• Re: Sinner is back

    From Scall5@21:1/5 to Sawfish on Sun May 11 02:07:24 2025
    On 5/10/2025 6:07 PM, Sawfish wrote:
    Does he look as if he has gained a bit of weight, like muscle?

    I had the match on my TV, but was doing other things around the house so
    I wasn't paying too much attention. I assumed the result and only
    watched his serve (because mine sucks). That said, I think you are right.
    --
    ---------------
    Scall5

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Scall5@21:1/5 to PeteWasLucky on Sun May 11 18:57:06 2025
    On 5/11/2025 10:25 AM, PeteWasLucky wrote:
    Scall5 <[email protected]> Wrote in message:r
    On 5/10/2025 6:07 PM, Sawfish wrote:> Does he look as if he has gained a bit of weight, like muscle?I had the match on my TV, but was doing other things around the house so I wasn't paying too much attention. I assumed the result and only watched his
    serve (because mine sucks). That said, I think you are right.-- ---------------Scall5

    I hope you know cables companies collect tracking data?

    https://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/2024/nov/smart-tv-tracking-raises-privacy-concerns

    Sadly yes, I am aware of this. But until we Libertarians take the oval
    office, nothing will change...your duopoly Demo-GOP regime is too paid
    off to change anything.
    --
    ---------------
    Scall5

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From *skriptis@21:1/5 to Sawfish on Mon May 12 09:04:00 2025
    Sawfish <[email protected]> Wrote in message:r
    On 5/11/25 4:57 PM, Scall5 wrote:> On 5/11/2025 10:25 AM, PeteWasLucky wrote:>> Scall5 <[email protected]> Wrote in message:r>>> On 5/10/2025 6:07 PM, Sawfish wrote:> Does he look as if he has >>> gained a bit of weight, like muscle?I had the match on my
    TV, but was >>> doing other things around the house so I wasn't paying too much >>> attention. I assumed the result and only watched his serve (because >>> mine sucks). That said, I think you are right.-- ---------------Scall5>>>> I hope you know cables
    companies collect tracking data?>>>> https://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/2024/nov/smart-tv-tracking-raises-privacy-concerns> > Sadly yes, I am aware of this. But until we Libertarians take the oval > office, nothing will change...your duopoly Demo-GOP regime is
    too paid > off to change anything.Now I am asking this honestly, Scall, and I'd be willing to carry on a thorough conversion via email or something because people like hopping on anything they can to make one look bad, but as much as I admire the tenets
    of libertarianism, I can envision NO scenario in which they ever have major political power at even the state level, let alone the national level. Here's why...Like socialism, which in order to work, the vast majority has to be generous and trusting,
    with no significant cheating, libertarianism requires the vast majority has to be responsible for themselves and self motivated.In neither case have I seen this as a stable, self-sustaining system. You can coerce an adherence to a socialistic system by *
    forcing* redistribution thru police actions, but this breeds an eventual reset. But libertarians, by their ethos, would not attempt to coerce self-reliance--the natural order (cold, hunger, etc.) does the enforcing. But if the majority *wants* someone to
    take responsibility and supply needs, they will reject the libertarian minority.So really,both socialism and libertarianism are utopian in nature.What do you think?



    I get your point, but I feel there's a logical mistake?

    Under this system, since libertarians do not attempt revolutionary takeover, it means if libertarians ever seize power then it means they will have done so through legal majority, or at least popular plurality and so they, can and will cut the funding of
    everything.

    So, I'm not sure where do you see the enforcement?




    --




    ----Android NewsGroup Reader---- https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Scall5@21:1/5 to Sawfish on Mon May 12 18:45:27 2025
    On 5/11/2025 9:04 PM, Sawfish wrote:
    On 5/11/25 4:57 PM, Scall5 wrote:
    On 5/11/2025 10:25 AM, PeteWasLucky wrote:
    Scall5 <[email protected]> Wrote in message:r
    On 5/10/2025 6:07 PM, Sawfish wrote:> Does he look as if he has
    gained a bit of weight, like muscle?I had the match on my TV, but
    was doing other things around the house so I wasn't paying too much
    attention. I assumed the result and only watched his serve (because
    mine sucks). That said, I think you are right.-- ---------------Scall5

    I hope you know cables companies collect tracking data?

    https://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/2024/nov/smart-tv-tracking-raises-privacy-
    concerns

    Sadly yes, I am aware of this. But until we Libertarians take the oval
    office, nothing will change...your duopoly Demo-GOP regime is too paid
    off to change anything.

    Now I am asking this honestly, Scall, and I'd be willing to carry on a thorough conversion via email or something because people like hopping
    on anything they can to make one look bad, but as much as I admire the
    tenets of libertarianism, I can envision NO scenario in which they ever
    have major political power at even the state level, let alone the
    national level. Here's why...

    Like socialism, which in order to work, the vast majority has to be
    generous and trusting, with no significant cheating, libertarianism
    requires the vast majority has to be responsible for themselves and self motivated.

    True. But I also believe in a strong military (based at home) and police/judicial system. Police enforcing laws that protect us instead of
    doing thinks like ticket monthly quotas and the war of drugs.

    In neither case have I seen this as a stable, self-sustaining system.
    You can coerce an adherence to a socialistic system by *forcing* redistribution thru police actions, but this breeds an eventual reset.
    But libertarians, by their ethos, would not attempt to coerce self- reliance--the natural order (cold, hunger, etc.) does the enforcing. But
    if the majority *wants* someone to take responsibility and supply needs,
    they will reject the libertarian minority.

    So really,both socialism and libertarianism are utopian in nature.

    What do you think?

    So is ideal Communism. More so than the two above.
    --
    ---------------
    Scall5

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Scall5@21:1/5 to jdeluise on Mon May 12 18:48:38 2025
    On 5/11/2025 8:44 PM, jdeluise wrote:
    Scall5 <[email protected]> writes:

    On 5/11/2025 10:25 AM, PeteWasLucky wrote:
    Scall5 <[email protected]> Wrote in message:r
    On 5/10/2025 6:07 PM, Sawfish wrote:> Does he look as if he has
    gained a bit of weight, like muscle?I had the match on my TV, but
    was doing other things around the house so I wasn't paying too much
    attention. I assumed the result and only watched his serve (because
    mine sucks). That said, I think you are right.-- ---------------Scall5
    I hope you know cables companies collect tracking data?
    https://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/2024/nov/smart-tv-tracking-raises-privacy-
    concerns

    Sadly yes, I am aware of this. But until we Libertarians take the oval
    office, nothing will change...your duopoly Demo-GOP regime is too paid
    off to change anything.

    And how would that change anything?  American libertarians are famously anti-regulation, and the companies involved would simply say "Hey, we're
    not forcing you to use our network.  If you don't like our surveillance, build your own network".

    The duopoly also prevents competition.
    --
    ---------------
    Scall5

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Scall5@21:1/5 to Sawfish on Mon May 12 20:22:56 2025
    On 5/12/2025 8:00 PM, Sawfish wrote:
    On 5/12/25 4:45 PM, Scall5 wrote:
    On 5/11/2025 9:04 PM, Sawfish wrote:
    On 5/11/25 4:57 PM, Scall5 wrote:
    On 5/11/2025 10:25 AM, PeteWasLucky wrote:
    Scall5 <[email protected]> Wrote in message:r
    On 5/10/2025 6:07 PM, Sawfish wrote:> Does he look as if he has
    gained a bit of weight, like muscle?I had the match on my TV, but
    was doing other things around the house so I wasn't paying too
    much attention. I assumed the result and only watched his serve
    (because mine sucks). That said, I think you are right.--
    ---------------Scall5

    I hope you know cables companies collect tracking data?

    https://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/2024/nov/smart-tv-tracking-raises-
    privacy- concerns

    Sadly yes, I am aware of this. But until we Libertarians take the
    oval office, nothing will change...your duopoly Demo-GOP regime is
    too paid off to change anything.

    Now I am asking this honestly, Scall, and I'd be willing to carry on
    a thorough conversion via email or something because people like
    hopping on anything they can to make one look bad, but as much as I
    admire the tenets of libertarianism, I can envision NO scenario in
    which they ever have major political power at even the state level,
    let alone the national level. Here's why...

    Like socialism, which in order to work, the vast majority has to be
    generous and trusting, with no significant cheating, libertarianism
    requires the vast majority has to be responsible for themselves and
    self motivated.

    True. But I also believe in a strong military (based at home) and
    police/judicial system. Police enforcing laws that protect us instead
    of doing thinks like ticket monthly quotas and the war of drugs.

    In neither case have I seen this as a stable, self-sustaining system.
    You can coerce an adherence to a socialistic system by *forcing*
    redistribution thru police actions, but this breeds an eventual
    reset. But libertarians, by their ethos, would not attempt to coerce
    self- reliance--the natural order (cold, hunger, etc.) does the
    enforcing. But if the majority *wants* someone to take responsibility
    and supply needs, they will reject the libertarian minority.

    So really,both socialism and libertarianism are utopian in nature.

    What do you think?

    So is ideal Communism. More so than the two above.

    No arguments from me, but we were not talking about communism, just
    whether the two systems I mentioned were utopian.

    Never gave it much thought, because in reality an utopian society is
    completely impossible given human nature.
    --
    ---------------
    Scall5

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Scall5@21:1/5 to Sawfish on Tue May 13 21:13:07 2025
    On 5/12/2025 8:43 PM, Sawfish wrote:
    On 5/12/25 6:22 PM, Scall5 wrote:
    On 5/12/2025 8:00 PM, Sawfish wrote:
    On 5/12/25 4:45 PM, Scall5 wrote:
    On 5/11/2025 9:04 PM, Sawfish wrote:
    On 5/11/25 4:57 PM, Scall5 wrote:
    On 5/11/2025 10:25 AM, PeteWasLucky wrote:
    Scall5 <[email protected]> Wrote in message:r
    On 5/10/2025 6:07 PM, Sawfish wrote:> Does he look as if he has >>>>>>>> gained a bit of weight, like muscle?I had the match on my TV,
    but was doing other things around the house so I wasn't paying >>>>>>>> too much attention. I assumed the result and only watched his
    serve (because mine sucks). That said, I think you are right.-- >>>>>>>> ---------------Scall5

    I hope you know cables companies collect tracking data?

    https://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/2024/nov/smart-tv-tracking-raises-
    privacy- concerns

    Sadly yes, I am aware of this. But until we Libertarians take the
    oval office, nothing will change...your duopoly Demo-GOP regime is >>>>>> too paid off to change anything.

    Now I am asking this honestly, Scall, and I'd be willing to carry
    on a thorough conversion via email or something because people like
    hopping on anything they can to make one look bad, but as much as I
    admire the tenets of libertarianism, I can envision NO scenario in
    which they ever have major political power at even the state level,
    let alone the national level. Here's why...

    Like socialism, which in order to work, the vast majority has to be
    generous and trusting, with no significant cheating, libertarianism
    requires the vast majority has to be responsible for themselves and
    self motivated.

    True. But I also believe in a strong military (based at home) and
    police/judicial system. Police enforcing laws that protect us
    instead of doing thinks like ticket monthly quotas and the war of
    drugs.

    In neither case have I seen this as a stable, self-sustaining
    system. You can coerce an adherence to a socialistic system by
    *forcing* redistribution thru police actions, but this breeds an
    eventual reset. But libertarians, by their ethos, would not attempt
    to coerce self- reliance--the natural order (cold, hunger, etc.)
    does the enforcing. But if the majority *wants* someone to take
    responsibility and supply needs, they will reject the libertarian
    minority.

    So really,both socialism and libertarianism are utopian in nature.

    What do you think?

    So is ideal Communism. More so than the two above.

    No arguments from me, but we were not talking about communism, just
    whether the two systems I mentioned were utopian.

    Never gave it much thought, because in reality an utopian society is
    completely impossible given human nature.

    Ultimately that's what I'm worried about with Libertarianism, Scall.

    Who ever said the Libertarian Party of America is about an utopian
    environment?
    --
    ---------------
    Scall5

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Scall5@21:1/5 to Sawfish on Wed May 14 18:12:56 2025
    On 5/14/2025 10:24 AM, Sawfish wrote:
    On 5/13/25 7:13 PM, Scall5 wrote:
    On 5/12/2025 8:43 PM, Sawfish wrote:
    On 5/12/25 6:22 PM, Scall5 wrote:
    On 5/12/2025 8:00 PM, Sawfish wrote:
    On 5/12/25 4:45 PM, Scall5 wrote:
    On 5/11/2025 9:04 PM, Sawfish wrote:
    On 5/11/25 4:57 PM, Scall5 wrote:
    On 5/11/2025 10:25 AM, PeteWasLucky wrote:
    Scall5 <[email protected]> Wrote in message:r
    On 5/10/2025 6:07 PM, Sawfish wrote:> Does he look as if he >>>>>>>>>> has gained a bit of weight, like muscle?I had the match on my >>>>>>>>>> TV, but was doing other things around the house so I wasn't >>>>>>>>>> paying too much attention. I assumed the result and only
    watched his serve (because mine sucks). That said, I think you >>>>>>>>>> are right.-- ---------------Scall5

    I hope you know cables companies collect tracking data?

    https://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/2024/nov/smart-tv-tracking-raises- >>>>>>>>> privacy- concerns

    Sadly yes, I am aware of this. But until we Libertarians take
    the oval office, nothing will change...your duopoly Demo-GOP
    regime is too paid off to change anything.

    Now I am asking this honestly, Scall, and I'd be willing to carry >>>>>>> on a thorough conversion via email or something because people
    like hopping on anything they can to make one look bad, but as
    much as I admire the tenets of libertarianism, I can envision NO >>>>>>> scenario in which they ever have major political power at even
    the state level, let alone the national level. Here's why...

    Like socialism, which in order to work, the vast majority has to >>>>>>> be generous and trusting, with no significant cheating,
    libertarianism requires the vast majority has to be responsible
    for themselves and self motivated.

    True. But I also believe in a strong military (based at home) and
    police/judicial system. Police enforcing laws that protect us
    instead of doing thinks like ticket monthly quotas and the war of
    drugs.

    In neither case have I seen this as a stable, self-sustaining
    system. You can coerce an adherence to a socialistic system by
    *forcing* redistribution thru police actions, but this breeds an >>>>>>> eventual reset. But libertarians, by their ethos, would not
    attempt to coerce self- reliance--the natural order (cold,
    hunger, etc.) does the enforcing. But if the majority *wants*
    someone to take responsibility and supply needs, they will reject >>>>>>> the libertarian minority.

    So really,both socialism and libertarianism are utopian in nature. >>>>>>>
    What do you think?

    So is ideal Communism. More so than the two above.

    No arguments from me, but we were not talking about communism, just
    whether the two systems I mentioned were utopian.

    Never gave it much thought, because in reality an utopian society is
    completely impossible given human nature.

    Ultimately that's what I'm worried about with Libertarianism, Scall.

    Who ever said the Libertarian Party of America is about an utopian
    environment?

    OK, we can limit it to the official LPA.

    I don't see them as being elected either as an executive magistrate, or
    in a legislative majority, or even a small minority, in any place larger
    than a US county. Not because it wouldn't work (if everyone else also
    agreed to adhere to LPA principals), but because it would be hard to get
    more than 20% of the vote.

    If this is accurate--and it might not be--the LPA would be an opposition party, at most.

    What am I missing?

    Based on the above, I would say you are missing nothing, save one point.
    I do believe that if the conditions and LPA candidates were right, we
    could pull a Ross Perot. That would really help improve things nationally.
    --
    ---------------
    Scall5

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Scall5@21:1/5 to jdeluise on Wed May 14 18:18:32 2025
    On 5/12/2025 9:07 PM, jdeluise wrote:
    Scall5 <[email protected]> writes:

    On 5/11/2025 8:44 PM, jdeluise wrote:
    Scall5 <[email protected]> writes:

    On 5/11/2025 10:25 AM, PeteWasLucky wrote:
    Scall5 <[email protected]> Wrote in message:r
    On 5/10/2025 6:07 PM, Sawfish wrote:> Does he look as if he has
    gained a bit of weight, like muscle?I had the match on my TV, but
    was doing other things around the house so I wasn't paying too
    much attention. I assumed the result and only watched his serve
    (because mine sucks). That said, I think you are right.--
    ---------------Scall5
    I hope you know cables companies collect tracking data?
    https://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/2024/nov/smart-tv-tracking-raises-privacy- >>>>> concerns

    Sadly yes, I am aware of this. But until we Libertarians take the oval >>>> office, nothing will change...your duopoly Demo-GOP regime is too paid >>>> off to change anything.
    And how would that change anything?  American libertarians are
    famously anti-regulation, and the companies involved would simply
    say "Hey, we're not forcing you to use our network.  If you don't
    like our surveillance, build your own network".

    The duopoly also prevents competition.

    What would be the incentive for companies to change their ways in a libertarian society?  They get economic benefits from tracking what we watch.  And the average consumer doesn't care enough to look for alternatives...

    The same as companies like Duck-Duck-Go and Thunderbird do, make privacy
    a selling point.
    --
    ---------------
    Scall5

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Scall5@21:1/5 to jdeluise on Wed May 14 22:31:42 2025
    On 5/14/2025 9:56 PM, jdeluise wrote:
    Scall5 <[email protected]> writes:

    On 5/12/2025 9:07 PM, jdeluise wrote:
    Scall5 <[email protected]> writes:

    On 5/11/2025 8:44 PM, jdeluise wrote:
    Scall5 <[email protected]> writes:

    On 5/11/2025 10:25 AM, PeteWasLucky wrote:
    Scall5 <[email protected]> Wrote in message:r
    On 5/10/2025 6:07 PM, Sawfish wrote:> Does he look as if he has >>>>>>>> gained a bit of weight, like muscle?I had the match on my TV, but >>>>>>>> was doing other things around the house so I wasn't paying too >>>>>>>> much attention. I assumed the result and only watched his serve >>>>>>>> (because mine sucks). That said, I think you are right.--
    ---------------Scall5
    I hope you know cables companies collect tracking data?
    https://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/2024/nov/smart-tv-tracking-raises-
    privacy-
    concerns

    Sadly yes, I am aware of this. But until we Libertarians take the
    oval
    office, nothing will change...your duopoly Demo-GOP regime is too
    paid
    off to change anything.
    And how would that change anything?  American libertarians are
    famously anti-regulation, and the companies involved would simply
    say "Hey, we're not forcing you to use our network.  If you don't
    like our surveillance, build your own network".

    The duopoly also prevents competition.
    What would be the incentive for companies to change their ways in a
    libertarian society?  They get economic benefits from tracking what
    we watch.  And the average consumer doesn't care enough to look for
    alternatives...

    The same as companies like Duck-Duck-Go and Thunderbird do, make
    privacy a selling point.

    Well, these are very niche products... thunderbird has a *fraction of a percent* of market share, is open-source and supported by a non-profit (Mozilla Foundation).  In any case, what does that have to do with libertarianism?  You said this issue of media companies tracking users
    could be fixed if libertarians took office. Regulations are out by definition.  So what would they do to "fix" it?

    Good gosh are you clutching at straws and ignoring my previous posts! Is
    this some type of Tesla-buying remorse that you have?
    --
    ---------------
    Scall5

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From *skriptis@21:1/5 to jdeluise on Thu May 15 07:04:51 2025
    jdeluise <[email protected]> Wrote in message:r
    Scall5 <[email protected]> writes:> On 5/14/2025 9:56 PM, jdeluise wrote:>> Scall5 <[email protected]> writes:>> >>> On 5/12/2025 9:07 PM, jdeluise wrote:>>>> Scall5 <[email protected]> writes:>>>>>>>>> On 5/11/2025 8:44 PM, jdeluise wrote:>>>>>> Scall5 <
    [email protected]> writes:>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 5/11/2025 10:25 AM, PeteWasLucky wrote:>>>>>>>> Scall5 <[email protected]> Wrote in message:r>>>>>>>>> On 5/10/2025 6:07 PM, Sawfish wrote:> Does he look as if >>>>>>>>> he has>>>>>>>>> gained a bit of weight, like
    muscle?I had the match on >>>>>>>>> my TV, but>>>>>>>>> was doing other things around the house so I wasn't >>>>>>>>> paying too>>>>>>>>> much attention. I assumed the result and only watched >>>>>>>>> his serve>>>>>>>>> (because mine sucks). That said,
    I think you are >>>>>>>>> right.-->>>>>>>>> ---------------Scall5>>>>>>>> I hope you know cables companies collect tracking data?>>>>>>>> https://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/2024/nov/smart-tv-tracking-raises->>>>>>>> privacy->>>>>>>> concerns>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sadly
    yes, I am aware of this. But until we Libertarians >>>>>>> take>>>>>>> the oval>>>>>>> office, nothing will change...your duopoly Demo-GOP regime >>>>>>> is>>>>>>> too paid>>>>>>> off to change anything.>>>>>> And how would that change anything?
    American libertarians >>>>>> are>>>>>> famously anti-regulation, and the companies involved would >>>>>> simply>>>>>> say "Hey, we're not forcing you to use our network. If you >>>>>> don't>>>>>> like our surveillance, build your own network".>>>>>>>>>>
    The duopoly also prevents competition.>>>> What would be the incentive for companies to change their >>>> ways in a>>>> libertarian society? They get economic benefits from >>>> tracking what>>>> we watch. And the average consumer doesn't care enough
    to >>>> look for>>>> alternatives...>>>>>> The same as companies like Duck-Duck-Go and Thunderbird do, >>> make>>> privacy a selling point.>> Well, these are very niche products... thunderbird has a >> *fraction>> of a percent* of market share, is open-
    source and supported by >> a>> non-profit (Mozilla Foundation). In any case, what does that >> have>> to do with libertarianism? You said this issue of media >> companies>> tracking users could be fixed if libertarians took>> office. Regulations are
    out by definition. So what would they >> do to>> "fix" it?>> Good gosh are you clutching at straws and ignoring my previous > posts!> Is this some type of Tesla-buying remorse that you have?You made the claim, now defend it. If you have no answer you
    can just admit it.



    But what's your point?

    That libertarians wouldn't be able to fix anything because according to their belief they would restrain themselves from governing at all?

    Firstly, it's stupid, since it's not even libertarianism, it's anarchism which they do not advocate.

    Secondly, it's again old you, trying to bully ie shame, coerce, and force guilt your opponent into doing things you think they should be doing based on supposed set of beliefs they hold, else they'd get a label from you for being "hypocrites"?

    You're still not tired of that?
    --




    ----Android NewsGroup Reader---- https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From *skriptis@21:1/5 to jdeluise on Thu May 15 10:42:04 2025
    jdeluise <[email protected]> Wrote in message:
    But I'm not opposed to libertarianism. Personally, I align with many of its principles and like the ideas at a surface level. But go deeper and I think it has many flaws which prevent it from being used to build or maintain strong societies at scale.
    Like communism, I think it relies on an inherent denial of some aspects of human nature to work effectively. And as we see again and again, the true believers talk big but never have any answers to the hard questions.



    I never said you were opposed, I said your shtick is boring.

    If anything, denial of humane nature is exactly what you do, trying to box every person you argue with and supposedly expose their hypocrisy or lack of consistency in their worldview. As if people are so black and white all the time

    As if that person, after you catch them being illogical or inconsistent in one issue, would then run away in shame and you'd win the argument.

    You constantly do it and it's ridiculous.



    Boohoohoo scall5 doesn't know (or won't) answer any of your petty questions and jabs directed at the concept of libertarianism?

    What is he here, a spokesman for that, or Ron Paul or Ayn Rand to prove effectiveness of his beloved system?

    Has it not occured to you, that just as you say you "align with many of the principles", the same could apply to him, roughly speaking?





    However the past post was utterly absurd, "how would they stop anything unless they regulate it" thus committing a sort of treason of the very idea?

    Omg. That's so petty.

    Of course in the real world, the libertarians would regulate stuff, everyone who's governing has to regulate. At least something?

    It's just a matter what would they choose to regulate and how, no?

    Your dream fantasy scenario of libertarianism you forced Scall to defend, would actually be anarchism, no regulation, nothing, no state etc.

    I'm not sure why would he even accept such a challenge.




    Thinking more about it, libertarianism isn't really such an extreme or theoretical or utopian concept, anarchism would be that, and absolute statism would the the same on the other side.


    To make myself clear, if libertarians could get over the idea of utopian concepts such as opposing all regulations, everywhere and at all costs, and foocs on individuals and defend individuals, and not defend ideas, if they could come out of academic
    surroundings and come into people, and would be willing to regulate, crush, harm companies and powerful entities in the name of personal freedoms, that would be the ideology I could sign up for.

    I'm sure there are plenty of such people there, but there's also another equally powerful group of theoreticians who would view and treat e.g. myself and Meta company just the same, and those are freaks.

    Until those are part of libertarianism and aren't ideologically purged, the movement has no future of practically seizing power.

    Because they offer nothing.

    People get nothing, and powerful companies and oligarchy already have what they want for most part.




    --




    ----Android NewsGroup Reader---- https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Scall5@21:1/5 to All on Thu May 15 18:29:29 2025
    On 5/15/2025 3:42 AM, *skriptis wrote:
    jdeluise <[email protected]> Wrote in message:
    But I'm not opposed to libertarianism. Personally, I align with many of its principles and like the ideas at a surface level. But go deeper and I think it has many flaws which prevent it from being used to build or maintain strong societies at scale.
    Like communism, I think it relies on an inherent denial of some aspects of human nature to work effectively. And as we see again and again, the true believers talk big but never have any answers to the hard questions.



    I never said you were opposed, I said your shtick is boring.

    If anything, denial of humane nature is exactly what you do, trying to box every person you argue with and supposedly expose their hypocrisy or lack of consistency in their worldview. As if people are so black and white all the time

    As if that person, after you catch them being illogical or inconsistent in one issue, would then run away in shame and you'd win the argument.

    You constantly do it and it's ridiculous.

    Spot on *skriptis
    --
    ---------------
    Scall5

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Scall5@21:1/5 to All on Thu May 15 18:36:02 2025
    T24gNS8xNS8yMDI1IDEwOjI3IEFNLCBQZXRlV2FzTHVja3kgd3JvdGU6DQo+IFNjYWxsNSA8 bm9zcGFtQGhvbWUubmV0PiBXcm90ZSBpbiBtZXNzYWdlOnINCj4+IE9uIDUvMTQvMjAyNSAx MDoyNCBBTSwgU2F3ZmlzaCB3cm90ZTo+IE9uIDUvMTMvMjUgNzoxMyBQTSwgU2NhbGw1IHdy b3RlOj4+IE9uIDUvMTIvMjAyNSA4OjQzIFBNLCBTYXdmaXNoIHdyb3RlOj4+PiBPbiA1LzEy LzI1IDY6MjIgUE0sIFNjYWxsNSB3cm90ZTo+Pj4+IE9uIDUvMTIvMjAyNSA4OjAwIFBNLCBT YXdmaXNoIHdyb3RlOj4+Pj4+IE9uIDUvMTIvMjUgNDo0NSBQTSwgU2NhbGw1IHdyb3RlOj4+ Pj4+PiBPbiA1LzExLzIwMjUgOTowNCBQTSwgU2F3ZmlzaCB3cm90ZTo+Pj4+Pj4+IE9uIDUv MTEvMjUgNDo1NyBQTSwgU2NhbGw1IHdyb3RlOj4+Pj4+Pj4+IE9uIDUvMTEvMjAyNSAxMDoy NSBBTSwgUGV0ZVdhc0x1Y2t5IHdyb3RlOj4+Pj4+Pj4+PiBTY2FsbDUgPG5vc3BhbUBob21l Lm5ldD4gV3JvdGUgaW4gbWVzc2FnZTpyPj4+Pj4+Pj4+PiBPbiA1LzEwLzIwMjUgNjowNyBQ TSwgU2F3ZmlzaCB3cm90ZTo+IERvZXMgaGUgbG9vayBhcyBpZiBoZSA+Pj4+Pj4+Pj4+IGhh cyBnYWluZWQgYSBiaXQgb2Ygd2VpZ2h0LCBsaWtlIG11c2NsZT9JIGhhZCB0aGUgbWF0Y2gg b24gbXkgPj4+Pj4+Pj4+PiBUViwgYnV0IHdhcyBkb2luZyBvdGhlciB0aGluZ3MgYXJvdW5k IHRoZSBob3VzZSBzbyBJIHdhc24ndCA+Pj4+Pj4+Pj4+IHBheWluZyB0b28gbXVjaCBhdHRl bnRpb24uIEkgYXNzdW1lZCB0aGUgcmVzdWx0IGFuZCBvbmx5ID4+Pj4+Pj4+Pj4gd2F0Y2hl ZCBoaXMgc2VydmUgKGJlY2F1c2UgbWluZSBzdWNrcykuIFRoYXQgc2FpZCwgSSB0aGluayB5 b3UgPj4+Pj4+Pj4+PiBhcmUgcmlnaHQuLS0gLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tU2NhbGw1Pj4+Pj4+ Pj4+Pj4+Pj4+Pj4+IEkgaG9wZSB5b3Uga25vdyBjYWJsZXMgY29tcGFuaWVzIGNvbGxlY3Qg dHJhY2tpbmcgZGF0YT8+Pj4+Pj4+Pj4+Pj4+Pj4+Pj4gaHR0cHM6Ly93d3cudWNsLmFjLnVr L25ld3MvMjAyNC9ub3Yvc21hcnQtdHYtdHJhY2tpbmctcmFpc2VzLSA+Pj4+Pj4+Pj4gcHJp dmFjeS0gY29uY2VybnM+Pj4+Pj4+Pj4+Pj4+Pj4+IFNhZGx5IHllcywgSSBhbSBhd2FyZSBv ZiB0aGlzLiBCdXQgdW50aWwgd2UgTGliZXJ0YXJpYW5zIHRha2UgPj4+Pj4+Pj4gdGhlIG92 YWwgb2ZmaWNlLCBub3RoaW5nIHdpbGwgY2hhbmdlLi4ueW91ciBkdW9wb2x5IERlbW8tR09Q ID4+Pj4+Pj4+IHJlZ2ltZSBpcyB0b28gcGFpZCBvZmYgdG8gY2hhbmdlIGFueXRoaW5nLj4+ Pj4+Pj4+Pj4+Pj4+IE5vdyBJIGFtIGFza2luZyB0aGlzIGhvbmVzdGx5LCBTY2FsbCwgYW5k IEknZCBiZSB3aWxsaW5nIHRvIGNhcnJ5ID4+Pj4+Pj4gb24gYSB0aG9yb3VnaCBjb252ZXJz aW9uIHZpYSBlbWFpbCBvciBzb21ldGhpbmcgYmVjYXVzZSBwZW9wbGUgPj4+Pj4+PiBsaWtl IGhvcHBpbmcgb24gYW55dGhpbmcgdGhleSBjYW4gdG8gbWFrZSBvbmUgbG9vayBiYWQsIGJ1 dCBhcyA+Pj4+Pj4+IG11Y2ggYXMgSSBhZG1pcmUgdGhlIHRlbmV0cyBvZiBsaWJlcnRhcmlh bmlzbSwgSSBjYW4gZW52aXNpb24gTk8gPj4+Pj4+PiBzY2VuYXJpbyBpbiB3aGljaCB0aGV5 IGV2ZXIgaGF2ZSBtYWpvciBwb2xpdGljYWwgcG93ZXIgYXQgZXZlbiA+Pj4+Pj4+IHRoZSBz dGF0ZSBsZXZlbCwgbGV0IGFsb25lIHRoZSBuYXRpb25hbCBsZXZlbC4gSGVyZSdzIHdoeS4u Lj4+Pj4+Pj4+Pj4+Pj4+IExpa2Ugc29jaWFsaXNtLCB3aGljaCBpbiBvcmRlciB0byB3b3Jr LCB0aGUgdmFzdCBtYWpvcml0eSBoYXMgdG8gPj4+Pj4+PiBiZSBnZW5lcm91cyBhbmQgdHJ1 c3RpbmcsIHdpdGggbm8gc2lnbmlmaWNhbnQgY2hlYXRpbmcsID4+Pj4+Pj4gbGliZXJ0YXJp YW5pc20gcmVxdWlyZXMgdGhlIHZhc3QgbWFqb3JpdHkgaGFzIHRvIGJlIHJlc3BvbnNpYmxl ID4+Pj4+Pj4gZm9yIHRoZW1zZWx2ZXMgYW5kIHNlbGYgbW90aXZhdGVkLj4+Pj4+Pj4+Pj4+ PiBUcnVlLiBCdXQgSSBhbHNvIGJlbGlldmUgaW4gYSBzdHJvbmcgbWlsaXRhcnkgKGJhc2Vk IGF0IGhvbWUpIGFuZCA+Pj4+Pj4gcG9saWNlL2p1ZGljaWFsIHN5c3RlbS4gUG9saWNlIGVu Zm9yY2luZyBsYXdzIHRoYXQgcHJvdGVjdCB1cyA+Pj4+Pj4gaW5zdGVhZCBvZiBkb2luZyB0 aGlua3MgbGlrZSB0aWNrZXQgbW9udGhseSBxdW90YXMgYW5kIHRoZSB3YXIgb2YgPj4+Pj4+ IGRydWdzLj4+Pj4+Pj4+Pj4+Pj4gSW4gbmVpdGhlciBjYXNlIGhhdmUgSSBzZWVuIHRoaXMg YXMgYSBzdGFibGUsIHNlbGYtc3VzdGFpbmluZyA+Pj4+Pj4+IHN5c3RlbS4gWW91IGNhbiBj b2VyY2UgYW4gYWRoZXJlbmNlIHRvIGEgc29jaWFsaXN0aWMgc3lzdGVtIGJ5ID4+Pj4+Pj4g KmZvcmNpbmcqIHJlZGlzdHJpYnV0aW9uIHRocnUgcG9saWNlIGFjdGlvbnMsIGJ1dCB0aGlz IGJyZWVkcyBhbiA+Pj4+Pj4+IGV2ZW50dWFsIHJlc2V0LiBCdXQgbGliZXJ0YXJpYW5zLCBi eSB0aGVpciBldGhvcywgd291bGQgbm90ID4+Pj4+Pj4gYXR0ZW1wdCB0byBjb2VyY2Ugc2Vs Zi0gcmVsaWFuY2UtLXRoZSBuYXR1cmFsIG9yZGVyIChjb2xkLCA+Pj4+Pj4+IGh1bmdlciwg ZXRjLikgZG9lcyB0aGUgZW5mb3JjaW5nLiBCdXQgaWYgdGhlIG1ham9yaXR5ICp3YW50cyog Pj4+Pj4+PiBzb21lb25lIHRvIHRha2UgcmVzcG9uc2liaWxpdHkgYW5kIHN1cHBseSBuZWVk cywgdGhleSB3aWxsIHJlamVjdCA+Pj4+Pj4+IHRoZSBsaWJlcnRhcmlhbiBtaW5vcml0eS4+ Pj4+Pj4+Pj4+Pj4+PiBTbyByZWFsbHksYm90aCBzb2NpYWxpc20gYW5kIGxpYmVydGFyaWFu aXNtIGFyZSB1dG9waWFuIGluIG5hdHVyZS4+Pj4+Pj4+Pj4+Pj4+PiBXaGF0IGRvIHlvdSB0 aGluaz8+Pj4+Pj4+Pj4+Pj4gU28gaXMgaWRlYWwgQ29tbXVuaXNtLiBNb3JlIHNvIHRoYW4g dGhlIHR3byBhYm92ZS4+Pj4+Pj4+Pj4+IE5vIGFyZ3VtZW50cyBmcm9tIG1lLCBidXQgd2Ug d2VyZSBub3QgdGFsa2luZyBhYm91dCBjb21tdW5pc20sIGp1c3QgPj4+Pj4gd2hldGhlciB0 aGUgdHdvIHN5c3RlbXMgSSBtZW50aW9uZWQgd2VyZSB1dG9waWFuLj4+Pj4+Pj4+IE5ldmVy IGdhdmUgaXQgbXVjaCB0aG91Z2h0LCBiZWNhdXNlIGluIHJlYWxpdHkgYW4gdXRvcGlhbiBz b2NpZXR5IGlzID4+Pj4gY29tcGxldGVseSBpbXBvc3NpYmxlIGdpdmVuIGh1bWFuIG5hdHVy ZS4+Pj4+Pj4gVWx0aW1hdGVseSB0aGF0J3Mgd2hhdCBJJ20gd29ycmllZCBhYm91dCB3aXRo IExpYmVydGFyaWFuaXNtLCBTY2FsbC4+Pj4+IFdobyBldmVyIHNhaWQgdGhlIExpYmVydGFy aWFuIFBhcnR5IG9mIEFtZXJpY2EgaXMgYWJvdXQgYW4gdXRvcGlhbiA+PiBlbnZpcm9ubWVu dD8+ID4gT0ssIHdlIGNhbiBsaW1pdCBpdCB0byB0aGUgb2ZmaWNpYWwgTFBBLj4gPiBJIGRv bid0IHNlZSB0aGVtIGFzIGJlaW5nIGVsZWN0ZWQgZWl0aGVyIGFzIGFuIGV4ZWN1dGl2ZSBt YWdpc3RyYXRlLCBvciA+IGluIGEgbGVnaXNsYXRpdmUgbWFqb3JpdHksIG9yIGV2ZW4gYSBz bWFsbCBtaW5vcml0eSwgaW4gYW55IHBsYWNlIGxhcmdlciA+IHRoYW4gYSBVUyBjb3VudHku IE5vdCBiZWNhdXNlIGl0IHdvdWxkbid0IHdvcmsgKGlmIGV2ZXJ5b25lIGVsc2UgYWxzbyA+ IGFncmVlZCB0byBhZGhlcmUgdG8gTFBBIHByaW5jaXBhbHMpLCBidXQgYmVjYXVzZSBpdCB3 b3VsZCBiZSBoYXJkIHRvIGdldCA+IG1vcmUgdGhhbiAyMCUgb2YgdGhlIHZvdGUuPiA+IElm IHRoaXMgaXMgYWNjdXJhdGUtLWFuZCBpdCBtaWdodCBub3QgYmUtLXRoZSBMUEEgd291bGQg YmUgYW4gb3Bwb3NpdGlvbiA+IHBhcnR5LCBhdCBtb3N0Lj4gPiBXaGF0IGFtIEkgbWlzc2lu Zz9CYXNlZCBvbiB0aGUgYWJvdmUsIEkgd291bGQgc2F5IHlvdSBhcmUgbWlzc2luZyBub3Ro aW5nLCBzYXZlIG9uZSBwb2ludC4gSSBkbyBiZWxpZXZlIHRoYXQgaWYgdGhlIGNvbmRpdGlv bnMgYW5kIExQQSBjYW5kaWRhdGVzIHdlcmUgcmlnaHQsIHdlIGNvdWxkIHB1bGwgYSBSb3Nz IFBlcm90LiBUaGF0IHdvdWxkIHJlYWxseSBoZWxwIGltcHJvdmUgdGhpbmdzIG5hdGlvbmFs bHkuLS0gLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tU2NhbGw1DQo+IA0KPiBIb25lc3RseSBJIHRyeSB0byBy ZXN0cmFpbiBteXNlbGYgYXMgbXVjaCBhcyBJIGNhbiBidXQgc2VyaW91c2x5DQo+ICAgYW5k IHBhaW5mdWxseSBJIGNhbid0IGZpZ3VyZSBvdXQgaG93IHlvdSBmYWlsIHRvIHNlZSB0aGUg ZnVsbA0KPiAgIHBpY3R1cmUuIFlvdSBndXlzIGNhbid0IGlzb2xhdGUgeW91cnNlbHZlcyBv biBzb21lIHJlbW90ZSBpc2xhbmQNCj4gICB0byBlc3RhYmxpc2ggeW91ciBvd24gcG9saWNp ZXMgYW5kIHRoZW4gd2FpdCBmb3IgdGhlIG1vbmV5LA0KPiAgIHNoaXBzLCBtZXJjaGFuZGlz ZSB0byBjb21lIHRvIHlvdXIgcGVvcGxlIHdpdGhvdXQgYW55IGluZmx1ZW5jZQ0KPiAgIG9u IHlvdXIgZHJlYW0gcG9saWNpZXMuIEkgZG9uJ3Qga25vdyB3aHkgbW9ybW9uIGNvbW11bml0 aWVzIGNvbWUNCj4gICB0byBteSBtaW5kIHdoZW4gSSByZWFkIGFueSBvZiBTY2FsbDUgcG9z dC4NCj4gSSBhbSBzdXJlIFNjYWxsNSBldm9sdmVkIGEgbG90IGZyb20gU2NhbGwxIGJ1dCBJ IGRvbid0IHNlZSBpdA0KPiAgIHdvcmtpbmcgb3IgcHJhY3RpY2FsIGV2ZW4gaWYgb3VyIGxp dmVzIGdvdCBleHRlbmRlZCB0byBkaXNjdXNzDQo+ICAgdGhpcyB3aXRoIFNjYWxsOTkuDQoN CkFzIG9uZSBmcmF0IGV4ZWMgc2FpZCB0byB0aGUgb3RoZXIgZXhlYyBpbiAiUmV2ZW5nZSBv ZiB0aGUgTmVyZHMiOyAiVGhpcyANCmlzIHNvbWUgZ29vZCBzaGl0LiINCi0tIA0KLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tDQpTY2FsbDUNCg==

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From *skriptis@21:1/5 to jdeluise on Fri May 16 06:11:32 2025
    jdeluise <[email protected]> Wrote in message:
    You've said nothing of substance, scal. I've long suspected that for you being libertarian is merely way to express your individuality and feel good about yourself. But, ultimately you don't know much about it. Once you're done reciting the party
    line talking points, you've got nothing else. I felt this way last year when you refused to answer pretty basic questions about your own views on libertarianism. This exchange hasn't changed my mind at all.



    More shaming attempts, see what you constantly do?


    In the end, what's the point, he has to write a thesis on his views for you to accept them?


    --




    ----Android NewsGroup Reader---- https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Scall5@21:1/5 to All on Fri May 16 18:28:29 2025
    On 5/15/2025 11:11 PM, *skriptis wrote:
    jdeluise <[email protected]> Wrote in message:
    You've said nothing of substance, scal. I've long suspected that for you being libertarian is merely way to express your individuality and feel good about yourself. But, ultimately you don't know much about it. Once you're done reciting the party
    line talking points, you've got nothing else. I felt this way last year when you refused to answer pretty basic questions about your own views on libertarianism. This exchange hasn't changed my mind at all.



    More shaming attempts, see what you constantly do?


    In the end, what's the point, he has to write a thesis on his views for you to accept them?

    Think jd would give me a grant if I wrote a thesis?
    --
    ---------------
    Scall5

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Scall5@21:1/5 to jdeluise on Fri May 16 19:20:18 2025
    On 5/14/2025 11:09 PM, jdeluise wrote:
    Scall5 <[email protected]> writes:

    On 5/14/2025 9:56 PM, jdeluise wrote:
    Scall5 <[email protected]> writes:

    On 5/12/2025 9:07 PM, jdeluise wrote:
    Scall5 <[email protected]> writes:

    On 5/11/2025 8:44 PM, jdeluise wrote:
    Scall5 <[email protected]> writes:

    On 5/11/2025 10:25 AM, PeteWasLucky wrote:
    Scall5 <[email protected]> Wrote in message:r
    On 5/10/2025 6:07 PM, Sawfish wrote:> Does he look as if he has >>>>>>>>>> gained a bit of weight, like muscle?I had the match on my TV, but >>>>>>>>>> was doing other things around the house so I wasn't paying too >>>>>>>>>> much attention. I assumed the result and only watched his serve >>>>>>>>>> (because mine sucks). That said, I think you are right.--
    ---------------Scall5
    I hope you know cables companies collect tracking data?
    https://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/2024/nov/smart-tv-tracking-raises- >>>>>>>>> privacy-
    concerns

    Sadly yes, I am aware of this. But until we Libertarians take
    the oval
    office, nothing will change...your duopoly Demo-GOP regime is
    too paid
    off to change anything.
    And how would that change anything?  American libertarians are
    famously anti-regulation, and the companies involved would simply >>>>>>> say "Hey, we're not forcing you to use our network.  If you don't >>>>>>> like our surveillance, build your own network".

    The duopoly also prevents competition.
    What would be the incentive for companies to change their ways in a
    libertarian society?  They get economic benefits from tracking what >>>>> we watch.  And the average consumer doesn't care enough to look for >>>>> alternatives...

    The same as companies like Duck-Duck-Go and Thunderbird do, make
    privacy a selling point.
    Well, these are very niche products... thunderbird has a *fraction
    of a percent* of market share, is open-source and supported by a
    non-profit (Mozilla Foundation).  In any case, what does that have
    to do with libertarianism?  You said this issue of media companies
    tracking users could be fixed if libertarians took
    office. Regulations are out by definition.  So what would they do to
    "fix" it?

    Good gosh are you clutching at straws and ignoring my previous posts!
    Is this some type of Tesla-buying remorse that you have?

    You made the claim, now defend it.  If you have no answer you can just
    admit it.

    Like I said about buyer's having more opportunities to buy/use privacy-promoting software/hardware/websites. It would create more
    competition. Based on COVID recent history, you can clearly see how
    Twitter (now X), Facebook, and Google proved they are arms of the state.
    --
    ---------------
    Scall5

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From =?UTF-8?Q?Pelle_Svansl=C3=B6s?=@21:1/5 to All on Sat May 17 14:47:02 2025
    On 17.5.2025 14.33, *skriptis wrote:
    Scall5 <[email protected]> Wrote in message:
    Like I said about buyer's having more opportunities to buy/use privacy-promoting software/hardware/websites. It would create more competition. Based on COVID recent history, you can clearly see how Twitter (now X), Facebook, and Google proved they are
    arms of the state.



    This is where we probably wouldn't agree for long term solution.


    Yes, they're arms of the state, but the ultimate solution wouldn't be to cut those arms, or grow gazillion new arms "so that you have many options", even though it would alleviate the problems, the other practical solution is that you are the state.

    That you're confident that your people, like-minded people and your kinship, run the state so at that point, arms won't bother you.

    The Black Knight had an equally cavalier attitude to limbs.

    --
    "And off they went, from here to there,
    The bear, the bear, and the maiden fair"
    -- Traditional

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From *skriptis@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Sat May 17 13:33:44 2025
    Scall5 <[email protected]> Wrote in message:
    Like I said about buyer's having more opportunities to buy/use privacy-promoting software/hardware/websites. It would create more competition. Based on COVID recent history, you can clearly see how Twitter (now X), Facebook, and Google proved they are
    arms of the state.



    This is where we probably wouldn't agree for long term solution.


    Yes, they're arms of the state, but the ultimate solution wouldn't be to cut those arms, or grow gazillion new arms "so that you have many options", even though it would alleviate the problems, the other practical solution is that you are the state.

    That you're confident that your people, like-minded people and your kinship, run the state so at that point, arms won't bother you.




    --




    ----Android NewsGroup Reader---- https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Scall5@21:1/5 to All on Sat May 17 08:40:09 2025
    On 5/17/2025 6:33 AM, *skriptis wrote:
    Scall5 <[email protected]> Wrote in message:
    Like I said about buyer's having more opportunities to buy/use privacy-promoting software/hardware/websites. It would create more competition. Based on COVID recent history, you can clearly see how Twitter (now X), Facebook, and Google proved they are
    arms of the state.



    This is where we probably wouldn't agree for long term solution.


    Yes, they're arms of the state, but the ultimate solution wouldn't be to cut those arms, or grow gazillion new arms "so that you have many options", even though it would alleviate the problems, the other practical solution is that you are the state.

    That you're confident that your people, like-minded people and your kinship, run the state so at that point, arms won't bother you.

    Yep, we will simply have to "agree to disagree" on that.
    --
    ---------------
    Scall5

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)