2 million dollars? That can’t be real. Holy shit
Landslide7648
0 Post – 39 Comments
Joined 10 months ago
China has zero interest in harming Russia at this stage. The US and its allies are investing massive resources in Ukraine, so is Russia. Russia needs chinas goodwill and tech to keep going, that’s a win. The US can’t use the money it puts into Ukraine into the pacific, that’s another win.
China is happy if everything stays as it is
From the article:
These days, TV makers hardly make any money with their physical products. Roku’s FY 2023 earnings report shows that the company lost $44 million on the sale of smart TVs, streaming players and other devices in 2023. What brings in the bacon are ads and services; Roku generated a gross profit of nearly $1.6 billion with this business segment.
Can’t blame anyone but yourself if you use Google tbh
Nope, not true. Stop spreading misinformation just because you want to get public praise.
You will not automatically get deported, but it will be made easier to deport foreigners who are praising terrorism. There’s a big difference. You always have legal recourse against this.
That’s important because the phrase “from the river to the sea” is not illegal praise of terrorism in Germany, even if you may have heard so from your equally misinformed bubble. While its use shows that the person saying has a big problem with accepting that a complex situation will certainly not be reflected in a catchy sentence, and that it may be time for that person to just excuse them from a discussion they are very likely not a part of, it is not illegal.
Why? Because courts will have to make the decision whether its use in a specific context was illegal, and more often than not it won’t be.
Yeah, I got that. What I wanted to express is that likely the opposite would happen. People just want cheap shit and don’t care about enshittification.
Glad to see procrastination got the better of him
It’s never good to compare one genocide to the other. If you did and applied consequence to it, the current situation in Gaza would come show up somewhere in the middle of all ongoing atrocities, behind Sudan and Yemen.
Instead, efforts should be made to stop all of these wars regardless of location and political ideology.
If only there was a way to look at the actual study, but oh no
“We” didn’t do shit. People in 1776 did, today’s Americans wouldn’t reject it out of fear for consequence to personal comfort.
That guy sure is afraid of his wife.
Ah yes, we can see in Libya how well this worked out
I doubt that this vaccine will be covered by European health insurance providers if it costs a lot.
That headline is false. You do not have to affirm Israel’s right to exist.
You have to know that it’s illegal to call for the destruction of the state of Israel. That’s not the same.
It’s a multiple choice question. Also the headline is false. The question is:
“What action relating to the state of Israel is prohibited in Germany?"
The correct answer is “publicly calling for the destruction of Israel".
Don’t know if you’re joking, but just to be safe: no need for a filter
edit: apparently I was wrong
I’ve worked quite extensively with youth, including in radicalisation prevention. Children model their lives after adults. The term role model is simply different for children and for older people.
You are mixing up a lot of terms here without actually defining for what age group you want to apply them. So yeah, I can say with a lot of confidence that the death of young children is horrible, but it’s not the driving factor behind radicalisation. The reaction of the people around is.
lol
I had a look at the homepage of the holocaust museum. They differentiate between soft and hard holocaust denial, i.e. the genocide of the Jews wasn’t planned and didn’t happen at this scale, and the the genocide of the Jews didn’t happen, respectively.
That is, by the way, in line with Wikipedia states. I don’t expect you to actually walk away and learn something of course, but on the off chance that you’ll reflect on this I’d say: start opening your mind to the possibility that you are wrong.
What’s lemmygrad
Interesting. I could have sworn I read that it’s not required, but I can’t find it any of. I stand corrected.
Shitney
I replied to the wrong comment
I’m not denying my privilege, but I’d argue that I’m more aware of my biases than you appear to be
You call them police proceedings, but it’s the public prosecutor’s office (Staatsanwaltschaft) that is calling the shots. Regardless, the article also states that two of the highest courts called the Verwaltungsgerichte have decided that the phrase isn’t illegal per se.
Of course it is illegal in the context of glorifying Hamas terrorism, as it should be. That also puts a responsibility on organisers of protests to make sure that they distance themselves from people who are ambiguous in their distancing from hamas, that’s a positive thing in my opinion.
My point is that children lack the understanding of what caused this. It’s the reaction of the adults / role models in their life that will radicalise them.
Yeah, a bit odd to share that now. The only relevance I can see is that OpenAI / ChatGPT now officially collaborates with Springer.
That will undoubtedly have an impact on the quality of its content
Not according to Wikipedia. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocaust_denial
Holocaust denial is an antisemitic conspiracy theory[1][2] that asserts that the Nazi genocide of Jews, known as the Holocaust, is a fabrication or exaggeration.[3][4][5] Holocaust denial involves making one or more of the following false claims:[6][7][8]
Nazi Germany's "Final Solution" was aimed only at deporting Jews from the territory of the Third Reich and did not include their extermination. Nazi authorities did not use extermination camps and gas chambers for the mass murder of Jews. The actual number of Jews murdered is significantly lower than the accepted figure of approximately six million. The Holocaust is a hoax perpetrated by the Allies, Jews, or the Soviet Union.[4][9]
Good point. I didn’t realise that it was a different thread under the same post.
But regardless this doesn’t make Alejandra look like she’s acting in good faith. Her accusation of holocaust denial is a reaction to this post
I don’t read that as “JKR demands a source for persecution of transgender by the nazis” and more as a “JKR demands a source for her upholding gender ideology of the nazis”.
At the very least Alejandra could have asked for clarification before throwing “holocaust denier” in the ring.
But I also admit that I don’t actually follow this very closely, so it’s possible I’m wrong and JKR meant to state there was no persecution of transgender.
Again, a follow up question would have clarified that. But both sides, her, her supporters and the people who attack her are so deep down that cycle of outrage that they are not really interested in understanding where the other person is coming from. They just want to be right.
In my opinion it’s a pointless discussion.
My iPad has 3GB RAM and honestly that’s enough. I don’t know what you do on your tablet, but for my everyday activities I have never felt limited
She isn’t the one that first spoke of “all”, she’s referring to this message.
Anyway, I don’t think this entire argument is done in good faith nor by Alejandra nor JK Rowling.
What was it? I’ve only seen the screenshots shared by the other person, it was them who put the focus on it imho. Either way I haven’t seen any other statement, care to share that?
Yeah it’s because the Alejandra person actually claimed those things.
As critical as I’m of JK Rowlings trans denial, this appears to be blown way out of proportion by people who want to pin another label on her that will make their fight more righteous.
This is nothing but culture war
I understand that you believe that, it’s just as far as I know not the definition
I am pretty sure that’s not the right definition. Holocaust denial isn’t about denying the impact of the holocaust had on the victims and the survivors. It’s about denying the scale and planned nature of the genocide.
JK Rowling doesn’t deny the holocaust. She’s not even denying that trans people were targeted, she is denying that they were among the first victims of the nazis. And while denying that they were targeted is wrong, it’s not denying the holocaust happened.
Children won’t be radicalised by that. Their parents would be. And people the age of their parents.
I don’t get what’s happening here. What’s happening? Can you explain? Who are these people?