I only listen to podcasts in my car/while grocery shopping; just use AntennaPod, but I've though about something with gpodder support; would be neat to get out of my car, walk into the house and have the podcast continue (have snapcast for syncing music in the house) ... I don't listen to audiobooks though so I never thought about that :blobcatshrug:

I don't think that's it. It wasn't a security issue and p intentionally added in some HTML to make it not work specifically on Soapbox. You could probably find a similar trick for Mastodon or Misskey (there was that issue with image rendering in Misskey that broke the whole UI, remember?)

Plus the PR whats-his-name submitted didn't even have test/specs in them. You can just patch every dump thing p does unless it's an actual security issue ....

Also wasn't there a Pleroma security issue? Why isn't anyone talking about that?

Yea I'm finding a lot of "rumors of cannibalism" but not that NPR article with that title. Sometime's they change the title, but even if I look for the authors, nothing shows up except an iFunny link, so I think the screenshot is fake.

I’m not saying it does. In fact it doesn’t. That’s the problem. The blog post I wrote/linked is about how I would change Section 230. My issue is that it currently doesn’t say anything about editorializing.

Climate science is the best. It's all just based on 100% provable mathematics that every scientist can understand.

The maths:

ah yes … still trusting the plan :blobcatgrimacing:

I disagree. I think adding any content is defiantly editorializing. If things are fair, everyone should get their content displayed equally.

..and my blog post is about what changes I would make to Section 230, and I think getting rid of ALL contextual blocks around a person’s posts is a good idea and meaningful reform.

It was funny at first, but I also realized it was just as bad as the fact checks ... and Twatter/Xi Jinpinster has gone back on to full on censorship showing their whole Elon purchase was pretty much just for show anyway :blobcatgooglyshrug:

I mean, if you can't see the shooter is wearing different shoes between the security and body camera .... I'm sorry man. We're not watching the same reality any more.

I get that. I don't think that's it in this case. You can disagree but the evidence is right there. I do think those kids and teachers are dead. But I also think there are unanswered questions and people are afraid to ask them. Something as simple as the shoes ... look it's just clearly there man in the official video I linked. Go through it frame by frame. Look at the color quality of the room.

I've installed these cameras before man. I've written security camera recording software before! You should see the color from those specific shoes. They're not the same ones in the body cam footage. It's quality is worse! But if you slow it down, you clearly see the pattern from the Vans. It's even in the zoom in on that fucking Twitter thread. It's dead on.

Go actually watch the fucking videos. I meant to do a video on this, but never got around to it. If you go and watch it yourself, you'll realize it's bullshit. Even that skitzo Twitter thread tries to same the red/yellow on the shoes in blood or "compression artifacts" .. it's the Van's flame shoe.

Look I'm not saying six people didn't die. What I'm fucking saying is that the shooter is obviously not wearing the same shoes in the two videos. Anyone with a brain and a decent video player will fucking see it. I'm about to go to bed and not digging through my archive for you right now.

And then the question is, why?

Download both clips from Nashville metro and go through them frame by frame in either mpv or VLC.

The hallway cam is color calibrated correctly. It picks up the blues and pinks from the paper on the copy machine. Even with the long pants, you would see the red/yellow with that camera. It's not Pumas, they're both likely vans, but they are FUCKING DIFFERENT SHOES.

Go through the videos yourself. Don't believe some bullshit someone posts on Twatter.

I feel ya lil' bastard.

I was waiting for a punchline

How do you think the State should respond regarding the kid in the video?

This still makes zero sense. W Bush appointed someone with no fire/rescue experience in charge of FEMA and they royally screwed up the initial relief effort because of bullshit cronyism. He was directly responsible.

No one even really caught on how bad his appointments were until he tried to put fucking Harriet Myers on the Supreme Court!!

You talking about the Nashville shooting?

I think Jonestown was a CIA program about to be exposed ... the Nashville shooter changed her shoes during the shooting.

#justsayin

There are already laws for abuse/neglect. That's where much of the western world has drawn the line between State vs parental interest in kids. There is a problem with reporting, but that's not an issue that gets fixed with legislation.

You beat me to it.

Honestly, it’s the parent’s fault ultimately and the parents alone. I don’t think they should be banned from giving their kids whatever drug because doing that is one step away from giving your kid Ivermectin or not giving some an experimental vaccine being illegal. Parents should have the ultimate say with their kids.

That being said …. a number of these kids are going to grow up to murder their parents in their teenage years. The true believers will try to write it off, but it will be undeniable at some point and parents will have to admit what an absolutely horrific decision they made.

Viewers like you: tax payers .. because it's over 50% gooberment funded