Skip Navigation
InitialsDiceBear„Initials” ( by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (
Posts 3
Comments 393
The Trouble With Tracy - Sometimes considered the worst TV show in Canadian history
  • I would be curious to see some actual data on how often this is the case. Which would be somewhat challenging to research since it would require separating the truly unpopular posts from the bandwagon effect posts. Sure, you can just look at early momentum, but that will be just as much a measure of how much divisive content is posted.

  • The Trouble With Tracy - Sometimes considered the worst TV show in Canadian history
  • This comment currently has a single downvote, which leads to a strange situation. If I upvote it, it becomes more true, and thus more worthy of an upvote. But if I downvote it, it becomes less true and therefore more deserving of a downvote.

  • Baking Bread in a Solar Oven 🍞☀️
  • How well does it operate during sub-optimal conditions? Electricity can be stored in a battery, so you can spread your power out over time. I would expect some flexibility in this, since heat doesn't instantly dissipate, but if conditions remain poor for an extended period, I would think this would be much less resilient.

  • Treasury warns that anti-woke banking laws like Florida's are a national security risk
  • Funny how anti-woke is always synonymous with anti-freedom. The government doesn't approve of your opinions, and therefore must use the force of law to punish you.

    The good news is, I wouldn't expect these laws to survive in the long term. The federal government could easily preempt them since they obviously involve interstate commerce. And I suspect there's probably some blatant viewpoint discrimination baked into the laws, but that would come down to the specifics of the wording. But even if they are content neutral, I'd argue that they violate the first amendment, which thanks to citizens united would have to be applied to financial institutions too.

    And that brings us to the bad news: until congress and/or the courts are no longer held by nutjobs, I wouldn't expect either to do anything to fix this.

  • New Headcanon: Everyone in the TNG era was so obsessed with 20th century Earth because Kirk and crew didn't know the first thing about it when they got stranded there looking for whales.
  • 1930s: We've accidentally wandered into the past, we have to keep a low profile and avoid doing anything to change the timeline

    1960s: We're here to study the past, so we've come prepared for this exact scenario, and we'll need to be extremely careful not to do anything that interferes with the backdoor pilot history.

    1980s: Hi, I'm from space and want to take your whales into the future.

    But in all seriousness, for the most part Kirk does quite well in the 80s, failed attempts at profanity notwithstanding. It's mostly Spock that gets him in trouble, and he was still recovering from that whole being dead thing.

  • 32 percent of Americans believe a military regime or authoritarian leader would be a good way of governing the country.
  • 32 percent of Americans believe a military regime or authoritarian leader (described as a strong leader who can make decisions without interference from parliament or the courts) would be a good way of governing the country.

    They didn't agree with a statement that explicitly endorsed authoritarianism or military dictatorship. They agreed with a statement that is being interpreted as the equivalent of supporting those things.

    And the question itself is very open to interpretation. Does "strong" mean decisive and principled or cruel and dictatorial? Does interference refer to the normal balance of power between the three branches of government, or is it referring to extreme dysfunction, or even unconstitutional actions taken by courts and/or congress that violates constitutional principles.

  • New Headcanon: Everyone in the TNG era was so obsessed with 20th century Earth because Kirk and crew didn't know the first thing about it when they got stranded there looking for whales.
  • How well would you fit in if you found yourself 300 years in the past? You probably have a passing knowledge of what the world was like in 1724, but would you really be able to blend in and get the little details right?

    And that's probably an easier task than going back 300 years to the 20th century, when changes were coming much more rapidly.

  • Donald Trump Suggests He Would Not Defend Taiwan From China
  • Right, it's not about whether they are America's friend or foe, it's only about their relationship with Trump. And unfortunately, Trump seems to be better at relating to dictators.

    And it probably doesn't help that democratically elected leaders from countries that have longstanding relationships with the US tend to expect America to live up to it's obligations. They aren't coming in and kissing the ring in exchange for favors, they're putting the burden on the president to, you know, do his fucking job. "What's that, Ukraine wants the defense funding that congress allocated for them? Well what will they do for me?"

  • Donald Trump's Chances of Winning Election Are Declining
  • Obviously the only poll that matters is the actual election, and that's months away, and anything can happen, and everyone needs to do their part no matter what.

    That said, I would expect Trump's numbers to slide a bit from time to time as we get closer to the election. The closer we get to November, the more we'll see independent and apathetic voters start to pay a little bit of attention, and there is just so much not to like with Trump. The MAGA-dominated GOP is incredibly myopic about how their views will be seen by the average American living outside the right wing echo chamber.

    And as much as it would help them, I don't think Republicans will be able to pretend to be moderate or sensible, even for the sake of the election. There is a perverse incentive to be as extreme as possible in order to gain support from other extremists and win influence on the right, but that behavior drags the party as a whole down when it is seen by anyone who isn't already part of the base. For example, MTG gets national support and tons of media attention despite being a representative for a little rural district that no one gives a fuck about, all because she is a loud and controversial extremist. Anyone who moderates their tone or stops themselves from saying the quiet part out loud will lose influence to those who proudly proclaim their awfulness.

    None of this is to say that victory is assured. Hell, I'm not even saying it's likely (nor am I saying that it's unlikely). I'm just saying that I think that there's good reason to expect Trump's poll numbers to dip from time to time.

  • Donald Trump Suggests He Would Not Defend Taiwan From China
  • Trump is an idiot and a coward. He doesn't give a shit about global security, he doesn't get that abandoning allies only makes us look weak and unreliable, and he has no principles which could compel him to take a stand. He will decide things based on his own emotions and ego, doing whatever he thinks makes him look good. And his idea of looking good is less about being a leader or statesman and more about pretending to be a tough guy that gets respect by rewarding friends and punishing enemies.

    Remember, this is the guy who, when faced with a choice between showing leadership in the face of a pandemic or downplaying the disease so that it wouldn't be associated with him, went with downplaying the disease. If he can't be trusted to make the right choice in a conflict between a virus and humanity, why would we ever expect him to make the tough call to defend an ally in a difficult conflict.

    Honestly, I think if Trump had been president in 1941, he would have downplayed the significance of Pearl Harbor and would have used it as an excuse to stop aid to our allies. But I'm sure he'd still be all for internment, it's very much his style.

  • Why should you support proportional representation?
  • Question: How do you implement proportional representation without sacrificing the ability of the voters to choose specific candidates?

    Primaries and/or ranked choice voting allow for people to know who exactly it is they are choosing to have represent them. Proportional representation generally means that the people are only choosing what party they want, and the party gets to decide who will be their representative. There's any number of reasons why you might support a party in general but oppose a specific politician. I'd much rather have a system where people can potentially weed out terrible candidates, rather than leaving it to the party to decide.

  • Trump rally: Witness says he saw gunman minutes before shots fired
  • I don't think a fake assassination attempt makes much sense at all. He's not losing to the point that he needs to take a big risk. It's not close enough to the election for one big stunt to have a good chance of influencing the outcome. And it didn't even happen at a time and place that would maximize the visibility.

    The only thing I can think of that could explain this would be the recent trending of project 2025. But even then, if you need a distraction, the convention is next week, there's plenty of opportunity to shift the narrative there. And hell, if you want to stage an assassination attempt for your own benefit, that's the venue to do it at.

    On the other hand, faking it requires conspirators who can make it happen, all of whom have to be able to keep it quiet. There will be an investigation that he can't control. The smaller the conspiracy, the harder it is to pull off, but the larger the conspiracy, the harder it is to cover up. And unlike all his existing criminal cases, there would be no connection to his time as president in any way, so the immunity he just got handed by the supreme court wouldn't apply. And obviously the shooter has to not accidentally kill Trump while he is shooting at him and killing an innocent bystander. Plus, you have to have a shooter willing to die for the cause, or a patsy who can plausibly take his place, which raises so many more questions and carries a whole new set of risks.

    By comparison, someone looking at Trump and saying to himself "Well, if no one else is going to do this, I guess I will" is just a lot more plausible.

  • Donald Trump's ex-wife says she is 'open' to serving as his vice president
  • Well shit, I'm open to being his vice president too. Why wouldn't anyone take the job? Now that being president surrounds you with a bubble of legal immunity, the vice president is free to grant himself a good old fashioned Klingon promotion. Stab him in the neck with a pen, sign some papers with his blood in an official act, and all the evidence is inadmissible.

  • House Democrat is proposing a constitutional amendment to reverse Supreme Court's immunity decision
  • If you have a majority on the court that takes this disastrous decision as seriously as they should and are ready to overturn it, then it's fairly easy to get the case to happen. You just need to have a sitting president tell the justice department to bring a case against him. Doesn't have to be for anything big, just literally any criminal offense that can be brought to trial and appealed. He can even appeal directly to the supreme court and ask that they expedite the appeal. They hear the appeal, issue a ruling, and the precedent is gone.

  • Getting spoiled by big budgets and CG can ruin your palate.

    And don't get me started on modern conveniences.


    Superscript and subscript

    It seems like all the other markdown stuff works, but we're missing superscript and subscript in connect. As a frequent user of footnotes,1 I would greatly appreciate support for these tags.


    1 Great for citations, explanations, or really stupid tangents


    Parenting, Scadrian Nobility Style

    Amazing how one little letter can make such a big difference.