middlemuddle
Adapting a Disney Afternoon fantasy/action show into live-action horror is certainly a choice. At least, I’m assuming it’s horror based on the CVs of everyone involved. They’re certainly talented, but I loved Gargoyles as a kid and I think I’ll feel that this is a significant distortion of the original work. Still, I’m not going to actually judge it until I’ve seen it.
She’s apparently made it her life’s work to abuse the vulnerability of both bio and foster parents by leveraging her “knowledge” in a way that favors kids being permanently separated from their bio family. There are certainly circumstances that warrant that kind of separation, but she and that lawyer’s office seem to be leading a campaign of child separation. That’s pure evil.
The criticism of this news is needlessly toxic. Maybe Hamas won’t accept the offer, but that doesn’t mean it’s not a genuine attempt to save some children’s lives.
I think that’s just more examples of it being misused. BMI may be useful to compare populations in certain instances. It has value in being easily calculated based off data that is often easy to obtain. But, there are many situations where it would be inappropriate to use BMI for statistical comparison. That doesn’t mean it’s entirely useless.
If I had a friend I knew for decades that was convicted of some awful shit like this, I’d find it pretty easy to just not write a letter about their good character. Maybe I never saw even a hint of the monster that was convicted, but it’d be pretty messed up for me to just ignore the reality of the present and talk about how good they were to me in the past. Attesting to someone’s character has a limit. They could have very easily just kept their mouths shut on this topic not supported a convicted rapist. My hypothetical friend can go deal with the consequences of their own actions themselves while I try to internally come to terms with the fact that my friend betrayed me by lying to my face for so long.
An ad-free web is definitely a pipe dream. But a targeted ad-free web should be a simple option available to users. I’d guess that the majority of the public doesn’t care too much about being tracked, and may even appreciate having their relevant interests targeted so that they see an ad that is more interesting to them. The problem is that, for those of us who don’t want to be targeted, there is no simple way to disable that. Companies have baked their ad targeting directly into the functionality of their platforms so it’s incredibly difficult to avoid targeted ads if you still want to use the most popular sites. I think this is the reality that is unacceptable.
Every browser should have a simple toggle to enable targeted ads and it should be every site should respect this. I’m not super educated on Google’s Topics solution, but maybe the step away from cookies could theoretically support that kind of reality. I don’t think Google is going to lead the charge on that kind of change, but we certainly need to get away from cookies somehow.
The US has limits on free speech in the name of public health and safety. There’s no assumption of limitless free speech in the US. People who cry “free speech” typically have no understanding of its actual legal definition in the country and just want an excuse to be a bigoted asshole without consequences.
Twitter, not being part of the government, gets to decide what content they allow and doesn’t need to worry too much about the legal definition of free speech. But, despite Musk’s claims, Twitter is not actually a space of limitless free speech. They’ve taken plenty of actions since he took over that limit the speech of individuals he disagrees with. Twitter is just interesting in giving a platform to hate. There’s certainly money to be made in monetizing hate (see Trump), but hopefully it doesn’t work out well in the end for Twitter or Musk.
