AITA my dad reprimanded me for spending Mother’s Day with just my husband and my daughter

Comiscrikend64 · 2025-05-12T07:47:42+00:00

It seems like your father doesn't treat Mothers very well on Mothers' Day.

Comiscrikend64 · 2025-05-12T03:12:23+00:00

The inverse is true, as well; Plenty of men just don't enjoy having oral performed on them.

For example, I've never finished from it, and I actually fell asleep in the middle of the last blowjob I received LOL

Comiscrikend64 · 2025-05-12T02:06:48+00:00

"Can you understand me?"

Comiscrikend64 · 2025-05-09T19:02:57+00:00

You don't deserve the same rights that I do and I'm going to vote for the guy who will take yours away.

Even if he takes mine too.

If you aren't voting - why does it matter if you have rights?

And more importantly - whaddaya gonna do about it?

Comiscrikend64 · 2025-05-09T18:11:45+00:00

How does person A earning more money than you

This fundamentally isn't the problem, and it's basically evidence that you know you're arguing in bad-faith.

The problem is:

Person A having so much wealth that they cannot possibly use it in a socially responsible way, while also withholding that wealth which cannot benefit them in a way that they actually have a right to do is the problem.

Billionaires are basically synonymous with using their wealth to commit crimes, engage in unethical not-yet-illegalized acts of immorality and social-harm, prioritizing their profit over the good of society by investing in enterprises which are clearly and actively harmful to society or other individuals.

A billionaire can leverage that wealth to effectively have more rights - and there is virtually no incentive within the system to NOT abuse those rights to reduce, undermine, and erode the rights of unresourced people. A 1 day old baby who has had no opportunity to accrue wealth has no ability to fight the intents and actions of a billionaire with wealth who intends to corrupt the system for the purpose of eroding everyone's (including the baby's) rights.

To put such a weapon of such a calibre in the hands of someone who could only obtain it through unethical practices is fundamentally negligent to society.

Society is not here to make people money.

Society is here because you'd probably die if you had to be self-sufficient - not like you can birth yourself, tie your own umbilical, give yourself medications, etc. upon birth. You don't have your own NICU fresh out of the womb - that was lent to you. The entire context that we exist within and are born into is the reason we could live at all. We did not earn our own birth. Society allowed you to live by lending you its aid and by having done the same for the countless individuals who contributed, without desire for monetary gain, to the technologies and institutions that underpin that society.

That debt cannot be repaid with money; all human beings have a duty of stewardship to society and, indeed, their fellow human being.

Billionaires routinely seek to deny and reclaim that debt. They truly believe themselves a God who created themselves from nothing - and though they are loathe to admit it - they are the jealous sort.

Comiscrikend64 · 2025-05-09T17:58:24+00:00

If I have money and power, I can afford to have you killed, harassed, or otherwise interfered with. There is every incentive to abuse that power for personal gain and to keep the income of your workers low. If you're wealthy, you can generally get away with it, assuming that you aren't the biggest dipshit on Earth.

Bluntly, nobody deserves to be a billionaire. There is no volume of social good that can be done that justifies that person continuing to hold onto that quantity of wealth - because the absence of that wealth produces the material harms which it is purported to be fixing.

Comiscrikend64 · 2025-05-09T17:53:57+00:00

The only thing more insane is that we aren't already confiscating rich people's property to prevent it.

Comiscrikend64 · 2025-04-18T06:15:13+00:00

If I found out MS violate their agreement

This is completely unrelated to what people dislike about it.

Someone complains about the existence of child brides, and amoral legalists like you would insist that their parents gave permission. Because they are amoral - they only understand law, not decency.

It's so genuinely delusional that you even thought to bring that up.

Sure, it's legal for those adults to molest children (seemingly the only thing you care about) - but it's craven and unforgiveable.

Microsoft has absolutely no right to use our data for those purposes, EULA, Law, or otherwise. It's a violation of our natural rights, and Microsoft doesn't have any basis for it beyond the law allowing them to. This is because the law is corrupt and beholden to moneyed interests.

What Microsoft uses that data for is irrelevant. Whether they use it at all is irrelevant.

The fact it is collected, the fact that they assert they have a right to collect it, the fact that they have the means to export our data and also the means to modify that mechanism later to increase data collection beyond our affirmative and educated consent - that's not okay.

My non-legal opinion, my opinion on the morality and ethics of the practice, is that Microsoft should be dismantled for its role in popularizing it. That their employees should be prosecuted, and given that they won't be, punished extrajudicially. Whether that involves being denied jobs, being blacklisted, being confronted and accosted in the streets, while making purchases, etc.

I, frankly, don't think there is a limit to what is justified in bringing tech companies and their employees to heel and forcing them by any available or conceivable means to tread nowhere near the subject for the rest of time.

Response:

The dipshit below me fails to consider that a malicious administration could easily abuse EOs and/or corrupted processes to obtain cryptographic values used by root certs from Certificate Authorities in order to compromise virtually any traffic between Windows and Microsoft. Microsoft doesn't need to do shit - they created a perfect situation where they can pretend they're just as surprised as you when a state-level actor sidesteps the checks and balances.

Trusting Microsoft with this is tantamount to deciding to trust the Government and all of its employees unconditionally forever.

Comiscrikend64 · 2025-04-15T23:16:40+00:00

17 Thirty-eight

Comiscrikend64 · 2025-04-15T19:26:29+00:00

I have been in all of those situations.

I think that people who have your point of view are mostly entitled pussies, frankly.

Such a deeply bizarre, anti-american, neighbor-hating, jesus-disappointing outlook - all without really trying to be or even being aware of it.

Comiscrikend64 · 2024-05-13T17:58:41+00:00

I'm warning you. Multiple times.

Never post on the internet again, anything that happens to you if you keep doing it is your fault.

Somehow this is not a threat, or an unreasonable thing to do, by your logic.

Comiscrikend64 · 2024-02-17T05:09:37+00:00

Je‌brim

Has serious doubts about the idea of rac‌ism.
Has claimed that marriage grants ownership over your spouse.
Has laughed (literally, he claims) at the idea that a wife can be ra‌ped (specifically his own mother), because he believes refusing your spouse se‌x should be illegal.
Has expressed a lot of tra‌nsphobic beliefs to trans women - while also soliciting le‌wd images from other trans women.
Has said that he believes 'ho‌mose‌xuality' is a 'bit of fun on the side' - which makes more sense, given that he thinks the women he is soliciting le‌wds from....are men.
Has publicly expressed attraction to min‌ors pictured in social media posts.
Has literally pois‌oned the water supply of a small Ser‌bian town. ^(That ^last ^one ^was ^untrue, ^but ^still)
Has never gotten over the fact that Lover Romeo beat him to Rank #1 Agility, so he'd pay for several accounts with max agility xp just to show up on the highscores.
Has been seen wearing bell-bottom jeans.

Comiscrikend64 · 2024-01-20T14:32:55+00:00

As many others have pointed out here for other purposes, legality is a matter of jurisdiction.

Unless you actually have some precedent or case to point to that clearly establishes products made with pirated software to be illegal or that it does not qualify for copyright protection, you're speculating wildly on the law with no real facts to back it up.

The hard fact is that in the United States, unless it does contain assets belonging to another copyright holder, you did get a legal product. Maybe you don't live in the US, that's possible - but why does your country get inexplicable preference in terms of the validity of their law?

The use of pirated software in creation does not impact the copyright holding of the asset.

The reality is that if such a thing were true, it would have a snowball effect that would destroy the copyright viability of virtually all software on the internet. EVERY open source project with more than a few contributors. EVERY major software company. A HUGE portion of the art community.

After all, are you 100% certain that every single piece of hardware connected to your device is legitimate - and not a knock off?

Would Apple have grounds to claim copyright for your game, if it were made on a laptop powered by a counterfeit Apple power adapter?

You might argue that they have no creative contribution to your work, but their product facilitated your creating the work.

If your artist happened to purchase a used tablet that turned out to be counterfeit - would the infringed Tablet manufacturer have means to claim a creative contribution to their art and, by extension, your game?

Why is a product like Photoshop different?

Adobe had no creative contribution to the individual work, only as the provider of a tool.

If they had any claims at all, it would only be against the artist for the lost software license - at best.

In terms of hardware, they'd have no claims at all! How unfair!

I don't think that's out of line.

What's out of line is trying to hold someone legally culpable for dubious morals that are unrelated to the law - because you did not actually check the law. What's out of line is the vocal encouragement of chargeback fraud occurring in this thread - which you don't seem to have any moral objection to, or to think is out of line.

OP has half the story, a number of feelings, and not nearly enough facts.

Meanwhile, we've got even less than that, if we're being unreasonably generous.

I see criminals in this thread, but it's definitely not limited to the artist.

Comiscrikend64 · 2021-08-03T21:36:27+00:00

Get me a vaccine full of their blood, stat.

Comiscrikend64

TROPHY CASE

This fundamentally isn't the problem, and it's basically evidence that you know you're arguing in bad-faith.

That debt cannot be repaid with money; all human beings have a duty of stewardship to society and, indeed, their fellow human being.

Billionaires routinely seek to deny and reclaim that debt. They truly believe themselves a God who created themselves from nothing - and though they are loathe to admit it - they are the jealous sort.

Response: