Look at the results of that 90s LA bank robbery. It was the first time that two guys had enough body armour and firepower to challenge the local police. What was the end result? Every police officer across the country getting assigned body armour and high powered rifles, and every police agency militarizing and buying APCS, tactical units, etc.
The idea that the government would allow you to own weaponry that would legitimately challenge them is asinine.
This is honestly, the dumbest, most American take in the world.
It literally ignores the plainly obvious fact that not a single other developed country allows gun ownership, and yet, still have rights and democracy and freedom.
Guns did not get your rights, and they do not protect you from a government that has AI powered drones with anti tank mines on them. Hell a fucking APC with a sound cannon will make your AR look like a child's toy.
Guess what happened when a pair of guys had enough guns and body armour to challenge the local LA government in the 90s? Oh would you look at that, every single local government's police force across the country just militarized and bought tanks and SWAT teams in response. The idea that the government will let any random potentially mentally ill or terrorist citizen, buy enough firepower that they could legitimately challenge the government, is dumb on its face. No government anywhere allows that or would for obvious (see: terroristic) reasons.
Wide spread gun ownership just makes everyone less safe. Full stop.
Yeah I do agree with your overall point.
Last week's assassination of Minnesota's Democrat former House Speaker was the logical sequel to that of the United Healthcare CEO
I don't disagree with your conclusions about cheering on violence and what it begets, but I will just point out that if you're going by the sequel logic then the shooting of Brian Thompson was the 5th movie in the series, with the first four being assassinated Democrat state representatives.
It also ignores the literal hundreds of movies and documentaries that have been made where American Insurance companies kills thousands and cause enormous amounts of suffering, just so that they can turn an even higher profit.
I still don't agree with political assassination, but starting the narrative with the assassination of Brian Thompson is pretty arbitrary if the storyline is so broad that this is the sequel.
This is honestly a trash article. It can be summarized as:
"Microsoft, a trillion dollar corporation that makes around $150 billion in pure profit, every single year, is tempering expectations around AI, BUT then why are they still investing $12B dollars in it, that makes no sense!".
Like, they're tempering expectations around AGI revolutionizing the economy, not saying AI is trash and theres no value whatsoever in it.
Fellow AI-haters should check out the newsletter and podcast of Ed Zitron.
If you're not a hater and want a balanced and rationale take, don't.
Why aren't the data brokers being charged with accessory to murder?
Writing stuff down with pen and paper is an objectively better way to remember things then digital files, also way more secure unless you really, really know what you're doing.
Well if you're going to give them another shot, you should try the Outer Wilds.
Much less abstract puzzle solving, and it tells quite a good narrative (no combat).
Bruh, come the fuck on. Jews were 1% of the population, meanwhile like 30% of the population actively supported the Nazis, and far more would have continued to turn a blind eye as long as violence wasn't being perpetrated against people like them.
This is nonsense alt history that ignores the fact that Nazis steamrolled and enacted death camps in far more countries than just Germany, and personal ownership of firearms didn't make a dent in stopping them.