In a sense, this is also the point. They are different devices targeting different markets.

Not going to lie, there are some holes in the metaphor.

Trump is actually Hari Seldon and we’re simply unable to comprehend his genius grasp of psychohistory.

Well, yes, there is that.

That’s not what I’m saying. I’m saying governments could force MS, Google, Apple to implement content filtering tools at the OS level, that give users the choice to set up filtering however they want for themselves or their kids.

Those against website age verification argue that content blocking should happen at the OS level. For example, a parent could enable the built-in “child mode” on their child’s smartphone or computer. As I understand it, that would be more effective, graceful, cheaper, free speechy, and private. To a degree, tech savvy parents (and people who block ads and other content) already do similar things with third party tools - i.e. it’s feasible.

Everyone should have content filtering tools. I use Adguard services for filtering my own internet (adult, Reddit, YouTube, etc.). Surely, implimenting something similar at an OS or router level would have saved us decades of pointless bickering and provided us with an actual consumer benefit?

As long as no one gives them the idea that a hostile occupation is sustainable in perpetuity, we’ll be fine.

Nobody do this. It’s completely ruined my CoD rank.

Thought crimes are next on the todo list. Why do you think we want your AGI logs?

When will these fucking idiots give up? Like we’re ever going to give up privacy? Yeah, right after self-determination, you fucks.

No pressure? You don’t think being upset about it counts? Does it count as pressure when she’s upset with you about something? Is your version of freedom the one where we’re all free to do things your way?

Is it all about the culture gap, or maybe it isn’t about the culture gap at all? Maybe it’s about the culture gap as she perceives it, rather than the culture gap as you perceive it?

Maybe you should start putting the person you love first? Perhaps that’s in your own best interests anyway? Maybe you’re just bad at being selfish?

In June 2025 are you seriously trying to say that Hamas is motivated by end of days hadith? Palestinians are a marginalised ethnic group, to put it mildly. They don’t need religion for motivation.

I was speaking generally. Are you talking specifically about Hamas? I think they’re probably upset about a lot more than end of days hadith. What makes you think they have a specific focus on that? Genuine question.

In my experience, I’ve not seen any of the Abrahamic faiths ever focus on end of days in any material literal sense. I’m not that familiar with the typical US Evangelical or Israeli perspective, which is probably relevant. Evidently, they can sometimes interpret “Promised Land” in the literal sense, rather than a metaphor for a state of enlightenment or inner peace or anything like that. So, you might be right.

When this voluntary migration plan succeeds and the world becomes a beautiful terrorism free utopia, you antizionists are going to look pretty stupid.

Edit: Wait!!! Are you about to downvote me because you’re a zionist, an antizionist who doesn’t understand irony, or something else? I can’t not know!

The hadith is secondary commentary. It is supposed to be considered (in its historic and underlying Quranic context), rather than followed. As a third party, what can we conclude from reading it in isolation without any real world evidence or reference to the actual Muslim people giving it that consideration? Nothing beyond speculation.

I’m currently reading Jesus and John Wayne by Kristin Kobes Du Mez. You might find it interesting. I’m not sure how much I buy in, but it’s pretty wild.

Genuine serious question, and I’m certainly not implying that you should but, do you feel humiliated at all?

My point was that it was a “hadith” quote, as opposed to being from the Quran. Muslims frequently ignore hadith or give them such a wide interpretation as to give them negligible relevance. To simply infer the active beliefs of real Muslim people, or any religious group, from literal interpretations of cherry picked passages of secondary religious texts is ignorant nonsense. (Especially in 2025 when can just ask them directly over a round of Fortnite.)

Even when considering the antichrist stories (which appear in the New Testament), core principles in the Quran state that “believing” Jews, Christians and Muslims (and maybe even unlabelled monotheists) will be rewarded by God (2:62), and warns Muslims against trying to judge or assume “belief” in others (49:12, 4:94). This message also appears throughout the teachings of Jesus (e.g. Matthew 7:1-5), who Muslims consider to be a prophet of God.

Even if we carefully and collectively decide to determine a group as “bad”. We can, and arguably should, do that without recourse to religious prophecy. For example, if we collectively decide (e.g. UN, ICJ, ICC) that the group is carrying out an ethnic cleansing or genocide, based on real world evidence, interpreting a hadith prophecy to support that doesn’t add weight in any objective sense.

Trying to claim asylum in the US for transgender persecution feels like kind of an obvious mistake in 2025.