They’re the manufacturers. They could just… Put a screen in anyway?

Consumers definitely want the cameras regardless of legislation. It’s one of the very few decent features added to cars recently.

Weird-ass thing to get on your high horse about. If you’re so concerned about phone numbers, get a burner and a sim card with cash. Or, you know, use a communication method designed with anonymity in mind.

Would it be better to have anonymous sign up? Sure. But if you’re on a Google or apple device and got Signal from the first party store, your app usage is probably already enough to fingerprint you.

Signal was never about anonymous chat, it’s built for secure e2e chat between known parties. If you have a different threat model then there’s other options for you.

Have looked into this more and nobody has said much of anything. And yet somehow two noncommital sentences from her and Mamdani have turned into a leftwing smear frenzy that would rival any high-school drama.

To my knowledge, Ossé’s entry wasn’t planned and he had previously indicated he wasn’t running or wouldn’t run without DSA endorsement. And even now his statement is he’s “exploring” a run. And AOC/Mamdani’s statements were basically “I don’t think it’s a good idea for him to run” which is a neutral phrasing covering any reason (good or bad), and certainly isn’t an endorsement of Jeffries if the primary were to actually happen.

But if you were to read axios [parent company donated at 70% republicans/30% to establishment dems] or vox [owned by Jay Penske, son of MAGA mega-donor Roger Penske, with ties to Saudi money and Trump’s Whitehouse] this is a show a fealty to the corrupt Democrat cabal and requires unrest and dissent on the left.

Good lord people, why bother with this obvious bait…

Lmao do you have nothing better to do? This is worse than streamer drama. Nothing in that milquetoast clip has anything to do with policy, a change in stance on any issue, or even an endorsement.

But he’s now besmirched because he’s not in a blood pact with a council member most of America has never heard of? A fellow [Big Tent] DSA member who has only been paying dues for a handful of months?

If he’s changing stance on Gaza, publicly or in policy, I’m concerned and want to hear about it. If he’s stumping for establishment Dems and scaring his constituents away from a challenger, I want to hear about it.

If he’s disagreeing with the concept of a person running, who hasn’t put out any platform that I’ve heard of, before the race has even started… don’t bother me.

• Maybe this candidate has a great platform, maybe his platform will be garbage.
• Maybe he has a good platform but Mamdani genuinely thinks he doesn’t have the political chops for the big leagues.
• Maybe Mamdani is focused on the political landscape he has to navigate and simply doesn’t want a major player disrupted without good reason.
• Maybe Jeffries is internally unpopular and could serve as a lighting rod for building a voting bloc from current officials.
• Maybe he thinks Jeffries is too big a fish and that there are other candidates he’d like to primary.

I don’t know unless he comes out and specifies and it doesn’t benefit me to speculate on anything so intangible.

I’ll let the new campaign run it’s course, I’ll listen to the new platform, and I’ll judge what happens when it happens. Maybe this will fracture the DSA between left and farther left, but I wouldn’t care because both sides are light-years better than our current politicians.

• 2 minute story is entirely unverifiable hearsay
• doesn’t explain the purpose of that meeting, why the specific endorsers are here (other than they’re Jewish for some reason?), doesn’t even name a specific meeting date
• vague paraphrasing of Adler’s comments on anti-zionism
• even more vague paraphrasing of the reply. no indication of it’s phrasing, it’s tone, it’s content, it’s length, the speaker, etc…

“I CAN TELL YOU FOR A FACT HE’S IN THOSE ROOMS TELLING THEM TO STOP”

Uh… Can you? Give me a quote, give me a source, give me context, give me anything… If you can’t do the bare minimum then why are we even sharing this clip/anecdote?

He just got a text that they finished replacing references to his name with Clinton, no need to delay anymore

Nobody confirmed it was consensual or with a guy tbf. Could have been that horse

Is crude an essential oil? 🇺🇸🇺🇸🦅

Someone edit that into a joint please

I appreciate the response, thanks for the perspective. From my view, I rarely see this line of reasoning in the wild. The “participation” in elections begins and ends with “Both parties bad. Vote for [the nebulous idea of] a third party”. In my opinion, if you can’t give a concrete name and put in enough effort to get it on the ballot then you’re not actually participating.

As a example: I heard complete silence from this portion of the left during the NYC mayoral race/Mamdani’s campaign. No mention of (let alone stumping for) a more progressive alternative. Now with his win, there’s no discussion about parlaying that turnout into other elections. Only attacks on his international politics (not sure why that matters for a mayor) or projected future failure.

Nothing about that approach indicates any good faith engagement with progressive politics in the electoral space. In that sense it’s completely indistinguishable from the right’s suppression and defeatism.

Cool cool, so why does voting vs not voting matter? What actionable alternatives would you suggest and why do those preclude checking a box on a piece of paper?

I’d argue that even an illusory vote has value as a public barometer. If 80% of a voter base is consistently voting against the incumbent party it tells you way more about their discontent than 80% not showing up.

[re-commenting with no instance shaming]

Every Marxist-Leninist user

Removed by mod

So? How many die in those vs traditional methods? Why pretend to care about harm reduction and then shit on tech that could reduce it?

She’s gonna be shocked when someone reads her the 3rd amendment

Well for starters that’s not how you phrased it. No mention of Europe or Europeans, just “white” which is an overly broad modern invention. There are people we’d consider white who had minimal influence from that era of European/Victorian culture.

Secondly, not all Europeans who wore such elaborate clothing were white. France, Spain, Italy, and most all of southern Europe had populations of varying degrees of melanin (not to mention foreign dignitaries, mixed families, etc…). The populations in their colonies sometimes adopted or were forced to wear these styles.

Thirdly, AFAIK there’s not much to back up the personal hygiene myth. It’s true that city sewage infrastructure was far behind some peers at the same tier of development, but you don’t need modern plumbing to wash yourself off when you stink. Other cultures did have different hygiene standards but there’s many unique factors (access to hot springs, religious ritual cleansing, climate, etc…) which weren’t mirrored in Europe.

Taken at face value you turned “it’s funny how people wore elaborate outfits and didn’t have our modern hygiene concepts” into “white people have dirty ancestors”

Hear me out: down zoning. We dig some deep ass bunkers and throw parks on top of them.

I’ll take a crack at it:

• It’s a massive privacy/surveillance concern. Look at the issues that come with doorbell cams and now multiply the number of cameras and scatter them all over
• It’s another platform for mega corporations to track and sell data to advertisers or any malicious actors, but at an entirely new intrusive level. They no longer have to approximate what’s getting your attention when they literally know what has your attention. Good luck anonymizing or hiding your usage when you can’t spoof the real world in front of you.
• It’s unnecessary e-waste, at best providing the exact same functionality you’d get from your phone with the added benefit of… not reaching into your pocket? You still need a free hand to use it…
• It’s a distraction in a way that other tech can’t touch. Pedestrians/drivers getting notifications shoved directly into their eyes won’t end well.
• It probably has all the same inherent problems as previous generations of smart glasses. Primarily: your eyes aren’t designed for extended/repeated focus on an image less than an inch from your face and at the edge of your vision

Lol what? There’s no profit/loss calculation between any number of consumers vs a fascist admin more than willing to chop you up and eat your corporate lunch. Their revenue could get cut in half and bending the knee is still the right business choice.

Their business model is selling media, they don’t give a shit if they need to write out every minority princess protagonist for a white Jesus. So yeah, kill the scape goat, get some brownie points and wait for the media shit storm to blow over by next month.