I’m a Canadian living in the US with an H1B. I’ve exited and returned to the US multiple times including after Trump and thankfully no issues despite my extreme anxiety each time.
Sexual harassment and assault, such as illegal strip searches and the conditions at women's detention facilities, is a common form of Immigration abuse. This comment is an important reminder of just one form of that.
Nukes for everyone yay! Hey Georgia is also under Russian threat, why don’t they also get a nuke or two? Then maybe their neighbor Armenia will think to themselves “why not me, I’m also under threat by an ex-Soviet country”? Then maybe Azerbaijan, then Turkey, then Saudi Arabia, everyone gets a nuke, I freaking love it! Then maybe other countries that got invaded by a bigger power like maybe Vietnam? Iraq? Why not!
I mean...why not? What moral right does the US have to nuclear weapons that others don't? US exceptionalism?
Just looking at what is happening in the US right now -- an astonishingly corrupt banana republic increasingly led by an insane Christian nationalist movement that bizarrely doesn't seem to understand a thing about Christ's teachings -- I have more faith in North Korea's management of nuclear weapons than the US.
Nuclear non-proliferation relied upon a global order where borders were fixed and there was in essence an international law and detente. Now we have an America openly musing about militarily taking countries and land as if it's just casual talk.
Yes, everyone should have nuclear weapons. And many of them should be pointed at US cities. The US is undeniably the most dangerous nation on Earth right now, and has lost any and all credibility as a rational player.
Exactly. I can bet that every country on the world having a nuclear bomb would actually make the world a safer place. We are still primitive, so the threat of us being destroyed at any time should keep us at bay.
No country that holds nukes should be considered a pillar of morality. That's stupid beyond belief.
That is assuming everyone has a working survival instinct. Religious fanatics notoriously do not have this instinct. You just need one country with a religious fanatic at its head, who thinks that it is better we all go to heaven than to let evil win, and boom.
Now you can you argue the current US president is a fanatic if you want. But I do not see how adding more bombs to more countries reduces the odds of nuclear warfare in the future.
The current equilibrium has worked well enough. I do not see why we need to hand over nuclear weapons to countries currently embroiled in bloody civil wars.
Where is this ruling insane Christian nationalist movement? I don't see one. Are you just talking about people that think men are physically more dominant at sports and other physical activities, that is insane? I think that's what all of the world thought for thousands of years and probably 99% or more of people in the world think today. This is just more the Henny Penny stuff that I don't think helps the left much.
The Christian nationalist movement are the people saying things like “Many people have told me that God spared my life for a reason, and that reason was to save our country and to restore America to greatness” - Trump
I think you like naming fallacies without knowing what they are. That is a common tactic among Flat Earthers (oh I'm sure I'll be hit with another charge here). It is is not "No True Scotsman" to say that it is hyperbolic to suggest that say that statement was Christian nationalism.
You asked for an example, and then when presented with one, said, no, that’s not really an example.
Your argument to antiquity: “that's what all of the world thought for thousands of years”
Your argument to popularity: “probably 99% or more of people in the world think today”
Not that you’re trying to use those points in a cogent way. You heard “christian nationalist” and proceeded to attack a strawman of gender advantage, which has nothing to do with it. I gave you a salient example, and you went off with a half cocked opinion, conveniently sidestepping any further discussion of the actual implications.
That's the direction things are going, yes. It's being made clear that the old rules no longer apply, and that might makes right. What's more mightier than a nuke?
Would Ukraine have been invaded if it had nukes? Unlikely.
Will trump invade Canada? The odds are >0%, so nukes are pretty good defense mechanism.
So if a man with a shaved head and a swastika tattoo told you that it is his human right to live free of 'parasites', you would - what - agree? Because you require 'zero context behind whether a group of humans deserve human rights'? No nuance required, no context needed?
All words have context. Political statements more than most. It's also worth noting how vaguely defined some human rights are. The rights contained in the ICCPR are fairly solid, but what about ICESCR? What is my 'human right to cultural participation', exactly? Are the precise boundaries of such a right something that reasonable people might disagree on, perhaps? In such a way that when a person demands such a right, you may require context for what they're asking for, exactly?
Simplistic and bombastic statements might play well on Twitter, because they're all about emitting vibes for your tribe. They're kind of terrible for genuine political discourse though, such as is required to actually build a just society, rather than merely tweeting about one.
It's easy to seem like you have clarity of thought when you ignore all nuance. How far do you recurse this principle? Down the the level of 5 year old children in a household?
You sell it to an LLC and draft a bill of sale/invoice.
I’d only feel comfortable with a new account at Firebase explicitly in the LLC’s name, and keep my personal name/identity far away from it.
It’s not hard to get an EIN (a few clicks online and free), open a bank account (my credit union turns this around in a day or two), fund it, use debit card as billing method.
I’m not positive… I would imagine you’d need to transfer ownership. Like if I have an iOS app under my personal dev account then start an LLC and someone sues me for whatever reason, I think it would be hard to argue the LLC actually owns the app, but IANAL. You can generally sign up for most of these services as a team or business but I’m not familiar with firebase. It being Google though I’d assume they support business accounts
A pain point will be you’ll need to wait for your new LLC to get a DUNS number + apply for an Apple developer account. (Whilst you’re at it, set up Apple Business Manager too.) Realistically you will want a domain for that LLC that has email, so set that up too.
Nextdns is awesome and I highly recommend it. That said, DNS level ad blocking is pretty limited but it often is enough for journalism sites like this one. You also get privacy benefits since it's quite good at blocking trackers and even bandwidth improvements since your device spends less time spewing logging requests.
I use DNS level blocking on my home network at the gateway level, but I also use AdGuard Pro on iOS for my powerful ad blocking. With this level of ad blocking you can do more than what DNS level blocking does. There's rules like "hide any element matching this selector" or "block XHR queries to this particular path". (though still not as powerful as uOrigin blocking! Which you need for big sites with anti-ad-blocking measures like YouTube or Facebook)
tl;dr; There's lots of options for iOS ad blocking and they're great for dealing with spammy sites like this one.
