tenebrisalietum

Drivers licenses in most if not all of the U.S. are a joke, and people will still drive with suspended licenses, especially if they have to for work. Driving on a suspended license should allow the state to impound your car, though, then it would be respected.

Letting imagination run wild here...

Naw, they'll be replaced with national citizen IDs or simply nothing and you must apply for a federal ID to see or get benefits.

Regarding such an ID, I bet it would not be technically required unless you want to receive some sort of federal benefit or participate in a federal election. They might not even call it a federal ID, something like "National Citizen Verification" (NCV)

I'm sure that incentives would strongly align for you to have one (or start more expensively starting to get one) if you participate in federal court, get arrested by a federal officer, or go to a federal prison. Also joining the military would likely result in you and your spouse getting a free one. If the draft is reintroduced at some point in the future, then it'll become common quickly.

Of course they'll still have the SSN format because of existing legacy misuse of the SSN as a national identifier. But maybe not. Every bank I've done business with wants my state driver's license number, of which a birth certificate is a requirement. Maybe it's someone's idea to simply give banks access to those databases.

these types of accounts that are created same day and post ragebait are obviously fake.

You aren't supposed to be manually assigning addresses except in very small networks. You should have that centrally managed by DNS or any number of other things. No one should have to speak their address to you. You don't know what you're doing.

If you have a child, but don't have a house, you'll probably stay with your parents. They probably would rather you have your own house so they can have privacy and such.

A lot of the "multiple generations of families under one roof" type thinking are only practical if you have a large property, which was more common and much cheaper before the industrial revolution, tract housing, high rise apartments, and $2000/mo. rent for 500 square feet. Even if you think it's OK for 3 generations and 20 children to live in a 500 square foot apartment, most others don't want that.

When you have people with more money than they could possibly spend in their entire lives who wouldn't have to work a day in their life if they didn't want to, telling you that people need to start having babies and oh, also they need to work 80 hours a week and "sacrifice" to pay for them as well, lol no thanks.

Sexual escapades are only senseless if you rigidly believe sex is only for specific things, and adopt a model where human beings are property and can be owned. While sex does have a biological purpose, that in itself doesn't mean it has to be limited to that purpose.

Sex is fun and most sex doesn't lead to procreation, nor is intended to. The last 50 times I've had sex, me and partner(s) involved have had no intention of making a baby, and that's fine. Nature/God agrees with me, because the number of children most families have are typically far less than the number of times the parents have had sex.

There's a lot of times people want sex and don't want it to be some big life changing event. I won't marry someone like that.

> This creates a mindset not unlike that of a drug user who is obsessed with getting another hit

Everyone wants pleasurable things with a minimum of bad or unwanted consequences. This is called being smart and using your God-given brain and free will. This doesn't make anyone a drug user. This puritanical war on pleasure can only serve authoritarian and anti-human ends, which is often an explicit or implicit base of forms of slavery/indenture, and is the main reason why I strongly advocate against it.

> The psychophysical reality of sexual intercourse is much more than some passing physical pleasure.

Anything that feels really good will beget attachment because you want more of it. When it's attached to a person, you're going to want to be around that person more. And of course, human beings are naked apes with courtship and bonding instincts and all that good stuff. But people bond over things other than sex, and any good relationship or marriage will have many bonds other than the sexual one. Indeed, marriages where sex is the only reason they got together are as hollow as this drug user strawman you trotted out.

> Masturbation is even worse.

People who become overly dependent on parasocial relationships with fictional anything, whether that's a harem, video game, movie star, person mentioned in a religious book, etc. need help. I masturbate from time to time and it does not give me any problems, but I'm not addicted to it. But I would rather lonely people masturbate themselves into a coma than sexually assault others simply because of people who will say masturbation is wrong but at the same time won't consider other things like legalizing prostitution.

> they don't want to make the cultural changes necessary to restore normalcy.

I don't. The old way sucked. Robots and AI should be doing all our menial work, and the possibilities for pleasure are endless. The people who just can't exist without an employer giving them meaning because they never got enough approval from their daddies need to move to another planet.

and then they also own future responsibility for that change.

You should determine your own value if you don't want to be controlled by anyone else.

If you don't want to determine your own value, you're probably no worse off letting an AI do that than anything else. Religion is probably more comfortable, but I'm sure AI and religion will mix before too long.

> until some consolidation and unification can happen that's beyond the kernel.

That's underway, it's called systemd.

Soon, something like Modal Systemd Installers: `systemd-msid`

By your logic we should get rid of trucks and have all freight delivered by car.

I agree with you. I actually had a nice group chat with some family members about this particular thing recently. This stood out in particular which my niece posted:

"The only thing China has ever done to me is sell me cheap stuff, which is great because the main way people get money who aren't rich are through jobs, and companies don't really want to A) have employees and B) pay them anything. Companies are controlling everything so everyone I know is poor and just going to get poorer. I don't know how China is supposed to be harming me through Tiktok. I don't know how China is going to use my data to hurt me. Honestly I don't know why people want data so badly when everyone's broke-why don't you already know that. The only chinese stuff I see on Tiktok are people cooking and burning incense. I would understand if I like worked for the government but I work at a fast food place so ... what are they gonna do? Get me fired from Mcdonalds? Lol you could have multiple felonies and still work at Mcdonalds. Now they're gonna take Tiktok away like they take everything else and it's stupid. The other stuff sucks-Facebook is for old people and dumb minion memes, I keep seeing dumb alpha male crap on YouTube, and Instagram doesn't show me anything new after scrolling on it for ten minutes. Why do like 3 companies have to control everything?"

Lots of fallacies and issues with those statements. We had lots of conversation after that. But I think that shows the general mood among those who are sticking with Tiktok. A lot of the value is that it's simply not Meta.

Tiktokers have been discussing where to be reached on other apps for a while now.

Retire this meme. Google sucks now.

You dislike wokeness and reading. Interesting.