It's more than just social media, it is the internet in general. The human brain just isn't capable of properly processing what is true and what is false. Prior to the internet, we were fed a curated product via newspapers, TV News, etc, etc. Now there is a firehouse of information being shot at us and we struggle with determine what is true on our own.
Sure, but it's the social media aspect that's most concerning to me for a few reasons. 1. It removes the curation element of the content. It allows creation and mass distribution at an individual level, often individuals that are either bad actors or ignorant actors, multiplied by thousands 2. The interactive element then intensifies the negative impacts of the above I'm a vacuum, the Internet wouldn't be as bad, and has far more positive benefits than social media from a productivity perspective. The net benefits to the internet are clear. Social media though, much less. But I understand that in reality, the two cannot be separated anymore. They are forever inextricably linked as a shared state.
I'd post the Metal Gear Solid 2 Patriots speech involving the internet but that whole thing is so messy and convoluted it's not even funny. Also, Tom Nichols once said it'd be better if the internet went back to a subscription model. Such as by the hour.
It’s awful. Dealing with each other eyeball to eyeball meant that many of our worst impulses were kept in check. Once the internet came along and we were all safely hidden away behind a screen our collective id was unleashed upon each other. All our worst instincts; paranoia, hate, fear, etc., all on full display as we use these “gifts” of modern technology to bash away at each other mercilessly. Social media has become our undoing. Net negatives can’t be overstated is what you meant, I think, and I agree.
I just went through many pages of the thread, and picked this one to reply to mainly because it's the closest to the end of the thread. There isn't much that I've read that gives any real insight on the gun or the neck shot. It's pretty common to shoot low right on a heavy trigger, but probably moreso with handguns. "High neck" used to be a fairly common shot in hunting. It's entirely possible that's where the aim was if the shooter was sure of his shot. It's also very possible that it was a shitty shot. I've never shot at a human, but I wouldn't miss by that much on a target at 200 yards even without a scope. I don't consider myself to be an expert marksman at all, or even close to one, but I hit a headshot on a moving squirrel last weekend at 40 yards using a kid sized .22lr without a scope. Whether it was an AR or a bolt action tells us little about what he was actually shooting. There was a post above citing common high powered bolt actions, but most of the models cited are more commonly chambered for fairly weak cartridges. Like ARs, they're available in just about any chambering. It depends on the range, but a 5.56 in an AR is gonna make half the terminal energy of a 300 win mag. But, it doesn't really matter that much because (as animals of our size go) humans don't take much to drop. If we're wanting to talk conspiracies, it's probably better to focus on Loomer calling CK a traitor last week and how much the junta needed a distraction from Epstein.
And also as far as social media goes it may be beyond the capacity of most people to interact with that many complete strangers in a civil fashion. And that’s leaving aside the issue of bots or deliberate agitators pretending to be something they’re not.
Loomer trashes everyone to Trump that is Loomer. She's trying to isolate him so that she's the only voice he hears....
Yep. There are several videos of people shooting varmints (in those cases, rats) with night-scoped air rifles. In another series, this guy turns a mink loose on rats.
Okay, congrats on the quick reply, I guess... Trump listened better when she bashed Curt Smi- uh, Kirk <shrugs>
Noted humanitarian, Senator Mike Lee (R-Utah) is being called a hypocrite for his reaction to Charlie Kirk’s killing vs Melissa Hortman’s, and her husband’s, and the attempted murder of John Hoffman and his wife. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...hooting-melissa-hortman?CMP=oth_b-aplnews_d-1
That sounds about right. When a Republican gets shot, its Democrats fault, but when a Democrat gets shot, it is also Democrats fault.
Conservatives in their view are supposed to be the big man but don't understand that they can bleed too.
Where was this cover in the aftermath of the murder of Melissa Hortman and her husband Mark and the attempted murder of John Hoffman and his wife Yvette?
thanks Belgian, we need outsiders stirring the pot as much as possible please. Tensions and divisions are not yet running high enough here in the USA.
You don't find it bizarre that the murder of a new media figure/podcaster is seemingly treated as far more serious by large sections of the media than the murder and attempted murder of Minnesota state legislators and their spouses? And I believe in the case of the Hoffman's, including the attempted murder of their daughter, whom they shielded with their own bodies (they were shot a combined 17 times and are thus lucky to be alive).
Trump can sow more division in ten seconds on “Truth” “Social” than any of us can generate in a lifetime.
it’s bizarre but then it’s a fresh new outrage every single day…I’m trying to pace myself. We’ve got almost 3.5 more years of this clown show to go. If the normal political process collapses and elections don’t happen as usual, I’ll have to recalibrate but for now we’re ridin’ the storm out. Trying to stay calm and sane. but yeah it’s ridiculous. Flags at half mast, medals of honor, time magazine covers for Kirk, but if a Democrat gets taken out…scattered thoughts and prayers… …it’s outrageous, completely. I’m surprised the country is still functioning as well as it is.