If people knew what was good for them, they would have supported him. Instead, racism, bigotry and intolerance was a priority for the majority of Americans. Good job fucking yourselves over last election. I hope Trump keeps this shit up till you guys reach the boiling point....
Don't get me wrong, there are plenty of good folks in America, but arguably, not enough yet.
Well, our "left" party instead decided to call Bernie Sanders racist during the primaries and do everything they could, twice, to keep him from winning their primary. So, it's not just racist voting for Trump that does this. The entire political establishment is absolutely terrified of an actual leftist running on the Democratic ticket for president.
Because once every 4 years when Americans actually pay attention to politics for a month or two, they would overwhelmingly vote for a leftist pushing progressive working class policies. No matter how "racist" they are. Racist in this country also have had someone they know experience crippling medical debt.
The 30% of this country that votes for racism and bigotry is the only group of people that actually see their policy positions get passed. The rest of us got garbage healthcare reform, more wars, more police state and surveillance, oh, and a genocide from the "not racist" party.
The racist bigots are the only ones with a lot of motivation to go to the polls. At least they get something for taking time off work to go vote.
I hope you stub your toe on the way to the bathroom tonight and the bruise serves to remind you to look for commonalities with people fighting the same fight as you instead of shitting on everyone with a slightly different point of view.
It's like you all are incapable of not straw manning.
How convenient it must be to just be able to instantly disregard any criticism, because anyone who dares is a "dirty liberal who wants everyone to the left of them to be killed."
Right dude, just keep making up positions to argue against that literally nobody here has.
I mean you they literally said you they hope I get raided by ICE. Repeating what you they said is not a "Strawman". You They cheered for fascist to come kill me because you they disagreed with my initial comment.
“What do you tell voters who are new to the process who say this makes them feel like it’s all rigged?” Tapper asked the DNC chair.
“Unpledged delegates exist really to make sure that party leaders and elected officials don’t have to be in a position where they are running against grassroots activists,” Wasserman Schultz calmly explained.
Fuck Debbie Wasserman Schultz. Fuck the DNC. They literally worked against the will of the people to install an establishment candidate and told the world they did it. This is not democracy. This is the event that radicalized me.
You're confusing the DNC with the primary voters, who gave Clinton a landslide victory over Sanders. You can't get any closer to the will of the people than that.
Yeah, but thats a shallow fact. It ignores the very real truths of the dnc not staying neutral in 2016. It ignores the concept of superdelegate that existed back then. Sure the promary voters ultimately decided, but pretending like the dnc didnt put the thumb on the scale with its media aparatus is to be disingenuous.
Don't forget the Democratic National Convention ratfucking Bernie twice. Establishment Democrats can't let progressives get into power because it threatens their own, since Dems and Cons share a lot of the same donors (AIPAC, etc.).
I've always wanted to watch it and finally got around to it. Great show, wish I didn't sleep on it!
I did a Binge Watch January (totally didn't make this up) and caught up on a half dozen shows. I got some whiplash going from Barry to The Good Place to Severance lol
I'm still surprised and low-key amazed by the writers of The Good Place. Making a show about philosophy, existentialism and theology all mixed together into a great comedy is a feat and they pulled it off really well.
Even when I literally called the "twist" of season 1 from the first episode I enjoyed the walk there and never felt like it was super contrived. They easily could have taken that plot and ran it into the ground.
Honestly I can't think of another show that's dug into some pretty meaty philosophy and made it so much fun!
It's an impressive achievement to pack a primetime sitcom with as much philosophy as it did. Michael Schur is a great comedy writer but I had no idea he was more than that until this show. Apparently Ted Danson and Kristen Bell were the only actors who were told from the start
As for the twist, I thought of it more as a plot point. They were building up to it from the start and rest of the show hinges on it. At the risk of sounding negative, Season 1 was kind of like a long pilot episode to set up the true conflict of the series.
I'm not one to get emotional watching TV or movies but I definitely teared up at the end with Eleanor and Chidi
I'm not one to get emotional watching TV or movies but I definitely teared up at the end with Eleanor and Chidi
I always enjoy the "love will find a way" trope and they did a good job writing the characters as earnestly loving in a relationship that felt real and not simply contrived for the plot in and of itself.
Definitely will have to rewatch the series for a third time at some point in this lifetime.
Yeah, the relationship felt very earned. It didn't just play into the "opposites attract" thing, it was how the characters changed that made the other love them.
Maybe you can watch it a 4th time in The Good Place
Of course, I realized this right away. When we are done destroying everything, we are going to have to pay to fix it all up, as well as fix our own broken government.
Before we take it out of the Treasury, though, we should confiscate the entire fortunes and corporations of a few people, starting with Trump, Musk, Theil, Ellison, Bezos, the Waltons, and a bunch more. They wanted MAGA, they supported MAGA, and that choice will cost them every penny they've stolen to clean up their mess.
Take a number and get in line, I am pretty sure the Netherlands reparations are pretty far down on the list.
Unless you count the massive deaths from leaded fuels, forever chemicals, micro plastics, etc. that the US invented and then proliferated knowing of the horrors they would bring. To top it off when they were confronted with the truth they did everything in their power to ignore, deceive, and then lie about it.
Damn, well maybe you aren't that far down the line. I am pretty sure reparations would be in the hundreds of trillions for all the damaged caused which is far more than the US has.
I suppose the best solution would be to just dissolve the US at this point.
Why? It doesn't have to be. We are in unprecedented times, and it will require unprecedented solutions. Just because our elected leaders were too cowardly to do it the past, doesn't mean we have to keep following their shameful malpractice.
Perhaps the biggest one is a conscious decision that the citizens do not exist to serve the wealthy. The wealthy are allowed to keep their wealth, as long as they are serving the needs of the citizens. As soon as they are found to be hoarding wealth, abusing their employees or the systems, engaging in corruption, etc., they will be imprisoned, and their entire fortune confiscated, and their families prohibited from accessing government assistance.
The wealthy will quickly learn that wealth comes with important responsibilities and harsh punishments, and it might not be worth it to be wealthy.
If the US doesn't bail out the UAE they will need to sell some of their $2 trillion in assets to fund their SimCity in the dessert thats suffering because of Epstein's Epic Fuck-up Fury. A lot of those assets are in companies owned by Trump and his Oligarch friends.
GCC states are US colonies. If they were not, they would get couped by CIA/Mossad. Only legitimated democracies in the world have CIA/Mossad approved governments. People in these nations generally have a poor view of Israel, and US has shown an incapacity to protect them. US alliance is a liability.
95% likelihood end of Iran war is US just leaves, and world figures out how to ship through SoH to the satisfaction of Iran. GCC colonies are instrumental to massive US financialization values. Petrodollar is not important, but recycling wealth to US is critical. To keep that colonial arrangement, US will need to help with reconstruction even if they no longer get arms sales and bases in the region, and CIA/Mossad threats to monarchies will continue even if some short term reversal of assistance flow occurs.
If war resumes, it can only be through consent of GCC (and other US colonies), and quick defeat/withdrawal of that consent occurs by destruction of desalination, ultra expensive ships that are sitting ducks serving those regimes, in addition to $Bs of damage to oil production/shipping infrastructure.
I understand the sentiment, but there’s no intrinsic link between the two. Like everything in economics, they’re imaginary constructs, and the connective tissue between these two concepts exists exclusively as a shared delusion.
What it reveals is what the incumbent administration has actively chosen to prioritise. It could do either, both, or neither, but the permutations are a false dichotomy, and treating them otherwise helps mask their true status.
no, like, i get what you're saying but you're only partially correct
your take essentially boils down to "the government can do whatever it wants, can distribute wealth however it wants, can make as much debt as it wants to, and can raise as many taxes as it wants to"
while partially correct, it's not entirely correct because the more wealth redistribution the government does, i.e. the more taxes and spending the government does, the bigger the influence of the government on people's lifes will be, and i think that makes people dependent on the government which is not good because it's a single point of failure and sets society up for future disruptions.
i believe: government needs to intervene as much as necessary but as little as possible.
which means more wealth redistribution from rich to poor today because that's necessary, but we should eventually get to a state again where that redistribution is limited in the future.
your take essentially boils down to "the government can do whatever it wants, can distribute wealth however it wants, can make as much debt as it wants to, and can raise as many taxes as it wants to"
For an entity which exclusively holds the monopoly ability to issue the currency its budgets are denominated in, they don’t engage with money in the same way a currency user must, it’s almost exactly inverted. Tax payments they receive don’t pay for anything, they’re mostly an inflation control mechanism.
Burdening themselves with ‘debt’ in their currency is an unnecessary complication, and every ‘payment’ they receive in that same currency is obliterated the moment the accounting record is reconciled.
i believe: government needs to intervene as much as necessary but as little as possible.
which means more wealth redistribution from rich to poor today because that's necessary, but we should eventually get to a state again where that redistribution is limited in the future.
It’s cute that the notion that the involvement of the state in an economy is framed as an aberration, and a problem to be resolved. A national economy originates from the state as its primary tool of control and coercion. Limiting its role in its function is a fascinating display of cognitive gymnastics.
I agree that pursuing a state of equilibrium where wealth redistribution can be limited is worthy, but framing it as a return to something previously recorded is, at best, laughable.
71 Comments
0li0li@lemmy.world · 61 pts · 108d
If people knew what was good for them, they would have supported him. Instead, racism, bigotry and intolerance was a priority for the majority of Americans. Good job fucking yourselves over last election. I hope Trump keeps this shit up till you guys reach the boiling point....
Don't get me wrong, there are plenty of good folks in America, but arguably, not enough yet.
wheezy@lemmy.ml · 22 pts · 108d
Well, our "left" party instead decided to call Bernie Sanders racist during the primaries and do everything they could, twice, to keep him from winning their primary. So, it's not just racist voting for Trump that does this. The entire political establishment is absolutely terrified of an actual leftist running on the Democratic ticket for president.
Because once every 4 years when Americans actually pay attention to politics for a month or two, they would overwhelmingly vote for a leftist pushing progressive working class policies. No matter how "racist" they are. Racist in this country also have had someone they know experience crippling medical debt.
The 30% of this country that votes for racism and bigotry is the only group of people that actually see their policy positions get passed. The rest of us got garbage healthcare reform, more wars, more police state and surveillance, oh, and a genocide from the "not racist" party.
The racist bigots are the only ones with a lot of motivation to go to the polls. At least they get something for taking time off work to go vote.
Samskara@sh.itjust.works · 5 pts · 108d
The biggest issue is a lot of Americans don’t vote.
pupbiru@aussie.zone · 5 pts · 107d
god i fucking love that we have compulsory voting in australia
literally solves so many issues
Wataba@sh.itjust.works · -12 pts · 108d
Peppycito@sh.itjust.works · 15 pts · 108d
I hope you stub your toe on the way to the bathroom tonight and the bruise serves to remind you to look for commonalities with people fighting the same fight as you instead of shitting on everyone with a slightly different point of view.
wheezy@lemmy.ml · 12 pts · 108d
Liberals trying not to cheer for fascist to kill anyone to their left. It's an impossible challenge it seems.
prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone · -3 pts · 108d
It's like you all are incapable of not straw manning.
How convenient it must be to just be able to instantly disregard any criticism, because anyone who dares is a "dirty liberal who wants everyone to the left of them to be killed."
Right dude, just keep making up positions to argue against that literally nobody here has.
pinto@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 107d
Removed comment:
You: "No one actually says that leftists need to die."
prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone · -2 pts · 107d
When did I say that? Yikes, talk about putting words in my mouth.
pinto@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 106d
Directly quoting you is not putting words in your mouth.
wheezy@lemmy.ml · 3 pts · 108d
I mean
youthey literally saidyouthey hope I get raided by ICE. Repeating whatyouthey said is not a "Strawman".YouThey cheered for fascist to come kill me becauseyouthey disagreed with my initial comment.prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 0 pts · 107d
Yeah I didn't say that but ok.
wheezy@lemmy.ml · 2 pts · 107d
Yes. Your reply read like you were responding as the original commenter. Which was my misunderstanding originally.
It's why I added the strike through to the comment after realizing. Long long before you replied.
HikingVet@lemmy.ca · -2 pts · 108d
You should start reading usernames.
wheezy@lemmy.ml · 2 pts · 108d
Sure. Definitely thought it was the original person. But the response is written like it is and definitely in defense of the original.
Diva@lemmy.ml · 1 pts · 108d
jaaake@lemmy.world · 11 pts · 108d
https://www.salon.com/2016/02/13/un_democratic_party_dnc_chair_says_superdelegates_ensure_elites_dont_have_to_run_against_grassroots_activists/
Fuck Debbie Wasserman Schultz. Fuck the DNC. They literally worked against the will of the people to install an establishment candidate and told the world they did it. This is not democracy. This is the event that radicalized me.
pfried@reddthat.com · -1 pts · 107d
You're confusing the DNC with the primary voters, who gave Clinton a landslide victory over Sanders. You can't get any closer to the will of the people than that.
chilicheeselies@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 107d
Yeah, but thats a shallow fact. It ignores the very real truths of the dnc not staying neutral in 2016. It ignores the concept of superdelegate that existed back then. Sure the promary voters ultimately decided, but pretending like the dnc didnt put the thumb on the scale with its media aparatus is to be disingenuous.
pfried@reddthat.com · 2 pts · 106d
Superdelegates existed in 2008 as well. They were mostly in Clinton's camp, but when Obama got ahead in the primary voting, not even anywhere close to as big a margin as Clinton had over Sanders, they switched. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/feb/23/uselections2008.barackobama
When she ultimately lost the primary, she threw her support behind Obama in the general election. https://www.c-span.org/program/american-history-tv/senator-hillary-clinton-2008-convention-speech/194032
Resonosity@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 8 pts · 108d
Don't forget the Democratic National Convention ratfucking Bernie twice. Establishment Democrats can't let progressives get into power because it threatens their own, since Dems and Cons share a lot of the same donors (AIPAC, etc.).
aesthelete@lemmy.world · 48 pts · 108d
Oh, I get it.................This is the bad place.
Tyrq@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 20 pts · 108d
Been watching this again, it's nice to absorb something positive for a change. Gonna have to find something with the same tone to binge after this
prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 8 pts · 108d
Good luck with that, The Good Place is pretty singular
glimse@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 108d
I've always wanted to watch it and finally got around to it. Great show, wish I didn't sleep on it!
I did a Binge Watch January (totally didn't make this up) and caught up on a half dozen shows. I got some whiplash going from Barry to The Good Place to Severance lol
LePoisson@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 108d
I'm still surprised and low-key amazed by the writers of The Good Place. Making a show about philosophy, existentialism and theology all mixed together into a great comedy is a feat and they pulled it off really well.
Even when I literally called the "twist" of season 1 from the first episode I enjoyed the walk there and never felt like it was super contrived. They easily could have taken that plot and ran it into the ground.
Honestly I can't think of another show that's dug into some pretty meaty philosophy and made it so much fun!
glimse@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 108d
It's an impressive achievement to pack a primetime sitcom with as much philosophy as it did. Michael Schur is a great comedy writer but I had no idea he was more than that until this show. Apparently Ted Danson and Kristen Bell were the only actors who were told from the start
As for the twist, I thought of it more as a plot point. They were building up to it from the start and rest of the show hinges on it. At the risk of sounding negative, Season 1 was kind of like a long pilot episode to set up the true conflict of the series.
I'm not one to get emotional watching TV or movies but I definitely teared up at the end with Eleanor and Chidi
LePoisson@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 108d
I always enjoy the "love will find a way" trope and they did a good job writing the characters as earnestly loving in a relationship that felt real and not simply contrived for the plot in and of itself.
Definitely will have to rewatch the series for a third time at some point in this lifetime.
glimse@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 108d
Yeah, the relationship felt very earned. It didn't just play into the "opposites attract" thing, it was how the characters changed that made the other love them.
Maybe you can watch it a 4th time in The Good Place
MML@sh.itjust.works · 2 pts · 107d
Similar, Upload?
Tyrq@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 2 pts · 107d
Just watched a couple episodes, and yeah, thats about as close as I could expect, thanks for the heads up!
FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world · 33 pts · 108d
I'm always going to be a little bit pissed off that we never got President Bernard Sanders.
BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today · 32 pts · 108d
Of course, I realized this right away. When we are done destroying everything, we are going to have to pay to fix it all up, as well as fix our own broken government.
Before we take it out of the Treasury, though, we should confiscate the entire fortunes and corporations of a few people, starting with Trump, Musk, Theil, Ellison, Bezos, the Waltons, and a bunch more. They wanted MAGA, they supported MAGA, and that choice will cost them every penny they've stolen to clean up their mess.
Jaybird@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 108d
Doomsider@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 106d
Take a number and get in line, I am pretty sure the Netherlands reparations are pretty far down on the list.
Unless you count the massive deaths from leaded fuels, forever chemicals, micro plastics, etc. that the US invented and then proliferated knowing of the horrors they would bring. To top it off when they were confronted with the truth they did everything in their power to ignore, deceive, and then lie about it.
Damn, well maybe you aren't that far down the line. I am pretty sure reparations would be in the hundreds of trillions for all the damaged caused which is far more than the US has.
I suppose the best solution would be to just dissolve the US at this point.
Jaybird@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 106d
unclejeeves@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 108d
pipedream
BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today · 7 pts · 108d
Why? It doesn't have to be. We are in unprecedented times, and it will require unprecedented solutions. Just because our elected leaders were too cowardly to do it the past, doesn't mean we have to keep following their shameful malpractice.
Perhaps the biggest one is a conscious decision that the citizens do not exist to serve the wealthy. The wealthy are allowed to keep their wealth, as long as they are serving the needs of the citizens. As soon as they are found to be hoarding wealth, abusing their employees or the systems, engaging in corruption, etc., they will be imprisoned, and their entire fortune confiscated, and their families prohibited from accessing government assistance.
The wealthy will quickly learn that wealth comes with important responsibilities and harsh punishments, and it might not be worth it to be wealthy.
rayyy@piefed.social · 15 pts · 108d
America first. Where did I hear that?
SirHery@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 108d
Fist in the "get fucked in the ass* konga line.
Typhoon@lemmy.ca · 4 pts · 108d
No you mistook their meaning. They said "Us first". Everyone thought they meant the USA but the oligarchs literally mean "us".
expatriado@lemmy.world · 15 pts · 108d
who spends money on trump's businesses tho
bedwyr@piefed.ca · 14 pts · 108d
On his business perhaps, this is also bribe territory. Big time.
thorhop@sopuli.xyz · 13 pts · 108d
The leverage of course being switching from the US petroleum dollar to the Chinese petroleum yuan.
This message brought to you by the Chinese century. The Chinese Century: Ni hao, motherfuckers.
MousePotatoDoesStuff@piefed.social · 13 pts · 108d
So much for "America first"...
Asfalttikyntaja@sopuli.xyz · 9 pts · 108d
You didn’t see that little wording, “American billionaires first”
MousePotatoDoesStuff@piefed.social · 2 pts · 108d
Should have read the fine print
Witchfire@lemmy.world · 12 pts · 108d
And that's gonna come back through his resort isn't it
Mrkawfee@lemmy.world · 12 pts · 108d
If the US doesn't bail out the UAE they will need to sell some of their $2 trillion in assets to fund their SimCity in the dessert thats suffering because of
Epstein'sEpicFuck-upFury. A lot of those assets are in companies owned by Trump and his Oligarch friends.humanspiral@lemmy.ca · 1 pts · 108d
KSA was the one building NEOM. But Dubai as simcity is acceptable. Property values down quite a bit since start of war.
BillCheddar@lemmy.world · 12 pts · 107d
Let their fucking billionaires pay for it. Or just keep the war going til they move. Either way, not on my goddamn tab, thanks.
ThunderQueen@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 107d
DisgruntledGorillaGang@reddthat.com · 10 pts · 108d
America First!!! 🇺🇸🦅🇺🇸🦅🇺🇸 🦅™
altkey@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 5 pts · 108d
Well, it's not his money he's investing but it would be him who would see a return.
Yerbouti@sh.itjust.works · 4 pts · 108d
Worst, I'll call you a low IQ SOCIALIST. Boom.
youcantreadthis@quokk.au · 4 pts · 108d
Just tell them theyre a fucking colony now. Blow up the fucking palace. Would be cheaper, less unethical.
explodicle@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 108d
But the UAE doesn't have enough bombs to blow up the USA.
youcantreadthis@quokk.au · 2 pts · 105d
If only they could do each other. The dream.
Cherry@piefed.social · 2 pts · 108d
I honestly wasn't sure which ruthless dictator family he was talking about...Trumps or UAE. I take it he is referring to money going to the UAE here?
Microw@piefed.zip · 1 pts · 108d
It also shows a lack of understanding for the UAEs political system. Who is he referring to? The UAE has multiple rulers and ruling families.
Cherry@piefed.social · 1 pts · 108d
No i mean is Bernie referring to trumps family or a UAE family?
WanderWisley@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 107d
Are you tired yet from this winning global markets? 🫲🍊🫱
humanspiral@lemmy.ca · 1 pts · 108d
GCC states are US colonies. If they were not, they would get couped by CIA/Mossad. Only legitimated democracies in the world have CIA/Mossad approved governments. People in these nations generally have a poor view of Israel, and US has shown an incapacity to protect them. US alliance is a liability.
95% likelihood end of Iran war is US just leaves, and world figures out how to ship through SoH to the satisfaction of Iran. GCC colonies are instrumental to massive US financialization values. Petrodollar is not important, but recycling wealth to US is critical. To keep that colonial arrangement, US will need to help with reconstruction even if they no longer get arms sales and bases in the region, and CIA/Mossad threats to monarchies will continue even if some short term reversal of assistance flow occurs.
If war resumes, it can only be through consent of GCC (and other US colonies), and quick defeat/withdrawal of that consent occurs by destruction of desalination, ultra expensive ships that are sitting ducks serving those regimes, in addition to $Bs of damage to oil production/shipping infrastructure.
militaryintelligence@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 107d
God help us, I hope we can vote our way out of the mess we put ourselves in but I doubt it. In 2028 he'll refuse to leave and everyone will just shrug
nonentity@sh.itjust.works · -6 pts · 108d
I understand the sentiment, but there’s no intrinsic link between the two. Like everything in economics, they’re imaginary constructs, and the connective tissue between these two concepts exists exclusively as a shared delusion.
What it reveals is what the incumbent administration has actively chosen to prioritise. It could do either, both, or neither, but the permutations are a false dichotomy, and treating them otherwise helps mask their true status.
gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de · 4 pts · 107d
no, like, i get what you're saying but you're only partially correct
your take essentially boils down to "the government can do whatever it wants, can distribute wealth however it wants, can make as much debt as it wants to, and can raise as many taxes as it wants to"
while partially correct, it's not entirely correct because the more wealth redistribution the government does, i.e. the more taxes and spending the government does, the bigger the influence of the government on people's lifes will be, and i think that makes people dependent on the government which is not good because it's a single point of failure and sets society up for future disruptions.
i believe: government needs to intervene as much as necessary but as little as possible.
which means more wealth redistribution from rich to poor today because that's necessary, but we should eventually get to a state again where that redistribution is limited in the future.
nonentity@sh.itjust.works · 4 pts · 107d
For an entity which exclusively holds the monopoly ability to issue the currency its budgets are denominated in, they don’t engage with money in the same way a currency user must, it’s almost exactly inverted. Tax payments they receive don’t pay for anything, they’re mostly an inflation control mechanism.
Burdening themselves with ‘debt’ in their currency is an unnecessary complication, and every ‘payment’ they receive in that same currency is obliterated the moment the accounting record is reconciled.
It’s cute that the notion that the involvement of the state in an economy is framed as an aberration, and a problem to be resolved. A national economy originates from the state as its primary tool of control and coercion. Limiting its role in its function is a fascinating display of cognitive gymnastics.
I agree that pursuing a state of equilibrium where wealth redistribution can be limited is worthy, but framing it as a return to something previously recorded is, at best, laughable.
naught101@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 107d
Modern Monetary Theory spotted in the wilds of Lemmy. Nice.
gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de · 1 pts · 107d
it's quite widespread actually.