This just in: The Trump administration isn’t trustworthy and will break deals if and when they feel like it to suit their own interests, whatever the living fuck they may be and however pointless they may be.

That fact that leaders worldwide keep being shocked by this is honestly the actual shocking thing.

You don’t have to. Here, I’ll tell you: It’s when your asshole sprouts another asshole.

As someone who really loves pickles on burgers and chicken sandwiches: I approve this message and indeed want an assertive gal like her around.

It’s definitely cooler that way, but also maybe in that regard “Cancer” means they were clawed to death by a giant crab?

My votes go for:

• Prest to Death
• Fistula
• Livergrown
• Made Away With Themselves
• Murthered

…but I mean that’s the band name “Cancer, and Wolf”

Seriously though, going over a reddit threat this was on, looks like “Wolf” referred to a fast-growing tumor that “ate you like a wolf” or somesuch.

https://old.reddit.com/r/coolguides/comments/f3c2hi/cause_of_deaths_in_london_in_1632/hkh904m/

Hovering about $113.50 now.

If you think blocking access to knowledge about sexuality, atheism, or drugs is actually protecting children and not about a controlling and unpopular law I don’t know what to tell you. Because it’s clearly not actually intended to protect children as much as it is to block inconvenient information to help indoctrinate children to be compliant and unquestioning.

He is indeed staring.

No, they are censorship laws aimed at preventing young people from accessing certain types of information that specific groups don’t want young people learning about, such as their sexuality, concepts like atheism, and safety information regarding drugs.

Let’s be absolutely clear here: The explosion of people being comfortable coming out as some stripe of LGBTQ+ has everything to do with an open internet where youth were not restricted from finding out about information related to how they felt inside. Instead of being made to feel like strangers in their own skin, with a world telling them that people like them didn’t or shouldn’t exist, they instead found community and self-love through internet forums and information which allowed them to pursue full, healthy lives as adults.

This “protect the children” malarkey is one more way for the religious groups who oppose LGBTQ+ culture to “protect the children” by restricting access to this kind of information, reducing their ability to find it in their formative years, in the name of protecting them while actually stunting their personal growth.

It extends beyond sexuality as well, although that is the most obvious since many religions are deeply censorious regarding sex.

It also affects subjects like atheism, as the various religious cultures generally do not want people contemplating the idea that there isn’t a god, especially not while they’re young, they want you long indoctrinated into belief before you can explore different ideas.

Further, when I was a kid in the 80s and 90s, everything I knew about drugs was literally old wives tales meant to scare kids away from drugs, and then the internet came around and suddenly there was a boom of actual, verifiable scientific information about drugs so if you wanted to experiment with drugs, you knew what you were getting into. I once had a conversation with a girlfriend who was a bit older than me about her experiences with LSD as a teen, and she admitted that at the time she really didn’t understand on any scientific level what was happening or what the nature of hallucination was, she just knew she was having fun and seeing crazy shit.

This is a backdoor to restricting access to important information that youth need to have access to for making healthy decisions for themselves sexually, religiously, and in terms of what substances they put in their bodies.

The birth of the internet gave us a beautiful period where people could grow up with access to accurate, verifiable, worthwhile information that helped them navigate and understand the world they were growing up in and who they were within that world.

This kind of legislation intends to snuff out that openness and accessibility which led to increased openness and acceptance of LGBTQ+, atheism, and safe drug use (including the understanding that some illegal drugs like marijuana and LSD are probably safer than legal drugs like alcohol and tobacco).

Actually, when being grilled by congress, Mark Zuckerberg proposed exactly this solution: OS level age verification.

It’s actually being pushed by social media companies to take the heat and responsibility off of them.

I push people away and scare people off because my fear of rejection makes me want to put everything unappealing about me on display so people leave before I inevitably get attached. If they stick around after hearing how awful I am, maybe they won’t leave me all alone like I am now.

Oh I guess those guys from the Pirate Bay are in the clear and we can undo their prison sentences then!

1. Copyright should be a much shorter, more reasonable length, and then this whole issue would be a moot point because there would more than enough in the public domain for the corporations to train their AI while also not restricting access to individuals and open source projects to do the same.

2. The real issue at hand is that corporations like Facebook have literally billions at their disposal to fight this in court. The Pirate Bay admins did not, despite being charged with profiting wildly off their media sharing site. Facebook has arguably made so much more off of their AI offerings than the admins of the tiny Pirate Bay team could have dreamed of. For fucks sake Peter Sunde’s username was “brokep” which I always assumed stood for “Broke Peter” as in “Peter has no money.”

3. We have yet to see if the courts in the USA will make this a hypocritical outcome where small players like the Pirate Bay who legitimately did not make that much money went to prison, Aaron Schwartz was threatened with life in prison and committed suicide, but somehow it will be okay for giant corporations to do because they made so much money doing it. It’s definitely possible, America feels like a country where as long as you do the crime big enough, it stops being treated as a crime and instead people pat you on the back and reward for criming so hard you broke the justice system and instead it just gets labeled “good business sense.”

Well for one she’s a physicist, not a biologist or psychologist, and you can find plenty of threads online where people are pointing out that she is cherry picking her data, and seems to pretend that numerous other studies on the subject simply don’t exist.

Also, the person I originally responded to claimed:

She does it for the field is theoretical physics, the field she knows.

Well, shocker, she totally does it for other shit she has no relevant background in, like transgender studies, and feels like she has all the knowledge at her fingertips while conveniently ignoring other research.

I don’t need to watch it to understand that conflating academia with communism is fuck-stupid and that privatizing science is a fuck-stupid solution to academia’s very real problems.

Also other folks here are pointing out she rejects science she doesn’t like when it comes to transgender science, for example.

As I said elsewhere, she’s bringing real “you’re not wrong, you’re just an asshole” energy.

Oh so she’s a TERF, too? That tracks…

Right, academia has a whole boatload of problems, but her proposed solutions are a non-starter for for anyone with a brain

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=htb_n7ok9AU

Here’s her “Academia is Communism” video.

https://posthillpress.com/book/the-war-on-science-thirty-nine-renowned-scientists-and-scholars-speak-out-about-current-threats-to-free-speech-open-inquiry-and-the-scientific-process

Here’s where the pull quote she made for the War on Science book is listed.

From assaults on merit-based hiring to the policing of language and replacing well-established, disciplinary scholarship by ideological mantras, current science and scholarship is under threat throughout western institutions. As this group of prominent scholars ranging across many different disciplines and political leanings detail, the very future of free inquiry and scientific progress is at risk. Many who have spoken up against this threat have lost their positions, and a climate of fear has arisen that strikes at the heart of modern education and research. Banding together to finally speak out, this brave and unprecedented group of scholars issues a clarion call for change.

“Higher education isn’t what it used to be. Cancel Culture and DEI have caused many to keep their mouths shut. Not so the authors of this book. This collection of essays tells of threats to open inquiry, free speech, and the scientific process itself. A much-needed book.”

—Sabine Hossenfelder, Physicist and Author of Existential Physics: A Scientist’s Guide to Life’s Biggest Questions

And hey, Richard Dawkins was good at presenting science to people, too. Didn’t mean he wasn’t and isn’t also an asshole with some real stupid ideas like when he proposed we shouldn’t let children read fiction because they may not be able to tell the difference between reality and fantasy.

I mean, it sounds like she’s got some valid critiques in respect to her own field of study, but her offered solutions of privatization are pretty off the mark. She also really can’t speak for other fields of study but apparently feels comfortable doing so.

She’s bringing real “You’re not wrong, Walter. You’re just an asshole.” energy.