Clearly, the superior siege delivery engine is a trebuchet.

Just enough budget for glowing eyes and a voice modulator, so here are some false gods!

Basically the existing cloud systems didn’t meet their requirements, so it ended up cheaper for them to build their own rather than get consultants to config a 3rd party solution.

And now that they had an inhouse team, might as well use them to make money, no?

In or on?

Tbf, GOP with all their sycophants is about 100 mil, if you need a place to start the deportations…

He made the “Bored of Peace” with several war criminals for a reason…

It’s insane how well Fetterman showed that brain damage causes conservatism.

Were those his completewords?

Because around here it was translated as “apologised his words offended”, or as I read it between the lines: “sorry you people are such woke snowflakes!”

Monkey see, monkey do

Because you can’t buy personal effort.

We here at Phlock are 110% ethical human beings!

Apparently modern CPUs are snow flakes 🤓

I think you’re confused about how heatsinks work.

For reference: modern CPUs are a lot of hot air. 😁

As 4chan showed in the past, user bases go to platforms that allow NSFW content, and take their SFW activity with them.

But that didn’t answer my question. What problem does age verification genuinely solve by taking away my (adult) privacy?

PS: Expect a lot of LGBT+ content to also get flagged, as it’s considered inappropriate in certain authoritarian countries with money. Having to send in personal ID to join a minority community is just one step away from wearing pink triangles.

I’m fine with the 18+ question because it atleast explicitly requires people to know they’re entering that site. You can’t argue kids are exposed by accident if they click “Enter”.

As for ID verification, I’m against it for my own privacy, if nothing else changes for kids, then what is the argument to have it for adults? (Besides authoritarian control)

Except “for the children” as argument to give up privacy never actually works.

Kids will find porn elsewhere, on shadier sites with even less moderators looking out for them. This has been true since the first dirty magazine in the woods has been found. The solution isn’t banning them, it’s educating them to treat it in a proper way. But that ofc takes effort and doesn’t let policy makers villify people.

Meanwhile the adults have to give up their privacy for no real effect. Or the porn makers just move to a platform without PII and we can repeat this dance again in a couple of years.

Because he didn’t make them gold.

Watch him repaint them during the “renovation” and proclaim how he made it so beautiful, instead of all that ugly white Obama had! (or some other complete bullshit lie)

Providing drugs and alcohol to “entice” women into having sex is predatory behavior, whether or not the women partake consensually or not.

So you’ve never asked a romantic interest or Tinder date to have drinks? Because the moment you pay the bill, how is what you’re doing any different?

The point was more that the argument of “no phones allowed” doesn’t really make a sex-on-drug party any worse.

Nobody points to Al Capone sane-washing tax-fraud. Nobody argues about what an evil cunt he was based on his tax returns either. It was just the logical consequence of his racketeering, violence and general mob-boss-ness. The only reason people know about his tax fraud is because it’s how he got caught. From a moral perspective, it makes no difference in how people consider his character.

Similarly, in this discussion about sexual abuse, not allowing phones backstage at a Lindemann afterparty is of no real consequence. You wouldn’t be allowed to bring a phone to a drug party, whether it’s organised by Charles Manson or the freaking pope. I wouldn’t go to a gay orgy in Brussels expecting to keep my phone around, it’s just part of the package.

Now if there wasn’t any drugs backstage and you still weren’t allowed to bring your phone, yeah, I think that would be a red flag, because the obvious reason for it is now missing.

Rule 34 strikes again!

I think it was more about inviting them to do drugs with him than to watch, and you wouldn’t want any selfies of that going on instagram.

Yes, obviously doing drugs around strangers is a bad idea. But if you truly insist on inviting strangers to do drugs with you, asking them to not bring any cameras in the room seems like a good move PR-wise.