They wouldn’t be able to finish stealing that car before a thousand hungry lawyers ate them alive. Why do we let media companies do that?

They would probably actually have a decent shot at getting away with it, at least at first.

And to answer your question, it’s because the anger that companies generate by doing this shit ends up turning into piracy. Why would you try to punish a corp for doing this (likely wasting your time) when a cheap VPN and basic tech literacy gets you what you want?

The effort ratios are way out of wack when it comes to digital products. It’s easy to get around digital bullshitery, not so much in the real world where we are all car dependant.

The democrats will just pick another stinker. How do you think we got Biden in the first place?

The two party system needs to be fixed before we will see any actually good candidates.

Because enshitifying their service would earn them short term profits, which is the only thing corps/shareholders care about.

Go for it. It was already an old, long dead meme when I posted it here.

This but corps

The air is plenty clean as it is

Tell that to the people in East Palestine Ohio. Tell that to the people that live near coal plants.

as long as you don’t live in California

Doesn’t matter where you live if the planet is uninhabitable.

Wanting to breath clean air on a habitable planet isn’t insanity.

First, you’re going to need some sort of evidence to back up this claim.

It’s in their interest to exaggerate, and they are under the control of a terrorist organization.

Second, Hamas isn’t who is publishing these numbers.

My understanding is that the only people tracking & publishing the numbers is the Palestinian health ministry, which is under the control of Hamas. Everyone else is just saying “Gaza’s health ministry said X” and such.

Yeah. Definitely place sole blame on hamas instead of the people intentionally bombing civilians.

Dude, I am this 🤏 close to being banned in another community for daring to say that the current event is a genocide of palestinians.

I’m not denying anything, let alone for the sake of convenience. I’m not apathetic. All I’m saying is, is that the current numbers are probably not completely accurate.

I also explicitly said that the current estimate is probably not far off.

I haven’t heard anything from a third party, and no doubt hamas is exagerating to some degree, but whatever the actual numbers are, I wouldn’t think the current estimate of ~20,000 is far off. Israel is intentionally bombing civilians, so the estimated number sounds fairly reasonable to me.

Easier to confirm, is the proportion of women & children. About half the population of Palestine is children, and about half are women. So ~75% being women or children also fits.

Civilians are pretty much everywhere alongside Hamas members who are usually between them.

Yeah, so maybe they should stop dropping bombs.

Israeli actions wouldn’t be similar to any of them.

Not only is this not true, but even if it were, as I’ve already pointed out it doesn’t need to be similar. A genocide can be totally unique yet still fall under the definition of genocide.

It’s impossible not to kill civilians in such a conflict when the area you are fighting in is a densely populated city

But it is possible to not drop bombs on areas you KNOW civilians are at.

Of course genocide is not defined by numbers. However, all genocides should have some traits in common.

This is also not a part of the definition of genocide.

How should Israel respond?

I get that there are unused ways of minimizing civilian deaths

Seems like you already know the answer to that question. Yet for some reason you’re giving Israel a free pass for killing civilians. So effectively you’re just arguing for terrorism. State terrorism, but terrorism nonetheless.

Good people don’t kill civilians.

I agree that genocides have different flavors but the results of all is a completely or partially removed ethnicity. By saying partially, I mean roughly 40% killed or moved to a detention facility.

The definition of genocide contains no percentage threshold. You’re making definitions up out of thin air.

It’ll look like what we already have. Swaths of users self hosting, with lots of redundancy to deal woth instances that have problems.

And that might mean it needs to stay small, but that’s OK. Not all success is measured in popularity.

Most of those deaths happen due to the lack shelters and lack of places where people can hide.

…and the bombs landing on their heads.

If Israel wanted to genocide Palestinians, they would have done it in a week.

Not all genocides are done with equal fervor.

Also, they would not have to be dead if Hamas didn’t start this.

This was started in 1948 when Palestinians were forced from their homes. Playing a game of “who started it” doesn’t justify anything.

it’s more of an approach where they no longer try as much to limit civilian causalities as much as possible.

Yeah… almost like they are totally OK with killing civilians (genocide).

Embrace extend extinguish

Don’t federate with corps, it will only end badly

it’s probably more than 20k. What does it prove though?

See above definition on genocide. If thousands of dead Palestinian civilians (~50% of whom are children) isn’t enough to be labeled as genocide then the definition you are using is a bad one.

Judging which bomb is purposefully thrown on civilians is impossible.

Are you saying that when Israel bombed the Jabalia refugee camp, they were not intentionally killing civilians?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/nov/18/israeli-airstrikes-kill-80-in-palestinian-refugee-camp

How many Palestinian civilians have been killed?

How many bombs have been intentionally dropped on civilians?

in whole or in part

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide