Fucking keyboard

Obviously.

I dont get it, the only proof of that came from another article

that one did not post any

well links

Yeah.

Hmm.

The bakery is a business. The couple didn’t go around posting the Baker’s personal address. Naming and shaming a business is different from posting a private citizen’s personal address

The effect is the same.

Get back to the discussion,

did the bakery actually post their info online?

Not really, one makes your work life shit, the other makes your personal life shit

And did the harrasment take place

Because the two are separate things?

Especially for a small family-owned business?

tbh with todays moral police, social media outrage will ruin your personal life even if your work life did it

And well, what was stopping the couple from finding another non christian bakery?

but im off, its 2:06 at night, so good luck discussing gay bakers

I agree, they shouldn’t bother giving their business to assholes who would refuse it

they shouldn't bother

they should be adults and find a different baker

And so they posted a vocal public review against the bakery for refusing service. There’s nothing wrong with that

for every 1 baker that chooses not to bake their cake, there are 800 more who will

The lawsuit only happened because their address got posted

just like places that don't want to hold gay weddings, for every place that doesn't there are 800 more that will

Then where did the damages come from if they didnt sue the bakery?

Who sued the bakery?

The couple sued because the Bakery posted their info in response to a scathing bad review they left after the couple was denied service

And where is the proof that happened?

The only info I got was a personal FB account, no screenshots of it.

A link to another article, that claimed the info was posted on one of the owners personal FB accounts

The link for where they filed the complaint doesn't work for me.

I'll probably look more into it some other time.

see...that's where the bakery is in the wrong, they shouldn't have done that, I do't agree with them doing that if that's true. They have the right to leave the review.

Hence why the question is whether they did it or not

Then again, its just the McDonalds coffe incident, rather not want to talk anymore about this.

Yeah.

Tim: throwing shit at your friends to save your own ass is (((allegedly))) a crummy thing to do

Didn’t you hear, they were never friends tho

betraying the country is crummy too

I forget what Manning leaked.

Millitary confidential stuff last I heard.

Then again, snowden did do that as well.

So depends on what was being leaked, if it was something closer to current conflict, then it is crummy.

If you’re leaking classified information about our government violating human rights (such as the surveillance state violating our right to privacy) it’s not really you betraying your country. I’d consider that more revealing the fact that your country is betraying you. On the other hand if you’re just leaking classified information that reveals no wrongdoing for the sake of leaking classified information, yes you’re betraying your country.

Or worse, if you're revealing classified information which could or does place soldiers and people in immediate danger.

I mean the question is not which is crummy, its what kind of info was being leaked.

THen we decide if it was crummy or not.

Id be worried if the info being leaked was say, current tactics, list of soldiers/leaders currently serving.

Judging from Snowdens notoriety, I assumed that it was because the info he leaked wasnt of the above.

Yeah Snowden was a "whistleblower" type wher he confirmed what the govt. was doing, manning released a plethora of shit ranging from recordings of military having fun blowing up civilians via helicopter to sensitive intelligence about people, military placement, etc, I doubt she had good intentions either considering the size and range of info

I think Manning's intentions were good, they were just extremely neglectful over what they actually released

HRC video with a weird glitch... wtf??? https://twitter.com/AlexMohajer/status/957078762440441856

@Kane.🇺🇸.Nexus ?

Q posted stuff about shit is going to get real and this was in my news feed

https://youtu.be/aIcF-tdNVyE

Really interesting interview id thought id share with you all

```Coincheck has fallen victim to a hack attack that reportedly stole more than $400 million worth of cryptocurrencies.

The Tokyo-based exchange is a platform where consumers can buy or sell a number of cryptocurrencies, and this appears to be the largest monetary theft of cryptocurrency ever reported.
```

stop keeping your money in exchanges

there is 0 liabiltiy with cryptocurrencies in most (every?) country

sooooooooooooooo many exchanges have been "hacked" over the years

Yeah.

I haven't jumped into crypto yet because I want to know what I am doing before I do.

obviously using crypto exchanges is fine

As exchanges, yeah, but they're not banks.

but withdraw anything you aren't trading

Yeah.

i have ~$1,000 in exchanges rn

I remember asking Tim one time if he could give a more clear kind of 'tutorial' to crypto, but his answer was basically 'make a coinbase account.' lol

lmfao

crypto trading is absolute cancer

though the barrier to entry is still lower than real stocks

It's just gambling really, payout is either in a day or never

lol

I got a check from mtg mountain or whatever the fuck it was

mtgox

it was like, 25 cents or some shit

@pukeblood not really

it's not hard to make money from exchanges

the stuff is too unstable to me at this point

lots of people take the quick route and sell/buy way higher/lower than market price

and a lot of money funnels back from fees, expansion, and investors

there isn't enough valid real-world equiv short of using it to launder money

and drugs

i mean

there's a bitcoin ATM near me

yeah

you mentioned that

it was at 95% mkt

@ping not really, the amount you make is based on how much you put in, and there's always a chance it could go down after

@pukeblood crypto is a lot different from stocks

there are bots

but they aren't as agressive

have you ever actually tried to buy during a dip? theyre aggressive

crypto trends are easier to identify by humans

High frequency trading crypto rtos's with extremely low jitter

I don't see it to differently from a new country's currency

unless there were local bidnesses accepting btc

which there are a couple here

Oh shit tim's ol

lol

THEY TRIED TO SHILL A TRADEGEENERS

Bitcoin and natural gas stocks are used to rig elections and train brutal corporate sponsored weebs around the world

https://therightstuff.biz/2018/01/27/fash-the-nation-106-state-of-disunion/

https://radicalcapitalist.org/2018/01/25/clearing-up-the-hoppe-foreword-controversy/

have you guys heard about this?

To summarize, Chase Rachels is an extremely right wing libertarian, wrote a very popular book called "Spontaneous Order." He has been trying to take out the leftists elements that have near total control of the community. He writes another book about how culture in important and how libertarianism is actually extremely, if not the most extreme right wing ideology. Asks Hans Hoppe to write a foreward for the new book. Hoppe reads the book and loves it, agrees to write the foreward for the book.

Everything is fine until (((someone))) at the Mises institute hears about this, goes full commie and finds the proposed book cover that was meant to be private. (pic relevant) This "person" throws an autistic shit fit and people at Mises tell Hoppe to withdraw his support and foreward of the book. Hoppe tells Chase he is being FORCED to withdraw his support. (probably monetary / academic threats)

Rachel's says he'd be happy to change the proposed cover as it has not been made public. This message goes unanswered by several people. Now Mises has scrubbed every reference to Chase Rachels from their site.

The lesson, is the same lesson we have always learned. Once the left has their hooks in something it can never be right wing again. They're like an incurable disease. They'll play as dirty as possible to prevent you from winning.

https://twitter.com/BrittanyVenti/status/957379376080916481

"I got banned for having an African cooking stream today on Twitch because they thought it was offensive. My mom is black, I was raised by her -a black woman.
They just assumed my race and banned me. I have DNA testing to prove this. Here is the email they sent me."

She got banned becuase she was baking clay pieces and her camera guy was making clicking sounds and handed her a banana

that's what I also heard

its an interesting issue

does she as a black person have the right to mock her own culture and race

That too

athene can say "im scamming you retards" and still not get banned

say AND actually do the scam, I should mention

So here's the thing... perhaps what she was doing was in poor taste...

but shutting down her stream the way they did just gave it a streisand effect.. rather than letting people make up their own minds..

or perhaps she's allowed to mock her own culture as you say and it's all parody...

in either case, we now have another platform making a unilateral decision based on "?" to silence someone that they don't agree with

between that, athene, and twitch mods banning users for their youtube videos, I think they are severely lacking a mission statement

but did you guys see the CNN "cuckoldry is positive" article?

Yup

Yup, no words to describe

holy fuck my eyes

this is a major news organization people

cnn is the new buzzfeed

to top it off, it shows all white hetero couples in the photos

but says its positive among gay men

like wat

BBC male presenters agreed to paycuts

hooookay

wow.. talk about demasculation..

no reward for hard work

I don't see any problem with that?

If they were actually forced into such a thing, sure, that's a problem

people should be paid what they're worth, regardless of other factors

If they want to neuter themselves in the name of equality that’s fine with me (again as long as it’s not forced).

given the amount of them, it probably was a voluntold issue

and oh yeah, I agree, if it was completely voluntary sure

but damn, stick up for yourself

Better than virtue signaling. If you believe something you should act on it.

So I’ll give them credit there.

Sure, to me this is similar to the Mark Wahlberg situation...

well what do you know, sargon covered both the cnn article and the bbc paycuts and came up with the same conclusion

people need not be spineless.

I dont believe this will fix anything whatsoever, you dont appease hitler rule #1

maybe we're getting this all wrong guys

maybe those people asked said "not even once, you're fake news"

and CNN jsut went "So you're saying you want to be cucked"

shit they got us

https://gizmodo.com/sex-researcher-thinks-many-cuck-obsessed-conservatives-1822422097

they even mention how the study was specifically on gay men, and ignore that ala CNN style

Purposely fake news.

Keep it up cnn

"Cuckolding can be positive for some couples, study says."
CNN is a shitty news outlet and lies constantly, study says

the gizmodo comments are cancer

I'm center, center right

I wouldn't ina million years believe that ANY self-respecting man, regardless of his views, would have anything to do with cuckolding

nor would I accuse any segment of the population REGARDLESS of their beliefs of it

they dont, I think gay men are specifically more promiscuous and likely to engage, which is why the lack of separation of terms in this study-review is pretty appalling

agree, but its' being described as basically gospel now

I just don't know where we go from here.. I really don't

and then the researcher himself is saying "well if conservative politicians openly hate on the gays and are sometimes gay themselves, then conservatives who openly show disgust with cuckoldry are likely cucks" makes 0 sense

none whatsoever

and sorry

Hey I may be late to this but, anybody else seen the "CA Wants JAIL TIME for Offering Plastic Straws" bit?

very few polititians, even conservatives, openly hate gays

they might not agree with the practice

but there is typically no hatred of the individual

@Christopher Yactayo yes, it's crazy.. tucker did a piece on it that basically sums up my views distinctly

Tbh only the bedroom tumblr femminists are advocating for promiscuity because they are too self entitled to maintain a relationship

It's been going on for years but the media has let that shit slip into mainstream

any real women wouldn't stay with a man that was so deemasculated to be into it

I asked my wife, she laughed

even if there were more, they're POLITICIANS, they "openly hate" anything they need to get their points, they are not representatives of values

Not that most in the media agree they aren't critical of it

being critical of the act != hating the person

but small minded people can't separate the two

you do this, therefore I hate you

you have this opinion, therefore you're a nazi

you are a nazi, and therefore I can punch you

Reminds me of that one porn actress who wouldn't sleep with a gay guy for a film, and was bullied until she committed suicide.

Well you kinda have to show some hate in order to express disagreement with something they take seriously

@JadenFrostwolf yeah that was completely fucked up

It wasn't that he was gay

Yeah, she even said it was because of a higher risk of STD's, I know.

I wouldn't call disagreing with someone's lifestyle, hate.., though

I forgot to mention that, sorry. lol

it's jsut a disagreement..

It was the risk of getting STDs since the actor wasn't required to take a test before that specific shoot

Yeah, I don't understand this obsession with emotion. Even if they did "hate" gays, what does it matter?

She had already done shoots with other bisexual men IIRC

@JadenFrostwolf just because that's her job, she shouldn't be forced to have sex with them, regardless of the reason

And yeah I don't care what someone's reason is for not having sex

They have the choice regardless of how stupid the reason os

it's their body.. regardless of prfession

I know, I'm on the side of the actress.

oh I know you are, I was agreeing with you

Even more is on the line since it's going online for everyone to see

and even if I didn't agree with you

that wouldn't mean I hated you 😄

Yeah. lol

because you know, I'm able to separate hate from disagreement

Ur all stupid and ignorant for not agreeing with me
JUST LOOK AT THE SCIENCE YOU IDIOTS

taylor swift gets bullied for not openly stating her political values, and thats WEIRD as shit to me

I know. lol

are you saying she gets hated on for NOT HAVING AN OPINION

lol

When people pull the science card it pisses me off

science changes every 5 years as we get new data..

Everyone on every side of the spectrum does it

Science isn't an entity

so while, yeah, science can be used, my god, it's not set in stone

@LotheronPrime Science changes every second as we get new data

exactly

We form theorems which contain a set of statements that back each other up inside of such theorem

@Christopher Yactayo So you're saying science is like wikipedia?

science =/= statistics though

too many people are quick to find a cause for ANY statistic, good or bad

They aren't always true in the sense of reality we just choose the theories that best match observations

its like the pseudoscientific health articles "eggs are bad for you mmkay"

because some people reacted bad to eggs

For example, special relativity vs traditional Newtonian physics

Techinically science is like wikipedia. Anyone can make a scientific study or display new data. Then that data is tested and retested to assure whether it is true or not. So yes, like wikipedia

Special relativity superseded Newtonian physics completely, giving a completely new set of supporting assertions and observations

Newtonian physics is great for the simple interactions we have on Earth with negligible difference in results to special relativity so they are both usefu

What I'm getting at is that you need to explicitly state which theory you are pulling from instead of just calling whatever shit you say "scientific fact"

Because you can't mix and match

or if you do

that's a new theorem entirely

a theorem is a hypothesis with a huge amount of supporting hypotheses surrounding it

which must stand up to scientific scrutiny before beingcited as example

and tend to stick

I mean we have thousands of University professors to figure this shit out, anything you come up with is most likely not new and has already been classified or thrown out

Peer review culture is the best we are going to get to a system that produces theories that match reality

(for humans at least)

I'm not so sure

on the surface, yes

but the entry to those peer reviewed articles can be low, and its jsut the same bubble that peer reviews each other, so very little scruteny

Well you might have objections to a lot of acedemia and I do too but they come from areas with very low peer reviews and citations

one study can be unanimously decided to have been executed to the best methods available, but its still only one study

Physics, psycology, engineering, etc are extremely difficult to bullshit

Psycology less than others since they are based on less concrete observations of extremely complex systems

https://youtu.be/YWVmDSMl30s?t=4335

jbp ont he subject

But still waaaaay harder to bullshit than history or sociology

JBP explaisn what I'm talking about more than I could ever

JBP basically says humanities is cancer and most people that make humanities papers aren't doing it to progress human knowledge, just pitch their own opinions and circlejerk them