[-] ltxrtquq@lemmy.ml 1 points 4 months ago

Supporting Israel is what Trump did too and even worse than Harris.

So the key to beating fascism in your mind was to platform the same policies, but a little less? What do you actually think Harris should have done differently that would have helped her win the election? Because clearly, doing the same thing but slightly less bad didn't work this time.

[-] ltxrtquq@lemmy.ml 1 points 4 months ago

They don't have the morally high ground. They chose to help a fascist get to power.

Kamala Harris, the Democratic Presidential Nominee, lost. Because of her poor campaign tactics, she allowed a fascist to get into power. Are you equally upset with her for not doing what it takes to stop fascism?

If not, why was the "right answer" for this election to support Israel when we know that she lost following that tactic, and not supporting Palestine?

[-] ltxrtquq@lemmy.ml 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

For something like t-shirt likenesses, I suppose I think the line is the person’s consent

So if he had a warehouse full of tshirts with his name or face on them and decides after filing bankruptcy that he doesn't want to sell them anymore, should he just get to keep it? Should it all be destroyed?

If he took a cattle brand and burned his name into everything on set, does that mean he shouldn't have to sell it any more?

In the extreme case: a person is legally entitled to sell nude images of themselves, but surely a court would never order it, even if that person had been previously selling nude images.

If someone was already selling porn before, do you think if they continued to that they shouldn't have to give any of that money they earned to the people they owe money to? This case isn't anywhere near that extreme because he's not the only person in the world named 'Alex Jones', so how much of his 'likeness' is being sold is debatable to begin with. And also, we aren't talking about future permission to use his likeness, we're talking about a social media account used to promote his business.

[-] ltxrtquq@lemmy.ml 1 points 5 months ago

You can either mitigate the inevitable damage

At some point we need to admit that harm reduction still means harm. At the very least, we shouldn't berate people for looking for alternatives when the options presented would both cause unnecessary damage.

[-] ltxrtquq@lemmy.ml 1 points 5 months ago

Yeah, but have you considered the electoral college? For most people, their vote for president doesn't matter.

[-] ltxrtquq@lemmy.ml 1 points 5 months ago

It also didn't help that it was one of the first $70 games when the norm was $60.

[-] ltxrtquq@lemmy.ml 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

“Driven” suggest more than half of total pregnancies,

Less than 20% of a total is “significant”?

The amount the percentage represents is irrelevant. A billion people could be involved, but if the total is 7 billion, it’s not going to be a significant part of the total trend.

In the terms of your analogy, this is about 3 people out of 20 pedaling a (weirdly long) bike and steered by all of them (somehow). Would you say that group of 3 are driving? Or would you concede it’s the two groups of 6 that are mostly driving the bike?

Your "words wholly" includes more than whatever you think it does.

My point has always been about this study

Has it? I think you're far less clear and careful with your words than you think you are. You've been arguing from the start that less than half of something isn't and can't be significant. We aren't even discussing the text in this study that you can read in the screenshot:

More than half the drop of America's total fertility rate is explained by women under the age of 19 now having next to no children.

What you're saying now about “the traditional driver of USA birth rates” isn't reflected in your other comments.

[-] ltxrtquq@lemmy.ml 1 points 6 months ago

Given r=f(θ), we are generally not concerned with r′=f′(θ); that describes how fast r changes with respect to θ

You're using the derivative of a polar equation as the basis for what a tangent line is. But as the textbook explains, that doesn't give you a tangent line or describe the slope at that point. I never bothered defining what "tangent" means, but since this seems so important to you why don't you try coming up with a reasonable definition?

[-] ltxrtquq@lemmy.ml 1 points 6 months ago

I think we fundamentally don't agree on what "tangent" means. You can use

x=f(θ)cosθ, y=f(θ)sinθ to compute dydx

as taken from the textbook, giving you a tangent line in the terms used in polar coordinates. I think your line of reasoning would lead to r=1 in polar coordinates being a line, even though it's a circle with radius 1.

[-] ltxrtquq@lemmy.ml 1 points 6 months ago

Given r=f(θ), we are generally not concerned with r′=f′(θ); that describes how fast r changes with respect to θ

I think this part from the textbook describes what you're talking about

Instead, we will use x=f(θ)cosθ, y=f(θ)sinθ to compute dydx.

And this would give you the actual tangent line, or at least the slope of that line.

[-] ltxrtquq@lemmy.ml 1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Apex Legends is a battle royale, Gigantic and Battleborn are (were) more like MOBAs, Paladins and Dirty Bomb don't work on linux. I haven't played all of these games, but I don't think they're as interchangeable as you're implying.

[-] ltxrtquq@lemmy.ml 1 points 7 months ago

Hey now, what did Microsoft's Activision Blizzard King ever do to you?

view more: ‹ prev next ›

ltxrtquq

joined 2 years ago