balance8873

Some of them could be hiding their opinions and saying "I just don't like to get into politics".

These all sound good for the Chinese as a people, my question was about the government being trustworthy in what it tells people.

1st and 3rd links seem potentially good, the wage increase...you must know that's a terrible comparison.

And this post is a great example of how the democrats shifted further and further to the right wing.

I see dot-ml users are accidentally upvoting me because I shat on the democrats. While they do suck in this case the demonstration is actually that someone who is trying to coddle the dot-ml groupthink shifts further and further into that groupthink for zero meaningful gains. They still got heavily downvoted despite trying to reach out to the hive mind. This is what happens to democrats who try to coddle the analogous republican groupthink. They too shift further into the groupthink and are punished by everyone for it.

Please adjust your votes accordingly.

But don't you define lackeys as being people who also say china isn't trustworthy? Ie it's a circular logic you seem to got there, based on past ml experiences.

Let's start with: governments are untrustworthy being made of people

So who told you china is trustworthy?

Wait you still have shared machines in 2025? This isn't 1998 Netscape navigator porn.

Your opinion is fact and you're apparently pro slavery. Got it, bye.

Well... Mine has the evidence of history. You rejected history and called pretty much every historical figure ever an outlier. I don't know what to do with that. (Besides move on with my life)

At this point it sounds like you're saying "I don't have proof but under everything I think people are Good and every counter example is actually something else."

I don't think this can be argued against because it's just a closely held belief. That is, you can't logic someone out of a belief they didn't logic themselves into. Therefore I am stopping here.

Sure, it counts. Which is Firefox's point. If you make a definition super broad, and some people will always try to extend the meaning of words until they explode like a Samsung battery, then you need to protect yourself by removing language that might be in contrast to that extremely broad definition. You can assign whatever nefarious intent you want to mozilla but their claims make logical internal sense.

So you will always find a person who is doing the enslaving but enslaving isn't human nature? I dont know how to follow that logic.

Let's take another class of slaves: domesticated animals. We've been doing that for a looooong time. We like them, but we don't consider them our equals and will in general readily murder them or sacrifice them to meet our needs. Most of what you eat has about the intelligence of a toddler. Cats and dogs we enslave as our emotional support are also intelligent creatures.

Since resources are always finite all creatures default to exploitation as a survival system. Humans are good at making up stories for why it's ok actually, but that doesn't mean it is.

Oooh, since they are all just disassociated globs of meat glued together in plant casing, maybe the move is to mix flavors into the meat before it's assembled.

I kid of course, that's dangerously close to spices and you can't put spices on hot dog meat.