So my account is currently listed as a "360 Performance Savings" with 4.35% APR. Not too shabby. Not the absolute best, but not bad either. I haven't done anything to modify my account in years...

Out of curiosity, what have they destroyed that you liked?

I have a CapitalOne360 account that I guess was formerly ING and it's been fine.

The finger thing is already a lot better--it certainly WAS the case that teeth, limbs, and fingers were dead give aways. It's already gotten much harder to identify and catch.

When asked, "Can you now image Apple devices?" Well, of course not. That would be stupid.

FWIW, you will definitely need noise cancelling headphones as well.

There's supposedly a "travel mode" that deals with some of the bounce from cars or airplanes, but it remains to be seen how good that is.

$3,500 is the average rent in California? I don't think that's correct...

For comparison, I rent out a SFH _house_ I used to live in, in a popular city in the South, for ~$1,500/month.

So, if the rapture never occurs, you never get anything...? Seems like a pretty good deal to me.

Given that she identifies as a makeup artist online (I'm assuming there is only one LauRen Ramlan), I'm inclined to agree with your take. Interesting project, regardless.

As I watched the IBM executives destroy the company, and create many, many , many, many empty wastelands of campuses (future video game stuff)....

IBM c-series and 99% of those claiming to be "important".... please do the right thing and eliminate the root cause of the problem.

Sincerely, "the people who made you all that money"

I'm not sure "redeeming" is quite the right, and I don't personally agree with everything Gay said (nor do I think she said everything particularly well), but, as the saying goes, I'll defend her right to say it. The question was a trap and Gay walked into. Nuance is lost when politicians set up traps.

Europeans and Americans have, traditionally, had very different views on "hate speech." I think we're much closer now than we were even 20 years ago.

I said something like this in another post, but for me, the bottom line is really:

A. Are Palestinians or others allowed to call for "intifada" or active fighting against Israel? This implies fighting and killing Israelis.
B. Are Israelis or others allowed to call for ongoing bombing and fighting in Gaza and the West Bank? This implies fighting and killing Palestinians.

I do not believe statement B can be allowed while statement A is banned.

If supports of Israeli can call for bombing Gaza, than supporters of Palestinians should be able to call for attacking Israel.

We've been a post-truth society forever, perhaps. The only difference is that previously, a relatively smaller cohort could more easily control the narrative (politicians, news media, etc). With the Internet and social media, this is much harder. It's certainly made society much less coherent.

I hope the fact that you literally can't show me one single thing I've said in this conversation that is not true would lead you to a moment of introspection. Should be easy to do, if you're correct.

It's easier just to resort to schoolyard insults. Freedom is hard, and freedom of speech is especially hard. Truth is even harder.

Happy to continue chatting if you have anything to add other than sticking your fingers in your ears and chanting Nazi.

Maps:
https://conquer-and-divide.btselem.org/map-en.html
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3b/West_Bank_Access_Restrictions_June_2020.pdf

Israel controls the West Bank. There are enclaves of Palestinian Authority control, but you cannot travel from one end of the West Bank to the other without encountering Israeli control. Israel regularly runs operations throughout and within these enclaves.

Israel controlled all land and sea borders around Gaza. Israel controlled trade in and out of Gaza. Israel destroyed the only airport facilities in Gaza and, through sanctions and control of trade, blocked construction of a new airport. Israel has run dozens of operations within Gaza in the last decade alone (if not more), predating the current war.

Well, ignoring that Stefanik is presupposing that advocacy for either intifada or usage of the statement ("from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free") means genocide (and I don't universally agree with that presupposition), Gay's continued answer is:

Which again brings me back to my core point. If even saying that Palestinians are allowed to fight back against Israel--Intifada--is genocidal and anti-Semitic, then we have failed as a society that even pretends to protect free speech.

Flip it on its head. Are Jewish students allowed to call for continued bombing in Gaza? That is literally and explicitly calling for the murder of Palestinians. Why is statement A ok but statement B is not?

Thanks to people like you, the term Nazi has been so denatured and trivialized that it's essentially the same as calling someone a meanie. It's pretty sad.

I stand by what I've said. If you can point to one single thing I've said that isn't true, I'm all ears.

Right, so this is how these conversations almost invariably go. You claim I have lied, I asked you to cite *one single* thing I have said that is not true. Instead you call me a Nazi, call all Palestinians psychopathic, and make up false claim strawmen (e.g., you claim I am defending attacks on civilians).

Quite frankly, you're illustrating very well who precisely the liar is, and you're illustrating why we MUST BE ABLE TO DISCUSS these issues without immediately starting to froth at the mouth with claims of "anti-semitism" and "Nazi!!!!"