Compare this:

Tell me why Armistice Day was more important than Veteran’s Day is.

I aim to engage thoughtfully with this topic while noting that the relative importance of these observances can vary based on personal and cultural perspectives.

Armistice Day, established to commemorate the end of World War I on November 11, 1918, held unique significance as it marked humanity’s hope that WWI would truly be “the war to end all wars.” The original spirit was focused specifically on peace and the prevention of future wars. When the armistice was signed, there was a profound sense of collective relief and determination to ensure such devastating conflict would never happen again…

To this:

I will come to a time in my backwards trip when November eleventh, accidentally my birthday, was a sacred day called Armistice Day. When I was a boy, and when Dwayne Hoover was a boy, all the people of all the nations which had fought in the First World War were silent during the eleventh minute of the eleventh hour of Armistice Day, which was the eleventh day of the eleventh month.

It was during that minute in nineteen hundred and eighteen, that millions upon millions of human beings stopped butchering one another. I have talked to old men who were on battlefields during that minute. They have told me in one way or another that the sudden silence was the Voice of God. So we still have among us some men who can remember when God spoke clearly to mankind.

Armistice Day has become Veterans’ Day. Armistice Day was sacred. Veterans’ Day is not.

So I will throw Veterans’ Day over my shoulder. Armistice Day I will keep. I don’t want to throw away any sacred things.

I find the second one more entertaining, more pleasant to read. If you want to call it that. I know translation is different from coming up with new text. But look again at the lyrics and the language in the second one.

I’m not trying to tell you that you’re wrong for wanting to read things that aren’t in English, or that there isn’t a place for machine translation so the information can get conveyed. I’m just saying that passing anything of value through this filter, and then presenting it as something for people consumption, is a bad idea compared with the other way.

It’s not enough to be able to put the words in the right order.

You have to know why they need to be said. Otherwise, it’s a big waste. Just throw the book in the bin and go spend some time outside instead.

I said 100,000 who receive at least a year of imprisonment, or deportation, or something similarly severe like getting shot. Someone just getting arrested, I don’t really care about. They already do that, and the damage isn’t always nothing, but I was talking about life-altering punishments.

There were 64,142 felony or class A misdemeanor sentences pronounced in 2022. A year is about the bottom end of prison time for a felony, so that’s probably an okay estimate for the number of people who received that punishment level in 2022.

https://www.ussc.gov/about/annual-report-2022

I’m fine with the six-month timeframe you said. If it goes from 32,000 cases to 132,000 cases then you’ll agree that’s a problem.

I’ll bet $50 against each scenario. I’m fine with not paying each other. The loser can pay that much to the organization of the winner’s choice.

You know what? Sure. I’ll shake on it if you will. If we’re still around and on Lemmy at the end, hit me up and we’ll see how it happened.

So, 100,000 people arrested or otherwise taken from their homes under a new or previously unimplemented legal pretext?

Yes.

I think we need to add a narrow timeframe over which these detentions would occur, like a single week.

Why? 100,000 people over the course of a few months isn’t enough of a problem for you?

Is this number separate or inclusive of people who get deported on some immigration basis?

Separate. I’m excluding people who already don’t have a legal right to stay in the US. I think the number of people who are technically already vulnerable to deportation, who will be deported, will be much greater than 100,000. As you pointed out, that’s already going on. It’s hard to measure in a number how much additional cruelty Trump will add to that by doing a “better” job at rooting out and deporting those people, so I’m not including that. The 100,000 is only people who would have been able to stay in the US, or out of prison or extralegal punishment, who now will not.

A lot of people have been arrested at peaceful protests under Biden, so it seems like we’re already at a grim baseline condition. Not sure what the bet is here.

I phrased it as “serious charges” on purpose. Lots of people get arrested at protests and then released, either without charges or with some kind of misdemeanor. Biden didn’t invent that, and usually it’s being done by local cops who often don’t even like Biden, and definitely don’t care what he thinks about what they should be doing to the protestors.

I said “serious charges.” We can quantify it as a year or more in prison, or something similar or worse that’s extralegal. That happens on a very occasional basis here, to a handful of people like the cop city protestors, or to that handful of climate protestors in the UK. I expect that under Trump, the scale of serious charges and prison time or worse for these protestors or some other type of “enemy” will dramatically increase. That’s why I quoted the 100,000 people number as a total for all of this extralegal action, deportation and imprisonment and all.

Just to give you a sense of “or worse,” what he did last time was issue an order for the National Guard to start shooting them. They didn’t, last time, and I expect that they probably still won’t in a lot of cases. I think he may create new federal law enforcement agencies which will obey that type of order.

It sounds, to me, like you’re saying that Biden is causing BLM protestors to get arrested and held for a couple of days in the local jail, and that’s already happening so what’s the difference if Trump is creating a new federal law enforcement agency to give them felonies or just shoot them. If I’m hearing you right about that, then I think that indicates a lack of understanding of the grave differences between a Biden presidency and a Trump presidency. That’s what I’m trying to impress on you.

Maybe there are some bills or amendment text floating around you can point to that if passed and successfully enforced would meet this expectation? That includes beating first amendment challenges, right?

I think a lot of this will be extralegal. We can quantify it by saying that if people start getting criminal charges because of what they said on social media, or what they allow to be posted on their social media site, because it was anti-Republican in some sense, the bet is passed. I don’t know exactly what the legal structure if any will be surrounding it, so I don’t want to involve that into the equation. Whether or not the physical people start going to the physical courtrooms or prisons is the relevant factor. Trust me, if it starts happening, we won’t need to quibble. You’ll know it when you see it.

Are you guaranteeing all of these scenarios or just any of them? Or should each one be a separate bet?

Is there a betting community on Lemmy where we could post our bet?

It’s two scenarios. One is 100,000 people getting deportation or prison time for things that are currently absolutely clearly legal, such as being Hispanic or attending a protest. The other is people receiving charges for expressing, or amplifying or not, a political viewpoint. We can limit that second one to social media, as a way of making it more concrete. We can make those two things as two separate bets, I guess.

How much were you thinking? I don’t really want to bet, to be honest. I’m happy to give you some amount of money if it doesn’t happen. I’ll be so happy that I won’t give a fuck. If I win, we can set it up that you have to give that amount of money to some kind of charity or operation that’s trying to resist. I don’t want the money. It’s not a fun thing for me to talk about.

Sure. 100,000 people hauled away by the cops when they haven’t done anything or committed what we would now consider a crime. Mass deportations of currently legal immigrants, or serious charges for people who participated in a protest but nothing else, is the obvious possibility.

That and laws or federally enforced law-facsimiles of some kind that mean you get punished just for a certain viewpoint that would be fine now. It could be a crime for a social media company or a private citizen to debunk election fraud claims from 2020, or something similar to that.

Give it a rest. I can argue back my point of view to you, and we can go back and forth a little, and it’s pointless.

I can guarantee you that people in large numbers will get their doors kicked in by the police and hauled away, and laws will get passed that make it a crime to be anti-Republican. How wide a scale and how bad that all will get isn’t certain, but I think it will be pretty bad.

Your days of pointing at the Democrats as the problem need to stop, and their days of pointing at the Bernie Sanders crowd and the Palestine protestors as the problem need to stop, because even if we (edit: don’t) do put all that bullshit aside and start fighting together against the real enemy for real, we might not win. I really don’t care who’s right anymore. Before the election, I did. That stuff is over.

The more people who are still convinced that their own side needs to be made into the enemy in any respect, the harder that fight will get, and it’ll already be hard, and bad.

Bernie Sanders did that, and it did great. It wasn’t enough to win, partly because the Democrats fucked him.

At this point, you’ll have to contend with massive social-media operations which are working against and shaping the narratives that most of the country use as a substitute for news, to understand what’s happening in the world. I think the time to be able to do it has passed, for a little while, without on-the-ground anti-electoral organizing on a massive scale.

See who you can find in your area. It’s about to get real, I think.

All the people who were doing that are now pushing RCV or other election reforms that would make it realistic for third parties to be able to get all the way to winning. The third-party people who are running in FPTP elections are, almost universally, either attention-seekers or deliberate spoiler candidates. Bernie Sanders, when he was running, joined up with the Democrats instead of running as a spoiler candidate, because he’s making an earnest attempt at making things better.

It doesn’t really matter now because we’ve slipped one rung down the civilizational Maslow pyramid now, and are in for a fight to preserve the right in any capacity to elect who we want in power. But, whenever we make it back out to the other side of that, it’d be nice to remember to reconfigure the system so third parties can actually win, first, and then run third party candidates after that, not the other way around.

Sanders got fucked in 2016 and the Democrats who get nominated aren’t great and yes it’s partially the Democrats’ fault they got so few votes in 2024. I strongly disagree that it’s chiefly their fault, but that horse is out of the barn now, and also the barn is on fire now and connected to the house with the children inside.

There will be some incredible shit going down in the next few years. It’ll be a challenge to have any sort of elections in 2028 that have anything non-Republican in any position to win anything. I don’t think it will happen.

If you want to have a conversation about how we get left-wing values to win in future elections, start with how we fight to preserve basic freedoms like elections that don’t have Trump’s election integrity squad in charge of them, and free speech online, and the military not being used against American protestors.

I hope I’m wrong but I think some real shit is going to go down real soon. I don’t think we should assume elections are going to be normal and then plan from that assumption.

A tool for wiping free RAM space offers several benefits, particularly for enhancing security, system stability, and performance

What?

The chorus of people who just now learned something new and were so excited they left a comment is absolutely wonderful.

I like how everyone else is saying, “Oh sweet! Look at this thing I just learned today!”

And then this guy is over here with “Well aktually espresso is totally different from drip coffee and so this totally unrelated thing Wikipedia was saying is all wrong I’m so smart.”

I think Lemmy needs some kind of daily “smart person contest” to draw off the energy that otherwise gets spent on trying to find someone to prove wrong in the comments at the expense of everything else. Lord knows, I need one of those too.

The fact that a bunch of bees who want to live somewhere have veto power, however temporary, over Mark Zuckerberg… it gives me a little bit of hope for the future.

Borg borg borg

You can combine it with a FUSE mount of the Google Drive, I’m not sure if that works but I don’t see why it wouldn’t.

If they link directly to {instance}/c/{community} but not to !{community}@{instance} it can chime in with that second thing.

Most people link to something, but they don’t always link to the thing that works everywhere.

There should be a bot.

Actually, do you want me to make a bot? It wouldn’t be hard.

!lemmy_check@lemmy.world

Called it.

The issue isn’t that billionaires owning papers is new. It’s the billionaires hewing to Trump, when previously they were willing to publicly feud with him as people would do in a free society. A good example is Bezos versus the US government over the issue of USPS carrying Amazon packages. Since they’re now showing signs of obedience to Trump in fear of being punished, important scholars are pointing out that it’s a huge problem with a long history in the collapse of democracies into autocracies. It’s a critical force multiplier for the worst and most dangerous features of a fascist government.

I already said this to you, with citations, as did others. You’re so excited about making your point and convinced that you know better that I suspect you’ll just repeat your previous point of view, pretending I said nothing of interest. I eagerly invite you to do that again, if you like.

So, you just have your thing you want to say, and you’re not interested in reading our stuff or any point that isn’t what you already had picked out to say, not interested in a conversation, nothing like that, huh?

Just going to keep saying your thing with increasing curtness for as long as someone keeps sending you replies? It sort of looks that way.