But what will happen when the Electrons join the fight?

I saw a post earlier on my mastodon mentioning this: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protocol_on_Mines,_Booby-Traps_and_Other_Devices I do see “portable objects” mentioned, but given that the section is otherwise about stuff associated with children, I’m not sure if pagers would qualify or not.

It’s very similar to the concept of blood libel I think, just directed at a different group than that term usually refers to. Which, given what that kind of thing historically has led to, is extremely concerning coming from such a public figure.

Realistically she’s got quite a few of those, but when given a bad but not fundamentally different from what one had before option, and a make everything far worse option, and a situation that makes trying to choose a third option an exercise in futility, the choice is a no-brainer.

Funnily enough, in an actual coincidence, Hitler himself also had a nephew (well half-nephew, but still) who hated and wrote about him (to the point of joining the US military while it was at war with his uncle, even).

Because the candidates do have those responsibilities, but have shirked them. Ideally, we’d want a better voting system, that didn’t mathematically garuntee that only two viable parties emerge, so that when the politicians refuse to use their power as they should, people who will may be chosen instead, but we don’t have that, and changing that is a long and difficult process that only gets harder if the more authoritarian types get power anyway. If you’re in a lifeboat with holes, and there are two people that have rigged things so that one of them is going to be in charge, and one wants to stop bailing out water and the other wants to scoop it back into the boat, then even though those two aren’t following their responsibilities, it doesn’t mean you should stop bailing the water out, because it has to get done by somebody or you drown. And if you have a say in which of the two is in charge, the guy that just wants to sit there uselessly is still the option you must pick, because at least they aren’t trying to undo the progress you’re making. Ideally you’d want to figure out how to undo the rigged system too, but you have to deal with the water first, lest you all drown fighting over who’s in charge.

And that’d be reasonable for you to do. However, having a network choose to remove something, or cut ties with servers in the network that don’t in an attempt to persuade them to remove that thing, isn’t exactly the same as a government ordering a thing be removed. The former doesn’t give much avenue for a malicious actor to suppress something that isn’t in their interest, because they can hardly control the collective actions of users on the network, but the latter does by creating a single point of decision making on the network’s content from the outside. Not that the motivations in wanting that video gone were bad, but there is an element of risk to making it possible for a government entity to remove something from a social network, even if the thing they want gone this time is something that really shouldn’t be there.

The arrows are intimidating, but their true power was their magical ability to transform things. For example, in this case they have transformed a high-wing airplane into a low-wing one.

• invade a country

• Country starts building weapons

Who could have predicted this?

Reminds me of a scene from Blackadder youtube.com/embed/GMwXMLQAoSg?start=45&end=85

The reporting I’ve seen was that someone in the crowd was killed by this, just not Trump himself, that implies that whatever was fired at least was deadly.

No, but he also does not look suicidal enough to have someone shoot live ammunition right next to his head and trust they make the shot perfectly.

I highly doubt that, staging something like this would be an insanely dangerous move, a slight miss from the shooter in such a scenario would be lethal, and given other people at the event seem to have been killed, it seems clear that lethal rounds were used. Trump may be a fan of ridiculous stunts, but he’s also pretty self interested; I do not think he would risk his own life for such a stunt.

I understand the impulse to not want someone one agrees with politically to have done something like try a political assassination, and then immediately leap to the idea that the notion that the event might help the intended victim’s political chances is just a bit too convenient and therefore must mean they orchestrated it, but it must be remembered that, whatever views one has, or groups one is in, or identities one holds, as long as they are not so obscure as to be shared by only a handful of people, it is statistically likely that there will be people who are on your team or side of group who are willing to do something like this given the chance, just by virtue of such people making up a fraction of the population.

Trump is hated by a lot of people, myself included and a large fraction of the people likely to be reading this too I’m sure. It is not at all unrealistic to imagine that someone hates him enough to try to kill him.

I wonder how the military units get organized when stuff like this happens, do the people from the tiny countries militaries just get told to go be part of a different military for awhile and follow those guy’s orders? Do they get their own little tent and individual unique assignments from their home country?