DrClaw
@drclaw.bsky.social
Biometrician.
Making predictions is hard, making predictions about the future is even harder.
Making predictions is hard, making predictions about the future is even harder.
Its not surprising. He was just at the white house getting is knob slobbed by T$... How you think he bought that invite? "What price you want oil at Donald? Yes, Yes" Plus they have the capital to ride out the low oil prices while US producers go under, then they jack up prices.
November 21, 2025 at 4:21 AM
Its not surprising. He was just at the white house getting is knob slobbed by T$... How you think he bought that invite? "What price you want oil at Donald? Yes, Yes" Plus they have the capital to ride out the low oil prices while US producers go under, then they jack up prices.
God damnit. Somebody call Chapelle, we gotta do the sketch again.
November 21, 2025 at 4:19 AM
God damnit. Somebody call Chapelle, we gotta do the sketch again.
To be fair... to live it down, we'd have to stop doing it.
November 21, 2025 at 4:16 AM
To be fair... to live it down, we'd have to stop doing it.
Why not give people the option of not seeing racist or homophobic things on their timeline? Election denial? Not for me. Any account that has ever posted the Nword, I'm good, no thanks. #Gryoper In the bio? Hard pass... But automated.
Empower people to moderate the content they interact with.
Empower people to moderate the content they interact with.
November 20, 2025 at 4:13 PM
Why not give people the option of not seeing racist or homophobic things on their timeline? Election denial? Not for me. Any account that has ever posted the Nword, I'm good, no thanks. #Gryoper In the bio? Hard pass... But automated.
Empower people to moderate the content they interact with.
Empower people to moderate the content they interact with.
"critics call it"
The fuck are you talking about. "The government watches how and where everyone drives" is objectively "mass surveillance"
The fuck are you talking about. "The government watches how and where everyone drives" is objectively "mass surveillance"
November 20, 2025 at 2:39 PM
"critics call it"
The fuck are you talking about. "The government watches how and where everyone drives" is objectively "mass surveillance"
The fuck are you talking about. "The government watches how and where everyone drives" is objectively "mass surveillance"
"chat gpt explain to me how to zip tie someone so they can't get out"
November 20, 2025 at 3:16 AM
"chat gpt explain to me how to zip tie someone so they can't get out"
And a lot of people at the time were really uncomfortable with the movie because of that relationship
November 19, 2025 at 2:59 AM
And a lot of people at the time were really uncomfortable with the movie because of that relationship
Imagine saying out loud, publicly, that the most liberal policies didn't make it into the most liberal "bubble" with a straight face and having zero shame about it.
November 18, 2025 at 5:55 PM
Imagine saying out loud, publicly, that the most liberal policies didn't make it into the most liberal "bubble" with a straight face and having zero shame about it.
People shouldn't lose citizenship for their speech.
November 18, 2025 at 5:50 PM
People shouldn't lose citizenship for their speech.
Oh he knows it, you just have enough respect for yourself and the country to not fumble through it like a bafoon.
November 18, 2025 at 3:36 AM
Oh he knows it, you just have enough respect for yourself and the country to not fumble through it like a bafoon.
Agreed. If you can readily purchase it online or from a local merchant without fear of fine or jail it is not banned or suppressed.
November 18, 2025 at 3:28 AM
Agreed. If you can readily purchase it online or from a local merchant without fear of fine or jail it is not banned or suppressed.
Is it more important to punish bad actors or to protect intellectual property rights ?
November 17, 2025 at 11:05 PM
Is it more important to punish bad actors or to protect intellectual property rights ?
Thanks, I think I understand your position better.
November 17, 2025 at 10:54 PM
Thanks, I think I understand your position better.
Ok, so you don't believe it is possible for people to actually act morally outside of legal constraints.
November 17, 2025 at 10:54 PM
Ok, so you don't believe it is possible for people to actually act morally outside of legal constraints.
So in your hierarchy of morality it goes:
1) no money, no consumption
2) someone else's money, consumption
3) my money, consumption
4) no money, consumption
Do I have that right?
1) no money, no consumption
2) someone else's money, consumption
3) my money, consumption
4) no money, consumption
Do I have that right?
November 17, 2025 at 10:33 PM
So in your hierarchy of morality it goes:
1) no money, no consumption
2) someone else's money, consumption
3) my money, consumption
4) no money, consumption
Do I have that right?
1) no money, no consumption
2) someone else's money, consumption
3) my money, consumption
4) no money, consumption
Do I have that right?
Which part of that morality is flawed? You attack it being disingenuous, not real... You assume that a person wouldn't act this way... But... where's the flaw?
November 17, 2025 at 10:23 PM
Which part of that morality is flawed? You attack it being disingenuous, not real... You assume that a person wouldn't act this way... But... where's the flaw?
And this makes it better, morally, because the bad person got money, but not your money... so its better?
November 17, 2025 at 10:21 PM
And this makes it better, morally, because the bad person got money, but not your money... so its better?
You explicitly said "there are legal means to consume the content while not giving money to the author"....
November 17, 2025 at 10:14 PM
You explicitly said "there are legal means to consume the content while not giving money to the author"....
My position is very simple. Laws have no bearing on the morality of an action. Paying bad people is bad because it incentivizes bad behavior. Artists who are not bad should be paid for their work, similarly because it incentivizes not-bad behavior.
November 17, 2025 at 10:00 PM
My position is very simple. Laws have no bearing on the morality of an action. Paying bad people is bad because it incentivizes bad behavior. Artists who are not bad should be paid for their work, similarly because it incentivizes not-bad behavior.
See now you've switched it all up. What happened to its ok if he's dead? the three part ... dead, is the work itself objectionable, do they have some bigot foundation ... Your whole position seems real complicated. Like why is it more important that there are legal means?
November 17, 2025 at 9:58 PM
See now you've switched it all up. What happened to its ok if he's dead? the three part ... dead, is the work itself objectionable, do they have some bigot foundation ... Your whole position seems real complicated. Like why is it more important that there are legal means?
The mental gymnastics... Its ok to want to listen to MJs music, its ok to listen to it if he's dead, and thus can't make money from it, but its not ok to listen to it while he is alive if he doesn't make money from it?
The number of people on this website that conflate legality with morality...
The number of people on this website that conflate legality with morality...
November 17, 2025 at 9:46 PM
The mental gymnastics... Its ok to want to listen to MJs music, its ok to listen to it if he's dead, and thus can't make money from it, but its not ok to listen to it while he is alive if he doesn't make money from it?
The number of people on this website that conflate legality with morality...
The number of people on this website that conflate legality with morality...
PhDs are hard, that is a great accomplishment! I wish you nothing but the best.
November 17, 2025 at 9:43 PM
PhDs are hard, that is a great accomplishment! I wish you nothing but the best.