Stoneykins [any]

Sorry it won’t work for you, but I wanted to throw out for anyone else reading thing: smarttube does let you sign in and have watch history and stuff, yes. And smarttube can also be used on amazon FireOS tvs.

deleted by creator

I actually don’t know anything about those. Were they put there while the soviet union still existed/built by the soviet union themselves, or were they put there later after by some fan of the soviet union? If the goal is to keep what is historical, regardless of political context, that would be the key distinction in my opinion.

I didn’t want to be more specific than my memory lol, thanks for the detail.

Most confederate statues are cheap crap bulk built all over the place sometime after the civil war as a sort of long term propaganda. They aren’t historical, they are reputation management.

I’m not sure why anyone would expect trump to not also fund the genocide of Palestinians.

Bluntly, the policy differences between the two are insufficient, but the behavior of trump supporters themselves is part of my considerations. Having trump as president for 4 years inspired incredibly fucked up behavior from conservatives.

I can only accept that as an argument for why strategic voting is smart. It doesn’t make sense to me as an argument for saying voting for the candidate you want is morally wrong in contexts where it could cause a spoiler effect. This is where people are blurring the line that bothers me.

I agree with all that. Your point about ranked choice is why I personally think state elections are more important than presidential at the moment, and is one of the major reasons I have for still voting democrat.

I think when it comes to telling other people how to vote, people should be more careful to not accidentally encourage hopelessness and voter apathy by the way they phrase it.

I don’t agree with saying anything but voting for joe biden is totally equivalent to voting for trump, which is being said a lot… I don’t see why.

Not voting or voting 3rd party can cause a spoiler effect. But obviously that effect is less than directly voting for the worse guy. Mathematically they aren’t the same.

It is causing a lot of conflict to try and place a moral obligation on strategic voting specifically.

Everyone who is about to yell at me: I’ll probably vote strategically, that is my plan. I just don’t agree with all this hatred for 3rd parties.

Global climate change and the all the plants and animals that have gone extinct makes Africa a different place than it was when hominids first evolved. And the population sizes were on entirely different magnitudes pre-agriculture. And even then, when they did start spreading, many of them starved or died from other things we would consider preventable in modern contexts.

So whether or not people are currently dealing with food insecurity in Africa has pretty much nothing to do with where humanity evolved from. The explanation for what is going on, even though we have agriculture and could feed everyone, is colonialism.

I think those are supposed to be the ends of a wooden frame sticking through hay?

But that is me trying to guess what they were going for. It looks more like a cookie lol

deleted by creator

I agree with and understand a lot of your frustrations, as they are also my frustrations.

But you basically said “I’m tired of voting for the lesser of two evils, so now I will vote for the greater of two evils.” Just vote 3rd party or something, and try to not take it personally when people are assholes about elections.

The two party problem as a result of first past the post means that not voting against the party you dislike more can result in a spoiler effect, and reduce the chances of the not-as-bad mainstream party winning the election. But, I reject that that spoiler effect is necessarily as bad as voting directly for the worse candidate, it is mathematically untrue. Many people try to insist they are equivalent to try and motivate voting, but I think it has the opposite effect, making people feel apathetic about the entire voting process.

Under first past the post we cannot be free of the biases of the system that enforces two parties, BUT it is possible to rarely, with a big movement of people, swap a third party with on of the major parties to replace it as a major party. The way I see voting 3rd party in situations like this is like the prisonor’s dilemma. People are motivated individually to cast their votes strategically for the major party they prefer by the spoiler effect, but if enough people collectively vote 3rd party then the outcome would be better for everyone. Thus, I cannot agree with or accept people claiming voting third party is unacceptable. It might not be likely to be effective, but it is hopeful and not nearly as misguided as people try to insist it is.

Also, Idk if this even applies to me, I’ll probably be using my vote strategically. I just support people’s right to vote 3rd party.

I’m so tired of people saying not voting for biden is completely equivalent to voting for trump, but this is stupid.

deleted by creator

Lmao what

I think they could install android TV on that pi they have, make this solution free.

Idk, not something I’ve done, and based on 30 seconds of googling it it looks like it would be annoying, but I’ll let OP decide what is worth doing.

I think it would depend on the individual. Some would admit it, once they see the whole globe through that glass it would be like trying to say apples don’t exist in response to someone handing you an apple. Their senses would override the belief. They might not be very thrilled to admit it…

Then there would be the people that are fanatics about it… They would probably get hysterical, or check out mentally, or get violent, or some other sort of emotional break. I would also guess these people would be unwilling to go into space in the first place.

Whether it was intentionally designed this way or just something that stuck because it benefitted them, the way they are trained teaches them to behave in that confusing way, and results in them being more often able to justify the use of force (just justify it, they use force whenever they want) because “the suspect wasn’t following orders”.