how many outages does this make now… this is the internet now. a couple companies hold the services for the entire internet and if they have an issue it’s basically the before times.

get fucked.

well fuck

this should be grounds for a prison sentence. open support for Nazism shouldn’t be covered by free speech laws.

let’s hope they sell these globally this time.

things that don’t require effort:

• …
• …
• effort

Removed by mod

this looks like an endorsement to me

this calls for a celebration

i hope people talking about him as a potential president remember this; he’s a conservative robot who doesn’t give a shit about you.

nah most of the time he just overpromises… rarely has he delivered anything at all, and when he does it’s such a clusterfuck that the word underdeliver feels super generous.

no, silly, just blatant disregard for other people’s wellbeing, which is president material

except this existed before copilot

stop calling everything copilot, Microsoft. it’s pathetic

I love how you state that as a fact as if words like give, gift, gill, gibbon, giddy, etc don’t exist.

please tell me you call it JIT-HUB.

Removed by mod

the comparison’s not meant to compare their qualities, but the push to include it in everything by various industries when no one really wants it.

i think they either agree that he was culpable or they used the assumption that you would find him culpable as an argument that inciting violence does make one guilty to some degree.

the problem is there isn’t really any evidence that the left called for his head (especially a head that big; even the shooter knew he couldn’t penetrate that dome with mere bullets), and certainly not anyone of significance… while the jan6 was incited by the most powerful person in the world.

ohh you absolute idiot, if you paid attention in science class you would know that light travels faster than sound: we see your mouth moving but don’t hear anything first so we say “huh” but at that point enough time has passed for the sound to reach our ears, therefore we can answer without need for repetition.

i don’t even understand what is happening in the screenshot. the comment you replied to seems to make the case that he is at fault, and used it as an example to someone defending someone else who incited something but didn’t actively participate. what’s the context here?