I’ve submitted this before the International Criminal Court in The Hague. As to which protocol of the Geneva Convention this violates, all of them.

Gen X here. Mother died of cancer when 13. Father left us two weeks after that. Several years later, father penniless and died of an OD in a ditch in East Tennessee.

Literally was trying to be left with the debt by the State of Tennessee, actually had to obtain a lawyer to show my legal declaration of becoming an orphan when I was a kid to get them to stop.

So the only thing they left me with was a lawyer bill and about two years worth of court proceedings. So no, at least for me, we’re not getting anything from them.

thanks to the property assets accumulated by the generations before them.

These people have clearly never heard of reverse mortgage. So take what they have to say with large heapings of salt.

While they wait for their inheritances

LOL. Yeah these people are taking the piss here. Many of the folks I know with boomer parents that have already passed have seen roughly 90% to 96% of the accumulated wealth either taken in medical expenses, obligated debt, or just straight up poor ass planning that left the parents near penniless in their final days.

This whole story is predicated on ignoring massive costs that come at end of life that many boomers have not planned on. And one can easily objectively see then ignoring this by failing to account the massive upswing in reverse mortgages and filial responsibility cases.

The boomers are not giving us anything when they die except headache.

Oh don’t even get me started. Hall effect has been known since 1879, those JoyCons didn’t use it because it was cheaper to use shitty graphite. They literally went the cheap ass route because they didn’t even care.

“Nintendo sues” oh look it’s a day that ends in Y. The only person Nintendo isn’t dead set on suing is Nintendo.

Here’s you 937th remake of Super Mario Bros 2 that you can only rent, have a nice day.

And our online service is absolute trash but you’ll pay anyway to have a legal emulator until we also discontinue that for Super other garbage online service!

Yes I saw some shit the other day about, “such and such reporting that sales are drastically down since blah blah blah. Where did it all go wrong?”

Or “Gen whatever is choosing to part ways with blah blah blah. Here’s our guesses as to why!”

And it’s just, NOBODY HAS FUCKING MONEY!!! That’s it. That’s all it is. There’s no preference. There’s no secret wokeness. There’s no underlying meaning. We are all just fucking broke!

They took all the money, they refuse to give it back in wages, they jacked up the price, and we are tapping out. HOW THE FUCK IS THIS STILL A GODDAMN MYSTERY?!?!?!

The only way someone can still be confused about what’s going on is if they’re on purpose being ignorant about it because, “mah market indicators!”

We are all broke. That’s it, that’s the answer. Media needs to stop with the bullshit. The headline every day needs to be “The world is on fire by rich asshats and the rest of us are too fucking broke to do anything. We are all going to die painfully because of those rich asshats.” And that should be all that’s on the news every hour on the hour. The end.

I just want to note here for those about to journey into this conversation, there’s a major hiccup that didn’t exist before. The Supreme Court placed an new expansive interpretation of the Second Amendment in the 2008 Heller case. This has significantly altered how the second amendment is read in the United States. So what may seem like “brain dead easy” things to do, likely cannot be done as they would be unconstitutional.

I say this because the question posed simply indicates “Present + Congress” which seems to imply, “which laws would you pass to fix gun control issues” and post-2008 that is no longer a thing. Any discussion needs to include at this point a conversation about the Supreme Court, the new understanding of the 2nd Amendment, and that the Justices currently on the bench will likely enforce their new expansive interpretation for their term on the court (which is a lifetime appointment).

We are now at a point that we cannot fix this issue without a Constitutional Amendment, a reorganization of the Supreme Court (packing, impeachment, etc), an incredibly careful tip-toe around this new understanding of the second amendment, and/or talking about the underlying issues that surround gun reform (economic and societal issues).

And we are seeing the consequences of Heller in things like 2022 Bruen which SCOTUS indicated that a “historic standard” should be applied to new gun regulation. This has lead to US v Rahimi where the Court of Appeals for 5th Circuit has removed the Federal protection that folks charged with domestic violence can still obtain a gun as “domestic violence” had no historical standard on which to base on. Which is an absolute astonishing level of logic there.

We are no longer at a phase where legislation alone along the strict lines of “just gun reform”, this new understanding of the second amendment has forever (or at least as long as those Justices sit the bench) altered how we can approach this issue. We cannot just simply say, “let us figure out ways to regulate gun ownership in itself” that is no longer allowed. We can approach the issue indirectly: how do we increase the cost of Interstate gun ownership, how do we regulate the the dissemination of ammunition, how do we address the various issues that draw people into violent crime, how do we address the issue of school shootings at an societal level. But we have been cut off from direct approaches that regulate guns themselves except in the most extreme cases and even then, advocates are continually being handed new tools by the Supreme Court to bring about new challenges for those.

Any meaningful debate about gun control needs to include the Supreme Court. Because given the current Court’s propensity to expand gun rights and the understanding of the second amendment, any law that might get introduced to fix the issue today, could and very likely would be overturned by the court. This has become a new chess piece in this game to be considered since 2008, prior yes this could have been a Congress and President issue alone, but post-2008, the Courts must be considered in the discussion. The Supreme Court too strongly embraces the new understanding of the second amendment to let any direct law be allowed to go unchallenged.

QA for a 3PL. Apparently QA didn’t prior to my arrival try things like entering words in zipcode entry boxes, typing 65537 letters into an address field, or holding the shift key when selecting which State to ship to.

I made a lot of, well not what I would call enemies but I wasn’t exactly friends with any of the developers.

AI is like spicy autocomplete. People need to understand that AI is basically that Excel meme but with pictures.

Police and acorns restarting their beef with each other.

💁🏽‍♂️🦀 Is this a Rust developer?

The Empire we broke from had this “feature” they seem to want so badly. And the thing is, these folks want this not realizing that there’s a “losing team” built into this kind of function. See they forget the whole Act of Supremacy 1534 and how then when the other team got in, we had the Act of Supremacy 1558, and guess what happened to the losing team? Ireland remembers.

This isn’t a one off thing. in the middle 1700s it wasn’t uncommon for mayors to not get to hold office, even after being duly elected, because they were the wrong flavor of Trinity. There’s the idea it’s a single person and just three “personas” so to say, or it’s actually three different people. That it’s grape juice and crackers standing in and transubstantiation, you are actually fucking eating flesh and drinking blood.

And this all sounds like small details shit. But I wouldn’t put it to chance on the smallness of those details to people who are worried if you look like you might go in the wrong bathroom. It’s all fun and games till someone is trying to deny your right to vote because you think instruments don’t belong in the church and that praise should only come from within.

See all the flavors of Christian are playing nicely at the moment because it’s the enemy of my enemy kind of thing with the secular state. But once’s that gone, we’re partying like it’s 1559. See that’s what they all keep getting wrong, they all think they’re going to end up on the winning team until someone starts saying “He ain’t hurting the people he’s supposed to hurt.”

That’s why they founders wanted a nation based in the people. See the King, his power come from God. And because of that, there’s all this technical crap that basically makes it impossible to question him. But a Government of the people, that’s the difference, the power of the nations isn’t derived from God or whatever, it comes from basically all the vibes from all of the citizens in the nation.

And Founders they were religious, no doubt. And they believed God gave them power and what not, etc, etc, etc. But the nation they created, that derives from the people. The people can be all kinds of religious if they want to be, but our nation is consecrated by the will of the people. What guides that will of the people, that’s for the people to pick. God, cool. Flying Spaghetti Monster, awesome. Reason and logic, amazing. Different strokes for different folks. Anyone who has read any of the people who created this nation’s works will quickly understand there is a difference between what drives man and whence the power of this nation derives.

But within that is a smaller, hardcore group who also check other boxes in surveys — such as that the U.S. Constitution was inspired by God and that the federal government should declare the U.S. a Christian nation, advocate Christian values or stop enforcing the separation of church and state.

These people have no idea what they are asking for. They think that they’ll somehow come out on top or that all the Christians will play nicely with each other or something. And they’re just fooling themselves. We’ve got a lot of history that tells how “amazing” the various sects of Christianity play with each other.

I guess my point is that we’re already talking about a hypothetical situation

Oh okay, fair enough. Yeah ideally that’s the direction it preferably should go in.

Why does everyone always assume that if minimum wage went up or if tipping went away that the customer would absorb the cost?

There’s no technical reason for why, just based on current evidence where 100% of the time producers shove any increase in cost to consumers.

You’re correct that there’s nothing technically preventing producers from eating the increase, it’s just that they’ve never done so, at least in the US.

Only real example where that has happen was with Nintendo and the WiiU. I’m sure there’s more but the fact I’m drawing blank past that but could name you over a thousand times when the cost was shoved off to consumers kind of is my point in a nutshell.

So that said, that’s why a lot of people just assume increase in cost of production equals increase in cost to consumers.

Someone drinking coffee like that seems to me like they’re trying to avoid tipping by going into cardiac arrest.

While Crystal Dynamics didn’t specify which content it’s referring to, it’s speculated that it could be the animalistic depiction of Pacific Island natives in Tomb Raider 3, who are implied to be cannibals.

“Look what they need to mimic a fraction of our power!”

— something, something Arch BTW

They went heavy on the serve part and totally gave zero protect part.

Only problem is they’re not around long enough for strong interactions and that makes it impossible for them to form Hardons.

I’m highly doubtful that a second Civil War would be like the first. I’m more of the opinion that we’d see something along the lines of the Troubles in Ireland.

Maintaining a fighting force requires a ton of money and the loss of international markets in the Civil War hurt the Confederacy greatly. Inflation in the Confederacy shot through the roof. Paired with the Union’s successful blockade, the Union securing most rivers, and the Union pretty much destroying every bit of infrastructure in the Confederate States, the Confederacy had massive economic woes that plagued morale.

I’m really doubtful that any State wanting to secede wants to lose access to the US dollar as it would wreck their economy. I just don’t see it being the way the Civil War was fought as it would almost guarantee a repeat.

Wars are fought along a lot more lines than just the ones where bullets matter.