I think there’s mainly 3 choices here , it could be that we’ve created a society where people with little to no empathy or regard for social norms excel. It could be that amassing so much wealth in our society requires people to adopt an ethical flexibility, and that flexibility eventually spills over into all aspects of their lives.

Or, it could be that morality and ethics are simply social construct that are quickly set aside as soon as society loses its ability to enforce its social mores.

All options appear to be not very groovy.

Wikileaks was never really a beacon of free speech its always been more of a platform where people can leak information about goverments and other powerful individuals or organizations doing bunch of shady or downright evil stuff behind our back. These often offer rare glimpse behind the scenes allowing us to be little less blind when voting during whather elections comes next.

When WikiLeaks first came about it’s original goal was aimed at leaking information about authoritarian governments, primarily China and some countries in the Middle East. It was pretty big news at the time because assange had wrangled together a team of some pretty high profile Journalist and privacy tech people.

However, most of those people were never really involved in the organization, and were mainly utilized as a marketing scheme. The rest slowly left the organization as works in their fields within WikiLeaks stagnated, or left over security and leadership concerns.

Imo Assange has always been a duplicitous attention seeker. However, if that were illegal, pretty much everyone involved in media would be thrown in a cell. I think his biggest failures that should tarnish his public image is his handling of the leaks. Him rushing to release information against the advise of his security experts, information that hadn’t been properly vetted to protect the whistle blowers from prosecution.

Multiple people have had their lives ruined because he didn’t take the time and effort to protect his sources. And not because they didn’t have the ability to, or lacked the proper protocols, but because Julian didn’t care so long as his name got air time.

If you’ve ever played in the surf and can feel when a wave pulls you towards the ocean before another wave pushes you back towards the beach. It’s like that, but just the undertow part. It’s very noticable.

First of all, that guy looks like shit for a 34 year old. Doesn’t look like the hair plugs took as well as he hoped.

Secondly… This guy just went through like eight years of school and like ten of residency and fellowship to be a surgeon, and he just threw away his whole damn life to own the libs.

No hospital with an operating room is ever going to allow this guy to practice, even if he somehow gets away with a slap on the wrist. This is the exact type of scenario that hospitals dread. Texas Childrens is going to be sued, especially since they let him access patient information after he finished his rotation. I also think there are fines for the facility where a HIPAA violation occurred.

What a loser.

Look up the meaning.

I don’t think you know what an ad hominem is… Attacking someone’s argument is not attacking them as a person. Who was I attacking?

Your logical fallacy is not my fault.

Lol, I think you need to relearn your logical fallacies.

I don’t. The one who “instinctually” believes it means something other than men hanging out are the people who think it sounds gay.

Again, unsubstantiated. And you haven’t explained how it would be homophobic.

First, that’s you inferring it from me not saying something, not me implying it.

Insisting a pro lgbtq website is being homophobic because one sentence taken out of context…

clarified the question, which you ignored

Because you didn’t add any clarity, you just questioned what the point of context was.

Personal bias and logic are too different things. My points are either wrong or they are right.

Personal biases affect how you developed an argument in the first place.

Whether they come from someone who is biased or unbiased does not change whether they are wrong or right.

Yes, and in this point of the argument you still haven’t sufficiently explained how a gay person labeling something as gay is homophobic. You know the entire point of the argument.

Your biases are leading you to draw conclusions from information taken out of context.

Ad hominem

Lol, who exactly am I attacking? I’m just stating it’s odd that you think you know more about homophobia than a queer author.

Argumentum ad populum.

Only because you haven’t stated your interpretation, what else is there to judge? A claim made without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

Straight men hanging out with each other is labelled as “pretty gay.” This is irrational because straight men can hang out with each other without being gay.

You’re purposely conflating what the author wrote, and misquoting them. Not exactly academically honest.

The quote was that “All Male Monday” sounds pretty gay. Which it does. That’s not homophobic, in fact it would be pretty rad if the context was at an lgbtq bar, and not a gathering of bigots.

Why do you instinctually believe All Male Monday has an inherent negative connotation?

Never said not suggested this. I think they’re idiots. Just like the author of this piece and the tweet, and the editors for allowing it. Multiple times youve falsely out words in my mouth

You have, by ignoring the purpose of the article and just interpreting statements taken out of context. You have also stated it’s gay people’s fault for driving men away from affection from other men.

“An all-male Monday sounds pretty gay to me.”

Yes, if someone advertised for a bar with “All Male Mondays”, It would be easy to assume it’s a gay bar. That by no means implies males hanging out makes you gay. Nor does it imply that being gay is bad, which would be homophobic.

What does context have to do with this? , when my level of homophobia has no bearing on the content of my argument.

What does context have to do with any arguments…? Every argument requires context so you can’t just misinterpret a piece of a body of work.

You tried to attack me, by calling me homophobic

No, your argument implies you are homophobic. Being called gay is not homophobic unless the person calling you gay is doing so as an insult. You are implying that being gay is inherently insulting.

In the context of the article, the writer would have to believe their own sexuality is inherently insulting.

when my level of homophobia has no bearing on the content of my argument.

Well at least we agree that you are homophobic, just apparently not at what level?

And yes, personal biases are important to determining the logical framework of an argument.

but point out to you that this article is exacerbating it. For that the origin of it is unimportant.

So it’s up to us straight men to decide what is and isn’t homophobic… Not the people who are gay?

I think if no one else is sharing your interpretation of the article, that may be a clue you have made an misinterpretation.

Is spewing homophobia okay as long as it’s sarcastic?

You haven’t established that it’s homophobic… Nor have you explained your reasoning behind interpreting it as homophobic.

Yes, when people, gay or straight or whatever, push this homophobia, they are partially responsible.

Ahh, so the men who go to that bar to avoid or devalue gay culture and their fight to achieve equality are totally victims. And the gay people poking fun at them are to blame… Got it.

Claiming that men socialize with each other is gay is absolutely homophobia. Quite literally. Why are you defending this as not homophobic?

They aren’t claiming all men who socialize with men are gay, they are poking fun at specific bigots. How is that homophobic?

I could be the most homophobic person on the planet and it would have zero bearing on the points I’m making.

Lol, are you like allergic to the concept of context?

Regardless of whose fault it is, it’s exists.

How do you solve a problem when you don’t know what or who’s causing it?

it’s safe to say it ain’t just straight people pushing it.

Lol, the article is dripping with sarcasm… I’d hardly say one joke article from a lgbtq magazine is causing all these young men to internalize their homophobia.

Based on your two sources, you are simultaneously claiming that men are failing to make affectionate relationships with other men because they fear being labeled as gay, and that it’s partly gay people’s fault.

Kinda feels like you are falling over yourself to make excuses for men to scapegoat the consequences of their own actions.

counterproductive (pushing homophobia) and also exacerbating a societal problem.

You are the only person interpreting being labeled as gay as homophobia. It’s only homophobia if you are already look down upon homosexuality to begin with.

That’s the whole point of the “tongue in cheek” nature of their homophobic statement: to leverage this fear of men bonding being associated with being gay.

Or, it’s a common joke. It’s not unusual for those who profess to be ultra straight, and care a little too much about how people perceive their sexuality are often deep in the closet.

internal contradiction of people who claim homophobia is bad using homophobia to insult people.

Again, being mislabeled as gay is only homophobic if already you don’t like gay people. It seems you may have some issues with homophobia yourself.

You kind of answer your own question.

Okay, so straight dudes are to blame for the straight dudes having issues, yet this is society’s fault?

by suggesting men getting together “sounds pretty gay.”

I think you are purposely misinterpreting the tongue in cheek nature of the author’s writing.

It’s great for you that you can show physical affection with your straight male friends

Not just my straight male friends, I show affection for my gay male friends too. I feel that the people who feel pressured not to show affection to their male friends are probably dealing with some homophobic tendencies.

[but let’s not pretend this isn’t a problem in our society.]

Again… I think you are missing the point of the article. The author proposes that men aren’t being suppressed, they are vicariously occurring emotional faults due to their participation in homophobia.

This isn’t a societal problem, it’s an internal contradiction that needs to be addressed by those who fear being labeled gay by other bigots.

men are already suffering for social pressure to not show platonic affection to one another, and they’re fanning that flame.

By who? The only people I hear endorsing that old timey John Wayne bull shit are men’s rights “activist”. Who constantly whine about men being suppressed, but also embrace the conservative stoic beliefs of the past.

I show platonic affection to my friends all the time, no one has ever given me shit about it.

I think that’s somewhat of a pedantic place to draw a line in the sand. I could just as correctly claim that if you aren’t committed to civil disobedience and are still paying taxes, then you are part of the problem. You are vegan, but you’re still supporting a government that spends hundreds of millions of dollars perpetuating animal cruelty on a daily basis?

Just because you aren’t vegan doesn’t mean you can’t believe that animals should be treated in a more ethical manner. Veganism is a imperfect human construct filled with internal contradictions based on western interpretation of ethics and cultural mores.

This is unfortunately not super uncommon. Older patients, especially women in palliative care are sometimes so close to death that the transition can be hard to detect. Things like heart rate and breathing can be so faint and slow that it can be extremely difficult to detect without equipment usually not found in most nursing homes. And when the patient is in this state, they can physically appear to be deceased.

That, and end of life care is horrible in America. It’s so profit driven that the facilities only hire the legally mandated amount of licenced professional to operate.

I work in orthopedics and rehabilitation, and a large part of my last job was providing specialty care at nursing homes. I’ve had the unfortunate experience showing up to a nursing home and finding my patient deceased when the employees just thought they were sleeping.

Lol, If was in it for the money I wouldn’t be working at a children’s hospital run by one of the poorest states in America.

My concern isn’t even particularly with the the creator, she’s an artist. My problem is when people try to pass it off as a medical device that can help disabled people.

An even larger problem is when hobbyist start making medical devices for children. There are inherent problems they do not understand, because they lack education in the field. Children are so adaptive that if you don’t provide them with a device that actually provides sufficient utility they will adapt to not wearing a prosthetic at all, severely limiting their future mobility/functionality.

Dani Clode -Senior Technical Specialist at the Plasticity Lab, Cambridge University | Formlabs 3D Printing Ambassador.

Nah, she just partners with a university lab. This happens all the time at universities, basically just a PR project to attract funding.

Makes sense the defense wants to slow the trial down as much as possible, so I doubt they’d be pressing for a speedy trial. My comment was mostly pedantic as it isn’t something that the prosecution can really utilize.

Another useless prosthetic designed by 3d printing enthusiasts…

I work in orthotics and prosthetics, and the majority of the articles written about the “next gen” prosthetics are just marketing materials trying to wrangle up VC funding.

Nothing about this makes sense. First of all, no one intuitively knows how to usefully operate a “third thumb”, so the learning curve on this is going to impede its adoption. We already have a hard time getting upper limb patients to use their prosthetics, and that’s when we’re purposely mimicking something they already know.

Secondly, the utility of thumbs in general is that they are opposable. With the placement of their “thumb” the only digit you can utilize with it is your other thumb… Which means adding a thumb negates the advantage of thumbs in the first place.

Finally, and most the important aspect to any prosthetics is utility. If this is meant to help people missing their other arm…how do they get the prosthetic on in the first place? And when you do manage to get someone to help you put this on, we’re supposed to use our big toe as the action controller? Okay, so that means you can utilize this thing while walking?

Why on gods green earth did they not use myoelectrics? We’ve had them since the 70’s, why is this “cutting edge” prosthetic going backwards in technology?

Oh wait, I can tell you… Because it was designed by a 3d printing lab with no experience in actual prosthetics. 3d printers are successfully being used in prosthetics, but only when the person utilizing them has a background in prosthetics or biomedical engineering. Ends up it’s a lot easier to have a prosthetist learn about 3d printing than it is to teach a 3d printing enthusiast about a field of study that requires education in physiology, anatomy, material science, and fabrication…

I may be wrong, but I think scheduling is an appealable matter, but only for the defense. Right to a speedy trial and whatnot.

But yeah, it’s pretty obvious she’s waiting to dismiss the case once a jury has been selected so she can force a double jeopardy scenario.

The justice department needs to come up with a new way to dismiss or punish federal judges who cannot remain impartial, or are so obviously abusing their positions.

so what argument is there that Trump shouldn’t?

The American justice system has been successfully boiled down to a pay to play system and it’s unfair to not let other rich people go for more serious crimes, but not Trump .

I mean I don’t think they would be honest enough to run with that, but it’s the only argument I can think of that would be based on an unfortunate truth.

Everyone consciously or subconsciously knows the justice system works differently for different classes. The only reason anyone who leans right actually believes it could be a “witch hunt” is because no one has an iota of faith in the justice system. Sending a “billionaire” to jail is so rare that the possibility of it happening seems suspicious.

I think I may have found the answer? After researching a little bit it looks like Abu al Abyad, the island above the elongated rectangles is actually an international military testing facility. This article , and a couple similar to it alluded that the area is for testing naval equipment and amphibious landings.

There are similar man made pools of salt water in desert condition that the US utilizes for radar testing at the China Lake research facility in California.

That’s fair, though it doesn’t seem to bother the little critters like rabbits or racoons for some reason. But yeah, it’ll def make the deer scamper off.