Schadrach

Don’t worry, Trump is working hard to bring it back! Make Waterways Burn Again!

The big difference being that in the US you do not have a constitutional right to pop corn.

See, she belongs firmly on one of the lists of people Trump prefers to appoint:

1. Republicans with significant media presence, especially social media. Ideally ones who treat themselves like a brand.
2. People plausibly accused of being Russian assets.
3. Whoever wrote the relevant section of Project 2025.

The last one is totally by chance of course, since Trump doesn’t support Project 2025 and knows nothing about it and all. /s

Maybe she’s both?

f you can’t see everyone as equal then you are beneath us and need to be dealt with in the most severe method possible.

Does that mean you need to be dealt with in the most severe method possible, after all if you see them as beneath you then you clearly can’t see everyone as equal, by definition?

I actually know someone this happened to. Dad came home and midway through changing got a call from his father in law and went to go help him, leaving his concealed carry weapon on the nightstand. Toddler son got a hold of it and killed himself. On the day before his slightly older sister’s birthday.

Kid was buried on the property, within sight of the front porch. Mom demanded that and then couldn’t handle being there so they moved in with her folks for the next couple of years, and their living room was practically a shrine to the kid.

In parallel to what Hawk wrote, AI image generation is similar. The idea is that through training you essentially produce an equation (really a bunch of weighted nodes, but functionally they boil down to a complicated equation) that can recognize a thing (say dogs), and can measure the likelihood any given image contains dogs.

If you run this equation backwards, it can take any image and show you how to make it look more like dogs. Do this for other categories of things. Now you ask for a dog lying in front of a doghouse chewing on a bone, it generates some white noise (think “snow” on an old TV) and ask the math to make it look maximally like a dog, doghouse, bone and chewing at the same time, possibly repeating a few times until the results don’t get much more dog, doghouse, bone or chewing on another pass, and that’s your generated image.

The reason they have trouble with things like hands is because we have pictures of all kinds of hands at all kinds of scales in all kinds of positions and the model doesn’t have actual hands to compare to, just thousands upon thousands of pictures that say they contain hands to try figure out what a hand even is from statistical analysis of examples.

LLMs do something similar, but with words. They have a huge number of examples of writing, many of them tagged with descriptors, and are essentially piecing together an equation for what language looks like from statistical analysis of examples. The technique used for LLMs will never be anything more than a sufficiently advanced Chinese Room, not without serious alterations. That however doesn’t mean it can’t be useful.

For example, one could hypothetically amass a bunch of anonymized medical imaging including confirmed diagnoses and a bunch of healthy imaging and train a machine learning model to identify signs of disease and put priority flags and notes about detected potential diseases on the images to help expedite treatment when needed. After it’s seen a few thousand times as many images as a real medical professional will see in their entire career it would even likely be more accurate than humans.

you can’t say it’s OK to cut off my hand because once it’s off, it’s no longer attached to me.

No, but I can say that if you ask me to remove your hand, what happens to the hand after it is removed is not a matter of your bodily autonomy.

the whole point of the entire conversation is the control over women, and the unborn is just a pretense.

And I’m literally arguing that the pro-choice side isn’t being honest about it either, that claiming it’s exclusively about bodily autonomy is also just pretense. Notice that I’m suggesting a hypothetical where bodily autonomy and still having the child are detached from each other, where ending the pregnancy doesn’t mean you don’t still end up with a baby to deal with and you instead keep trying to find a way to make that still about bodily autonomy because the alternative is admitting that to an extent it isn’t because that idea is uncomfortable to grapple with.

it’s also legal to marry children in some states

Yeah, California do be like that (seriously, CA has no minimum age of marriage if you can get a judge to sign off on it). Until 2022 MA had no hard minimum and only required parental consent to marry under 18. Most other states with “child marriage” are something like hard minimum of 16 or 17 and requires sign off from parents, a judge, or both for marriage under 18 (likewise in most states the age of consent is 16).

Actually surprised no enterprising pedophile with enough money to bribe someone has tried marrying a very young child in CA (or until 2022 MA) then traveling to somewhere like NM where marriage is an exception to age of consent.

99942 Apophis is scheduled to come visit for a near pass on Friday, April 13, 2029. It briefly held the highest rating of any object ever on the Torino scale when it was discovered 20 years ago. Another asteroid detected just last week is currently a Torino 3 but also won’t be here for 7 years and only has a 1.4% chance of striking Earth based on current observations.

Of course it is, what else would you expect from the controlled opposition party?

I don’t think your example removes the woman from the equation. the transfer is still related to bodily autonomy. the fetus is part of the mother,

It’s not “part of the mother” once it is no longer physically tethered to her, if it’s no longer physically attached to her body why would bodily autonomy be relevant? Like, the entire point is to separate bodily autonomy from being made responsible for a child, because it demonstrates that the argument isn’t really about bodily autonomy, not entirely.

To throw you another loop along these lines - if something that was part of your body remains part of your body once removed and you keep overriding power over what happens to it afterward would that mean after you donate blood you have absolute power over who is allowed to receive that blood henceforth?

and forcing someone to transfer it and keep it alive is still against that.

Once it’s not attached to her body and is therefore not a matter of bodily autonomy, why shouldn’t she be compelled to provide for it’s continued existence whether or not she wants the child? Maybe threaten her with jail if she doesn’t comply with payments to keep the gestation going.

you can’t force me to ejaculate into a cup, what makes it ok to force someone to transfer their fetus anywhere?

In this hypothetical no one is forcing anyone to transfer their fetus, they can carry the pregnancy or terminate the pregnancy as is their preference but what they can’t do is terminate the pregnancy and then kill the fetus, instead a terminated pregnancy doesn’t free you of the future child. Ending a pregnancy in this hypothetical doesn’t end the future responsibility for a child, which is why it’s illustrative of how it’s not entirely about bodily autonomy, not really.

And for a fun question, what do you think happens legally if you ejaculate somewhere (anywhere other than a vagina is fine for this hypothetical) and someone retrieves that sperm and manages to inseminate themselves with it against your will or even knowledge? I’ll give you a hint, it involves future responsibility for any resulting child. Same situation as applies for reproductive coercion, sexual assault and statutory rape for a person who produces the smaller reproductive cell (to use the US federal government approved phrasing).

why do pro choice people have to make the fucking worst arguments?

It’s an ongoing struggle and essentially everybody hates you when you point out just how many pro-choice arguments are either just fucking dumb and ineffective or try to argue for being pro-choice as an application of a broader principle that doesn’t get treated as half as important in most other cases where it’s application would be controversial.

It’s even worse when you yourself are pro-choice and it’s just pointing out that bad or inconsistent arguments are bad or inconsistent.

there’s one argument here: freedom over your own body. you shouldn’t be legally forced to undergo an operation for someone else’s benefit. yes even if the fetus is a person, it’s viable, can feel pain, whatever. there’s literally no other situation where that is even remotely legal.

Freedom over your own body is really only sold as some kind of highest principle specifically in pro-choice arguments and blood and tissue donations. Usually the counter arguments rely on the notion that there’s a point where you’ve agreed to the thing and can’t demand it be undone (you can’t for example donate a kidney and then demand it back), which for pregnancy brings it back around to things like whether or not a human being in the earliest stages of its life counts as a person that you’ve presumably consented to create by engaging in the reproductive act.

Also, by all appearances the line for when the bodily autonomy argument is seen as acceptable is specifically when the process involved is wholly biological - the moment it can be abstracted from that even a little bit suddenly bodily autonomy no longer applies.

A fun hypothetical to throw out there is this - artificial wombs are currently in development for agricultural use because they could potentially increase yields and reduce emissions (once the tech is mature, it’s hypothetically cheaper and cleaner to run an artificial womb than maintain a whole cow per head of beef per season). This tech could probably be adapted for human use. So, in a hypothetical where artificial wombs are perfected for human use, would you support banning abortion in favor of transplanting to an artificial womb if the prognosis for the woman was the same, knowing that she will of course be responsible for the resulting child? If no, are you really arguing from bodily autonomy since the part involving the woman’s body has been removed from the equation?

Applies in this case without the /s. He got shot while resisting arrest while armed, odds are had he complied (and thus not resisted arrest) he probably wouldn’t have been shot.

I don’t know the exact details here, but if it’s like previous police shootings, there was probably a less violent solution.

Armed man resisting arrest? Maybe, but presuming “just let him go” doesn’t count all of them are going to be considerably more dangerous for the officer and any bystanders.

Valuing family is “pretend”.

https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/06/03/asches-to-asches/

Like?

You don’t name them or they’re aren’t an actual issue

The biggest and most obvious is that ID isn’t available to literally everyone who can legally vote without cost to the end user of any kind, and as a consequence requiring such an ID is tantamount to a poll tax. Federal ID that’s fully subsidized would be the easiest solution, and if done right you could even optionally fold most state ID systems into a federal one with things like being licensed to drive being an endorsement on the federal ID.

Notably, the same people who demand photo ID to vote also tend to be the people terrified of a federal ID as a concept.

or allow you to prove your identity with things like bank statements and utility bills, or just somebody else who can vouch for you.

My state’s voter ID allows all of those things and more (including the voter registration card given to you for free when you register and whenever you update your registration as well as SNAP and TANF cards), although here the “somebody else who can vouch for you” has to have ID themselves and has to sign a sworn statement on penalty of perjury that you are who you say you are and that they have known you for at least 6 months.

So like nearly every commemorative coin then. I have half a dozen tied to various years I went to PAX because I thought they were a cool piece of memorabilia.

Which is wild when you realize the original idea behind McDonalds was to apply engineering and mass production ideas to food to maximize speed and consistency, and now a lot of the time they fail at both.

their small frosty’s aren’t quite at fuck off levels of pricing yet.

My local Wendy’s did a promo where you bought a keychain tag for $3 and can get a Jr Frosty with any purchase until the end of 2025. That certainly helps the Frosty thing, at least.

Politics aside, Chik-Fil-A is consistently one of the better quality fast food places I’ve been to.