The idea that a state government is unnecessarily at the mercy of any corporation is hard to comprehend. Especially, as in this case, a foreign corporation.
Open source shouldn't only be the standard for governments. It should be the minimum requirement.
What happens to the rapist, then? Can he get partial custody of the child? Can he use that as an excuse to keep meeting or at least indirectly interacting with his rape victim?
What a great healing agent, to force women to be repeatedly reminded of that time when they were raped.
There was another aspect to this video, which was that when Somerset actually did try to write some of the material himself, it was complete garbage.
For example, he completely plagiarized from a book about Disney, but then, he had to transition between one plagiarized book and a different plagiarized article, and in that transition, he presented some facts about Disney organizing gay events at their park, and it was all outright lies. Disney did not actually have any official LGBTQ events at their parks until far after that.
There was a different YouTube video that came out the next day, from this musician who listed all of the outright lies that he discovered while watching Somerset's channel.
I think the plagiarism displayed by Somerset is atrocious, but personally, I find lying and spreading misinformation to be even worse.
You need to make a choice to continue using Facebook
This reminds me of the movie War Games, when WOPR says, "The only winning strategy is not to play." The only correct choice to make here is to delete your Facebook account.
This happened in Sherman TX, a city most famous for the Lynching of George Hughes and subsequent riot in 1930, commonly known as the Sherman Riot.
I was tempted to say, "New century, new target of bigotry," but who am I kidding? They never gave up the old target of bigotry, either.
So high level overview is that Strickland was an ultra MAGA bishop who strongly supported Trump, and has publicly stated that he'd refuse the normal method for a bishop to be removed, in which he is asked to resign.
There's also this anecdote from the article:
Last year, when the Vatican defrocked ultra-conservative U.S. anti-abortion priest Frank Pavone for "blasphemous" social media posts and disobedience to bishops, Strickland was one of the few American bishops to defend him publicly.
"The blasphemy is that this holy priest is canceled while an evil president promotes the denial of truth and the murder of the unborn at every turn, Vatican officials promote immorality and denial of the deposit of faith and priests promote gender confusion devastating lives...evil," Strickland wrote on the platform then known as Twitter.
So basically, Strickland joined one of the most authoritarian organizations in the world, the Catholic Church, and then refused to obey the Pope, instead choosing to worship fucking Donald Trump, of all people, all the while calling President Biden and even the Vatican "evil."
Sounds like this man was far too stupid to be in such a position of power. Just another idiot who sacrificed himself for a rich con man.
This is part of the reason why you don't want to put a person with a fragile ego in charge of a major country.
For all of you guys that aren't going to read the relatively long article, here's a TL;DR
The artist in question is Devon Rodriguez, who you will more likely recognize if I say he is "the painter who draws people on the subway, from TikTok."
He did a gallery, and this critic, Ben Davis, said that these types of subway portraits are nothing new. The portraits are good as far as realistic portraits go, but as an art critic, the portraits themselves are not very noteworthy. The videos of him making the portraits are what is noteworthy.
Devon Rodriguez didn't like the review and pointed his fans at it. His fans didn't actually read the review (nor did Devon). The fans really got stuck on the part where the critic said that you might not recognize the artist until he called him "the painter who draws people on the subway, from TikTok."
On Saturday morning, I woke up to a tidal wave of anger from Rodriguez on Instagram, tagging me across scores of posts. Hundreds of his followers went on the attack, swarming my Instagram: “loser,” “hater,” “pathetic,” “jealous,” “your a dick,” and on and on and on. There were many creative variations on “kill yourself.” Others said they were going to get me fired, or said things like, “we are going to start a cancellation campaign against you.” A large number thought that defending Rodriguez meant calling me bald, ugly, fat, or whatever they thought could get under my skin. Most didn’t seem to have actually read my article. A contingent went after my wife. “Some women will do anything for money,” one commented. That one was funny, actually.
Meanwhile, Devon makes public posts saying, of the critic, "love will always outshine being a hater, I hope I taught you that today."
The critic goes on to say that Devon Rodriguez's videos are obviously faked, and posts the most obvious example he could find, where another TikToker dances on the London Underground for 30 minutes while he makes a sketch of her that clearly seems to be from a photo not taken at the time. The whole thing has multiple camera angles, and then she acts surprised when he reveals that he drew her.
He ends talking a lot about how problematic parasocial relationships can be. These are where a lot of people feel like they "know" a famous person, but he clearly doesn't know them. And the celebrity ends up with a lot of people acting all wacky to defend him.
Also, any number whose digits sum to a multiple of 3 is divisible by 3. For 51, 5+1=6, and 6 is a multiple of 3, so 51 can be cleanly divided by 3.
When things go right, it's "I". When things go wrong, it's "We". These are Musk's situationally preferred pronouns.
They give a bit more context in this video. (from 2017)
By the way, I got that link from an article in The Guardian, and I can't find anything in either of those two articles that really adds on top of what was known in 2017. It could just be hard for a layperson to understand, and so was oversimplified?
TLDW is that researchers have known for decades that this tablet showed the Babylonians knew the Pythagorean Theorem for 1000 years before Pythagoras was born. So, that part isn't new.
They seem to be saying that what's new is that they understand each line of this tablet describes a different right triangle, and that due to the Babylonians counting in base 60, they can describe many more right triangles for a unit length than we can in base 10.
They feel like this can have many uses in things like surveying, computing, and in understanding trigonometry.
My take is that this was a very interesting discovery, but that they probably felt pressure to figure out a way to describe it as useful in the modern world. But we've known about the useful parts of this discovery for forever. Our clocks are all base 60. And our computers are binary, not base 10, just to start with.
We overvalue trying to make every advance in knowledge immediately useful. Knowledge can be good for its own sake.
They do travel in flocks.