January 6th scared the fucking shit out of her. I think her life flashed before her eyes, and afterwards she felt like being among the most progressive voices while trying not to rock the boat too much or draw too much personal attention from the right was enough, and that challenging Democrats on their bullshit was too stressful and risky.

If that’s the case, I don’t blame her. I still admire what she’s done, but she does not have the spark she once did.

Why must we divide the tribe? I don’t know how leftist who can’t identify as such plans to exercise collective power. But you do you.

That’s a leftist. You’re a leftist, buddy.

I relate a bit, though. I think it’s cringe when socialists call each other “comrade”.

Haaretz also reported this about three months ago. But I think there’s benefit to seeing more coverage of this.

Well that’s dystopian and dark.

I didn’t say which side I come down on. I just said that there is lots of information with plenty of high quality citations.

I’m really happy that everyone is a winner.

It’s weird how many people in this thread are vaguely debating the validity of the historical research into this question when one person has posted a link to a well cited article on this very very heavily studied subject.

There’s even a link to a well cited article examining the skepticism of the historicity of Jesus: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christ_myth_theory

I don’t feel compelled to argue an interpretation. The facts are well documented and their interpretations by experts available. What anyone chooses to do with these are of no real concern to me.

I really try not to get into litigating each and every instance, but I feel compelled sometimes to point out a few things:

The claim that Abdallah Aljamal was holding hostages is not credible. This claim was made by the IDF without evidence, and they have a very long history of fabricating post-hoc justifications for killing people they weren’t targeting or supposed to target. Examples include the assassination of American journalist Shireen Abu Akleh in 2022 and the killing of medic Rouzan al-Najjar in 2018. In both cases, the IDF was caught lying to justify their murders, and I don’t think the claims about Abdallah Aljamal hold up at all. From what I read, he lived in the building one of the hostages was recovered from, but he wasn’t known as a target before he was killed. He was characterized as one after he was dead.

Overall, the concept of “valid targets” is bullshit. It is used to assuage our innate understanding that killing people – particularly the young, the innocent, the defenseless, the elderly – is WRONG. Israel has, in this particular war, extended the concept in a way that is clearly genocidal. Their target selection, as covered by 972, was wildly more vicious than their own historical limits on collateral damage. An anonymous Israeli intelligence officer called it “a mass assassination factory”.

I’m glad we agree that all the responsible parties for atrocities deserve to be held accountable. I don’t intend the above as a provocation to fight, but I want to make sure anyone reading this comment section is aware of this context.

It’s nuts that this is barely even news. Like… another day another atrocity.

I’m trying not to be numb to it, but it’s hard to remain shocked. I’m still disgusted, though.

I’ll say this, too: I think we too often judge wars by the conduct of the participants as though there are good wars and bad ones. And my hunch is that it’s more like there are bad ones and terrible ones, and as awful as this sounds, this one is more notable because it’s being well documented and it involves a uniquely fucked up context (decades of occupation with the support of the US). I think the way the Israeli right wing discusses it is uniquely brazen, and the degree to which the IDF targets journalists and medics seems high, but I think that this kind of stuff happens so often and is undercovered. I wish Yemen got the kind of coverage this is getting.

In terms of the atrocities, I think most wars are basically just a bunch of atrocities in a trenchcoat. It doesn’t make these any better: I just want this to end, and then all the other wars. Fuck this shit.

AND I want the people who do this shit dragged in front of the Hague. I’m very glad that Netanyahu and Gallant have had arrest warrants requested, but you know what I call that? A good start.

I think this article omitted important further context by not describing the target selection approach the IDF was using: they had an AI tool make guesses as to who was part of Hamas, then suggest bombing runs of their homes when they were believed to be inside around meal times or sleeping. They reserved precision weapons for commanders, and used dumb bombs to kill low-ranking suspected combatants.

This approach is inherently designed to create a pretense to carpet bomb neighborhood full of families based on a process with little to know human oversight it discretion.

For details, look up “lavender” and “where’s Daddy”.

Which part? I think this is all subjective opinion.

I posted a comment impulsively, then saw that you already gave the same answer better.

I’d like to go a bit deeper.

I don’t think people invented socially controlling practices because they found religion, I think they found religion to frame the invention of socially controlling practices.

Masturbation is a gratifying act that relives pressure to settle into a rigid domestic arrangement that serves to make more workers and soldiers, and create dependents that need fed, and whose well-being would be threatened if a parent became defiant and provoked the ire of elites.

Masturbation is good for the individual at the expense of the nation and its rulers. So it’s inevitable that priests would decry it as an affront against god, as that’s historically been their purpose.