AnonCoward4

That quote sounds a lot like 1. (the idea of compressing each Bayer color), but I might misunderstand it.

It's noteworthy for sure, however I am more annoyed by how it is reported. It was always like that for sure, however when the same medium proclaims being the arbiter of truth (fact checkers) I get really disgusted.

Circular logic. Because Russian crimes are documented (in western media) every war crime attributed to Russians must be true as well.

If it was from RT I would add "According to Russian media". Is that then a barely noteworthy western propaganda line or just the truth?

> I’m bored of Netflix. They have simply gone the assembly line direction instead of the direction of art, at least for some big niches. For example, every True Crime docuseries on Netflix is the same crap.

My benchmark for this genre is Forensic Files. I have yet to find another one that is this concise and informative.

> That's very difficult to say, actually; the Moskova was sunk with them after all, but the bigger issue is the abhorrent and indiscriminate shelling of civilian populations by the Russians. Fields with farmers and homes and hospitals with civilians are not of military importance. And yet, Russia keeps shooting them.

According to western media.

> The truth is Putin's Kremlin is to blame for this wide-spread shortage

Yeah that would be easy, however it's not as cut and dry (it rarely is). You could as easily blame Zelenskyy for killing thousands of east Ukrainians prior. And then their is the coup d'état in 2014 as well and the constant provocations of the NATO in general. So I am not so sure that Putin's Kremlin alone is to blame.

In Germany this is called "Gratismut" (gratis bravery). It's the current thing to hate Russia, so they don't lose anything by doing a passionate write-up about it. McDonald's also wants to convince you that they have any values, but in reality they have no problem with horrendous human rights violations in other countries.

I disagree that physical violence is justified for any anonymous conversation however hateful it might be. If it is not anonymous then there are things like slander where things get more blurry, however I am not a strong proponent of vigilante justice, so I would not call it just either.

Yeah, however that is not what happens if you just let that behavior described above slide. Punching someone because they said something to you is usually wrong especially if they don't even know each other (so it can't be personal, really).

Which means the internet is the better place to be for any person. The problem is usually if one side is not anonymous, then it's different, otherwise anything is fair game in regards to discussions I think, but maybe you find a good counter example.

> It's impossible to convince most people of even the most obvious truths.

You should maybe ask yourself why you need to convince them.

> The wisest path is to fake agreement, keep your thoughts for yourself and move away ASAP.

That's not wise, that's dishonest to the other person and to yourself. The last part (avoiding the other person) is obviously a completely valid option, but only one of several.

I agree with that assessment. Which means it should come as no surprise to anyone, if people are harsher online to people they literally do not know. It's not nice, but the alternative is also not very pleasant, which is real life and the constant misuse of status and lack of anonymity. Although it kind of creeped up to the internet as well.

(Disclaimer: I'm not from the US.)

> It's primarily the labor-heavy working-class white male (in the white male demographic) that has been brutalized by changes in the US and global economy. They have been left behind to drown in a pool of fentanyl.

That sounds like most people are actually more negatively affected by the economy compared to decades prior.

As far as I know you can't sensibly OD on LSD for example. It doesn't really cause addiction and to OD you need to take something like 100x the effective dose.However the psychosis danger would still be a valid concern ("rolling a dice" puts it quite nicely)

And in addition to that they also removed a lot of rail lines, especially goods traffic. It would've been a boon to have fewer trucks on the motorway and probably better for the environment.