Wahh wahh I’ve seen comments like this before, I need jump into someone else’s mentions to get pissy about it for 20 hours, wahh. I wasn’t even replying to you dude, imagine how much time we both could have saved if you’d just downvoted my comment instead of appointing yourself arbiter of the FuckCars discourse.

The fuck are you talking about? Yeah, they don’t get to have the nuance; it’s not in the fucking post. It’s a pithy 50ish words about how they’re so much smarter than other people for not driving to the grocery store. I pointed out the reality is more nuanced than that for most people, and your whole response has been, “yeah, well, they probably know that, so why don’t just act like their response is nuanced?” To which the answer continues to be, “Because that’s not what they fucking said, are you high?”

Except there are places where that’s true. There are also people in places with the same mindset who buy trucks for twice the price of a reasonable hatchback…

Yeah, I never said this wasn’t true, but again, none of that is in the fucking post. The dude’s not making a nuanced point about people who live in walkable areas but buy large trucks over sensible hatchbacks. He’s making a sweeping statement about how people who don’t walk to the grocery store are idiots, but America has the walking score of a developing nation; if you live somewhere where you can walk to the grocery store, you’re breathing rarefied air, and calling other people stupid for driving is entitled.

Like, what are you so pissy about? That I was responding to the content of the post instead of the points you assume the 4Channer would make, but didn’t? OK buddy, in the future, I’ll try to infer what you presume the OP’s hidden beliefs are and tailor my comment to that. Seems reasonable.

Yeah, that would be a great point if the entire post wasn’t a 4Channer framing this as personal choices and not systemic ones. The dudes not talking about how the car industry destroyed railcars, he’s dunking on people who drive to the grocery store, and the implication is clearly, “everyone can and should do this,” which is bullshit.

Oh, this wasn’t even a right on red. The green light for cars was lined up with the walk sign for pedestrians going rhe same direction. In a situation like that, when a car with a green light needs to turn through the crosswalk, they are supposed to yield to any pedestrian crossing at that time, but apparently the people of Orlando have so much car entitlement that they don’t even slow down when a pedestrian is standing in the middle of the crosswalk trying to complete a legal crossing.

This is assuming you live in a walkable town or neighborhood. I remember a reddit post (can’t find it anymore) of a guy trying to walk less than 2 miles to an appointment in Orlando. He followed Google Maps directions down the shoulder of a highway that led to a dead-end, backtracked, tried again, and finally made almost all the way to his destination, which was on the opposite side of a 6-lane highway Google wanted him to cross.

I’ve only ever visited the theme parks in Orlando, but I experienced one intersection I had to share with cars. I spent every walk sign waiting for cars making a turn to yield. Even though I had the right of way, literally none of them did, until I finally had to run across the street because the cars at the red light, who could see I was 1/3 through the intersection, floored it the second their light turned green. Sure, fuck all of those car-brained drivers who refuse to yield to pedestrians, but also fuck that city for not fining drivers for shitty behavior, or at least changing their traffic lights so all cars have red lights when pedestrians have the walk sign.

Anyway, point is, personal choices are important, but they can’t overcome the systemic issues created by car culture without collective action. And Orlando sucks ass.

There’s also a weird anti-abortion undertone where, whenever they talk about removing the fetus, they clarify that they would only do that if they could guarantee that it wouldn’t harm it. It’s as though someone who was tricked into sex without their consent isn’t justified in seeking an abortion (not that anyone needs a justification for an abortion beyond, “I don’t want to continue this pregnancy”).

Bird names are all either, “red-breasted blackbird,” or, “deep-throated cum-tit.” There’s no in-between.

I think the public domain would be fair game as well, and the fact that AI companies don’t limit themselves to those works really gives away the game. An LMM that can write in the style of Shakespeare or Dickens is impressive, but people will pay for an LLM that will write their White Lotus fan fiction for them.

Here’s the thing that’s really pissing me off; I already know the ending. Back when this movie would, “never see the light of day,” someone (the director I think, or maybe one of the leads) did an interview explaining how the movie was going to end. It sounded hilarious, but now that I know what the bit is, it’s going to be significantly less funny.

By the numbers, probably Mississippi. Lowest life expectancy, highest infant mortality rate, second highest poverty rate…being ranked 39th in education actually seems to be a bright spot for them.

I mean, that was gross, but I thought it did fit her character. She was a traumatized orphan with a dark past and sever attachment issues. It made sense to me that she would try replace D’Argo as quickly as possible rather than cope with or process that loss. I get why that put you off though, it was not a high point for her character.

Surprised I had to go this far for Farscape.

And God bless the French, they will burn Paris to the fucking ground for this. Meanwhile, in the U.S., congress just decimated what little public healthcare we have, and guys with Gadsden flag profile pics and handles like, “1776patriot,” actively cheered them on.

Shit, that’s a good one.

“Look how much variation there is when I compare 80 years if animation trends to 5 years of animation trends.”

Of course animation has trends. It’s not new. Just look at the Hanna-Barbara cartoons of this 60s, when cheaper animation designed for television replaced the Golden Age animation styles. Look how many of these characters are, “blockey-torsoed animals with a superfluous neck accessory that allows us to animate the head and body independently, which saves us time and money.”

It’s not limited to this one studio either. Look at the Rocky and Bullwinkle characters. Tell me, do these blocky, simplistic character designs have more in common with the Hanna-Barbara characters above or the rounded, more fluid designs of the Disney/Warner Brothers/MGM characters of the 40s?

the only way to Democrats made their way back to the whitehouse was with an entirely new generation/brand of democratic politics under Bill Clinton, which embraced free trade and deregulation (i.e, the “third way”). So far, progressivism has not won in the way that this new brand of liberalism has.

This is a little too simplistic. First, it’s important to note how weird the 1992 election was. It was the first time in modern history that an independent candidate had a legitimate shot at winning; in fact, Perot was leading in the early polls, and very well could have taken the presidency if he hadn’t mismanaged his campaign, dropped out, and then re-entered the race. While he was somewhat centrist, he held a lot of populist and progressive positions like Medicare for all, assault weapons bans, opposition to NAFTA, and criticism of Reagonomics. Clinton ultimately won, but that probably had more to do with the 1990 recession than anything Clinton did, and, again, he very well could have lost to Perot’s platform had Perot been a more competent campaign manager.

As for the failures of the progressive message after that point, I don’t think that’s true, at least when looking at Presidential races. Obama governed as a centrist, but he campaigned as a progressive, promising Wall Street regulation, home owner bailouts, and universal healthcare. He abandoned all of those goals early on, but they are still what got elected, and he even made income inequality the focal point of his reelection campaign (which he again abandoned immediately upon reelection).

While Biden would never be called a leftists, he was a savvy campaigner, and he correctly read that the country wanted a progressive candidate in 2020. He leaned heavily on his strong pro-union history and had Sanders help him craft a highly progressive platform to run on. To his credit, I believe Biden did earnestly try to pass that platform, and it’s failure wasn’t do to a lack of desire. (He also funded a genocide and refused to step aside despite his advanced age, so fuck him, but the point is he got elected on a progressive platform).

Now let’s look at the presidential losers. Al Gore, a centrist technocrat, lost to Bush (sort of). John Kerry, a moderate war hero, lost to Bush. Hillary Clinton, who made the centrism of her husband’s presidency the cornerstone of her campaign, lost to Trump. And Harris (who, granted, was cobbling together a campaign at the 11th hour) ran a campaign of tepid centrist reforms and lost resoundingly to Trump.

So, tl;dr: Bill Clinton was the only candidate who won on an openly centrist campaign, and that was a very unusual election. The two other presidents, while also being centrists, won in progressive campaigns, while explicitly centrist Democrats lost.

I think if I don’t know anyone it’s happened to in decades of living in large cities means its probably not very common.

Yeah, I rode the Subway and T for years during rush hour, I used to work in Times Square, and I’ve of course been to tourist events in that time. In nearly 40 years of city living, I don’t know anyone who’s had their pocket picked, either in busy areas or, “Main st.”

I grew up in New York City and now live in Boston and I’ve never encountered a pickpocket. I’ve been mugged three times and had a mentally unbalanced homeless guy punch me in the face unprovoked, but I’ve never been pickpocketed.