Claiming the rich will flee is such a dumbass take, just on the face of it. They’re rich. And they want to live in NYC, which (*checks notes*) ain’t exactly cheap to begin with. They can afford to live wherever the fuck they want, money is no object. So if it costs a bit more to live in NYC, what difference does it make? Allegedly the whole point of even being rich is to be able to afford the things you want.

But if it makes folks feel better, maybe call it New York Platinum Edition™?

They all should have been on a plane to Gitmo before the sun set on inauguration day.

Nah, worse than that. The root of the conservative pathology is self-hatred. They fear that they are worthless, shit people. A person who believes that they are better than everybody else can sit smugly in the corner and be superior in peace. Conservatives need near-constant reassurance that other people are worse than themselves, hence the performative cruelty they crave.

I make my guess that there are two factors:

1. The Baader-Meinhof Phenomenon (or frequency illusion If somebody has a chip on their shoulder about rude Linux users, the rude Linux users they see will be highly memorable.

2. People tend to get back the same energy that they project to other people.

My instance has a very laissez-faire policy, so it’s federated with almost everybody. My experience is the same; I’ve only ever seen self-aware mocking of the Linux-user attitude.

It’s no use. Resistance is futile.

Signed,

Someone Who Raged Against the Destruction of “FUD” Back in the Day

Incorrect. The U.S. Army has the means to try.

But, here’s the kicker, if we don’t know anything about this other plane of existence, then how can we know that our universe couldn’t spontaneously arise from it without the intent of a creator? That’s the crux of the question: We have a mystery about the origin of our existence, and “solving” the mystery by saying, “God did it,” is just sweeping the mystery under the rug and pretending it’s not there. What OP was able to see at 7 or 8 years old was that the mystery was still there, but with an unexplained extra step added.

No.

This is kind of like asking a man being attacked by a bear, “When did bears become your whole thing?”

I used to drive a Sprinter, and on the dashboard was a light with iconography of waves, wind, and raindrops. I concluded that it was warning me of a storm at sea.

Hey, wasn’t this supposed to be an actual dome? The demented, old dingbat described it as a literal dome.

With all due respect, you’re telling on yourself.

So, essentially the same as a company spokesperson!

Forget the spokesperson, just ask Google AI directly:

AI on Google Search, including the AI Overviews in search, does not provide summaries on topics involving Donald Trump and dementia. This is due to risk aversion, sensitivity to political topics, and recent legal challenges. Instead, these searches return a list of traditional web links.

Reasons for the lack of response

• Risk of misinformation: AI-generated conclusions about a public figure’s health could spread misinformation. The mental acuity of Donald Trump and President Joe Biden, the oldest presidents in U.S. history, is a topic of public discussion.
• Avoiding political sensitivity: AI models often have restrictions on sensitive or controversial topics to avoid biased responses. Google and other tech companies are cautious about how their AI products respond to election-related or partisan queries.
• Legal history with Trump: Google’s handling of Trump-related content may be influenced by recent legal and political issues. In 2025, Google paid a $24.5 million settlement in a lawsuit related to the suspension of Trump’s YouTube account.
• Inconsistent application of AI summaries: Some users report that searches about other politicians, like Barack Obama or Joe Biden, may return an AI-generated response, though this varies. This inconsistency has led to criticism that the AI applies selective censorship.

Google’s statement A Google spokesperson stated that AI Overview and AI Mode do not always show answers to all queries, especially sensitive or complex ones. The company suggests that users rely on traditional search results in such cases.

Armenia and Cambodia are screwed.

Tongue-in-cheek question, serious answer: Stop watching entirely, deny the company your attention, and erode its ability to control our culture. Use the time to learn DIY skills, and meet people IRL.

Probably preaching to the choir here on the Fediverse, but…

Aww, 1990’s memes give me the warm-fuzzies. We can’t have the economic prosperity anymore, but we can still pretend that men are all simple-minded goons and women don’t like sex.

Here’s the thing, though, this guy isn’t one of “us.” I didn’t egg him on, or help plan. I only knew Kirk from the tiny-face memes. The nebulous “we” isn’t responsible; the shooter doesn’t seem to have had a network radicalizing him. He’s the proverbial lone wolf. That means he’s exactly the kind of unpredictable, stochastic agent that I’m saying is out there in the world to provide the fascists their justification.

Back then, it was questions about early indicators of dementia. Wow, how wrong we were! /s

They were gonna do it, anyway. They were just waiting for an excuse. Any excuse. In a world as big and complex as ours, probability would have provided them with some pretext sooner or later. As we can see, they don’t know anything about the shooter, or his ideology. It’s just an excuse. If the world didn’t provide them one, they’d manufacture it. Walking around on eggshells and trying to avoid giving them one was never tenable.