Judges don’t tell a team their facts are wrong, the other team does. Judges decide which of the teams had better argumentation.

I find the judge symbolism interesting and compelling, but moderators are not judges. They’re not making a judgement in place of the citizens by the end.

Rather than only letting two people debate, they could ask for clarifications. If you see them as press, and as representing the citizens, you may even think they have to to fulfill the press code and their responsibility.

I think it’s a question of how you see the debate. What it is, or should be. Is it between the two candidates, and moderators merely give it structure? Or is it a debate with an expectation of truth and trustworthiness, fulfilling the press code, where the moderators would have to at least point out lies or ask for clarifications?

A debate between two candidates has its value, but we can’t deny it strengthens Trumps position as an apparently to many people charismatic liar. Between only two people it’s about who is more charismatic and convincing, not about truthfulness, verifiability. All of those only go as far as the other candidate can establish them.

If many citizens watch only the debate, is that enough to inform them / base their voting [or omission thereof] on?

In the end, it may be understandable to wish for moderators to point out lies. It can be irritating and frustrating to see lies on a podium finding success, without successful, conclusive rebuttal. But that’s not the moderators’ place in the show format as it is.

Disclaimer: I haven’t watched it.

Did they denounce target children before?

“Temu is designed to make this expansive access undetected, even by sophisticated users,” Griffin’s complaint said. “Once installed, Temu can recompile itself and change properties, including overriding the data privacy settings users believe they have in place.”

So just like the majority USAian app out there?

Which apps do that? Because I am certain it’s NOT the majority, and very skeptical about any other apps doing that.

deleted by creator

Over the last eight months, Israel has killed at least 37,765 people and injured another 86,429, according to the ministry’s latest figures. These numbers are likely an undercount due to the decimated medical infrastructure, killed medical workers, and thousands feared trapped under the rubble in Gaza.

Was there a debate in Congress? Did they reason their vote?

The closing paragraphs in the article paint a bleak light. None of reason or arguments. Only denial and dismissal of opposition/different views without any reasoning.

Content-Blocked - requires email signup

Accessible via https://12ft.io/proxy?q=https://theintercept.com/2024/06/27/congress-gaza-death-toll-democrats

• I did in the past: Replace .bik intro video file with an “empty” one to skip intros
• I know of, haven’t used: Change game window to be borderless with Borderless Gaming
• IIRC I’ve used Cheat Engine, before it was littered with shit, to speed up an awfully slow singleplayer game
• In Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory (W:ET) I had a whole setup of config scripts for key bindings
• For W:ET server hosting I put configuration into a deliberate, structured set of files (it’s not necessarily obvious between splitting base game and alternateable mod configuration)

So to me, saying “we don’t know if it was sexting,

They may have not known the source and tweet wording. I certainly didn’t.

/edit: I see it’s in the article as well.

I think we’re off a lot better. We have a lot more choice, and much less bad choices.

Adding to

The value of Bitcoin has only increased over time

???

And not only a bit. A fall from 67 to 16.

Will it move the mouse for me?

I think it’s very possible.

With the right causation or correlation, the correct person is identified.

Whether right reason refers to being mad at the person for the related reason or the reason itself being valid and rightful, both are possible.

Right time is related to the cause of anger as well as when the anger takes place. Both is possible to be at the right time.

You can even be angry without any visible indication. There’s also cases where an aggressive response is the right response. Proper response is possible too.

From Wikipedia:

1. High self-esteem and a clear sense of uniqueness and superiority, with fantasies of success and power, and lofty ambitions
2. Social potency, marked by exhibitionistic, authoritative, charismatic and self-promoting interpersonal behaviours
3. Exploitative, self-serving relational dynamics; short-term relationship transactions defined by manipulation and privileging of personal gain over other benefits of socialisation

I think we can put big checkmarks on all three of those for Trump. We don’t need a professional psychologist for that.

Which may be partially beside the point and argument the article is trying to make, but I still want to point these out.

I think the more interesting question on this topic is whether and when calling people narcissistic is fine or not. Is it a slur? I don’t think so. Is it an insult? I certainly don’t think it categorically and always is. It depends on context.

But this article isn’t that.

Donald Trump isn’t a narcissist, because we shouldn’t be calling anyone a “narcissist”. It’s an ableist slur.

Whether or not you are supposed to call him a narcissist doesn’t change whether he is a narcissist.

Not calling him a narcissist doesn’t make him not a narcissist.

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

Seems fairly obvious and to be expected that they would do that, given their intelligence and environment and utility use.

Still, important and significant to observe and prove in the wild. Especially as not one-off random anecdotal observations.

I think you can learn it when you’re younger than 20 years old