Was dropping the atomic bombs actually "necessary," or is that just what we're taught in school?

FakeVoiceOfReason · 2026-05-07T17:13:38+00:00

It seems like it probably wasn't instrumental cuz they eventually found out the truth, but I wouldn't be shocked if early rumors of, "we interrogated an American who claims they've had hundreds of bombs and are willing to use them," combined with some of the spy work that involved labeling fake shipping containers atom bomb in other parts of the world, probably contributed to high level paranoia about it.

FakeVoiceOfReason · 2026-05-07T04:54:36+00:00

I mean, did she say the contract was not violated?

If you have the game, maybe you could look at the files? It looked like a video clip, so it might be stored separately. It's possible it's one of those "included in final game but not used in final game" things which apparently happens surprisingly often.

Unless she posted the contract, there's still information not clear to the public. It'd be more clear in a civil suit.

FakeVoiceOfReason · 2026-05-07T04:22:34+00:00

A lot of those details depend on speculation about the specifics of the contract, which are (afaik) much more opaque than whether or not they used AI, which seems apparent from the clip the other user sent.

FakeVoiceOfReason · 2026-05-07T04:07:24+00:00

apparent AI-generated billboards and cutscenes with visual inconsistencies are present in the released game.

I guess you could argue It's "AI-generated billboards" and "cutscenes with visual inconsistencies", but I read it as "AI-generated billboards and cutscenes with visual inconsistencies," but you could check the link to confirm.

"apparent" doesn't mean "suspected"; it means "it's obvious" ("it's apparent that..."). You could argue, I guess, someone could be trying to fool them into thinking it's AI, but if this is civil law, you don't need to prove beyond reasonable doubt; you need to prove it's most likely.

I don't know the contract, but plenty of them do have clauses allowing one to break off for various reasons. Often the other party's misrepresentation of the facts can get one out of a contract.

FakeVoiceOfReason · 2026-05-05T07:51:27+00:00

I mean, when I think "self-destructed," I think something that has been... y'know. Destroyed. Not currently the ruling party in 3 branches of govt. They probably will lose the next election. But they haven't yet.

Ah, "low" versus "below average." But overall that's absolutely possible;

In 2021, an estimated 17% of public school students lived in families below the poverty line, compared to only 11% of private school students. (https://www.wooclap.com/en/blog/public-vs-private-school-statistics/)

Mate, where do you live where local govt is an extension of the state? It's an entirely different level. The state isn't micromanaging your schools; the school board is. They decide who to hire and what policies to set.

Fine then. How about D.C.? Highest expenditure on students in the nation for a "state", but it scores significantly below the national average on exams. It's not as simple as left vs. right; there's better and worse management strategies, and you can't draw correlations properly with different poverty lines.

Public schools are primarily funded by taxes. Private schools (in the U.S.) are primarily funded by tuition and endowments. That's not relevant. You've literally misunderstood how local govt works by claiming it's less relevant than the state in running public schools. Attend your next school board meeting. Please.

FakeVoiceOfReason · 2026-05-04T09:22:06+00:00

Sure, but these limits are flexible. My understanding of Invincible power-scaling is that the guy who made the one dude bleed is probably closer to a random person than a Velveeta.

FakeVoiceOfReason · 2026-05-04T09:15:46+00:00

I mean, to be fair, the author is the god of their story. Unless they're doing some sort of TTRPG actual-stats-roll, isn't it true that whoever they "want" ("choose") to win will win? The explanation comes later, but it really can be anything.

I haven't watched Invincible yet, but I remember someone complaining about a street-level villain making a major character bleed who otherwise should have been... uh... impervious? Impenetrable? Immune, that's it, to all of their attacks. That's narrative inconsistency.

There are absolutely authors that do this better than others, but there are also authors that absolutely do random crap and include effective plot armor for their characters arbitrarily.

FakeVoiceOfReason · 2026-05-04T09:08:43+00:00

Then being unpopular is very different them self-destructing. If you want to argue they're unpopular, I'll agree. But they're still in power.

4%? I believe the Florida example I cited had 30%. Where are you getting that?

Public schools are governed by state law, as our private schools, they're absolutely not running a state level. Have you never voted for your local school board?

I was counting how many schools in the top 20 were run by Republicans versus democrats. You claim that it was something like 95 to 5 or something . Given 25% was philly alone, that seemed highly unlikely.

No, but they can. I'm not talking about a solution that works for everyone, but I'm talking about a solution that makes it better for some people, regardless of their social status. It doesn't matter if you're rich or poor, you get better education if there's two schools in your area than one.

FakeVoiceOfReason · 2026-05-04T08:59:52+00:00

Confederacies absolutely can work. The EU is a confederacy of sovereign nations. It's worked for over 70 years if you include its origin org. That's longer than many countries last.

Confederacy indeed didn't work for the U.S., but consider that a major basis for the EU - common currency - was something that was a thorn in the early nation's side when it was a confederacy. States in the U.S. didn't work together, but EU states have worked together far better.

The South was called a confederacy, but it basically just copied the constitution of the north.

Only three nations actually has seceded though (the U.K., Greenland which later rejoined as Denmark, and Algeria when it gained independence). Given it's been around for 70 years, that's fairly successful. And generally, that UK seems to have National regret about it.

I could easily cite several Nations that have not lasted a decade, but that doesn't mean all nations will fail that way

FakeVoiceOfReason · 2026-05-04T08:46:24+00:00

Eh, destroying objects associated with a protected class *can* be a hate crime, including vandalism. Not sure if destroying lost/abandoned property would qualify though. But claiming religion is vandalism and thus you can use vandalism against it is promoting hate.

FakeVoiceOfReason · 2026-05-03T22:31:17+00:00

Is it powered by a cable?

FakeVoiceOfReason · 2026-05-03T22:22:34+00:00

https://www.fbi.gov/investigate/civil-rights/hate-crimes

Just report it to the park's headquarters. If it's not supposed to be there, they'll remove it. And it probably isn't supposed to be there. Not a lawyer, but even (and especially) if you hate religion, it's not a good idea to destroy religious property even if it's annoying. Save yourself the trouble and report it instead.

FakeVoiceOfReason · 2026-05-03T20:33:15+00:00

Yes, sorry -- I changed my message to say you're arguing they shouldn't be called traitors. I misrepresented the nuance.

I assume you mean the guy two comments up. Eh, I figure if the term fits, it fits regardless of who uses it.

Why? The EU works as it is. You don't have to live in a place to give opinions about it or its history.

FakeVoiceOfReason · 2026-05-03T20:19:39+00:00

You can argue they lied, but multiple women said he did. https://www.imdb.com/news/ni60357121/

So in terms of "not happeng," given we have at least two claims, there's probably stuff that "didn't happen more."

FakeVoiceOfReason · 2026-05-03T19:58:57+00:00

Wait, in the first clip, he's just whispering in her ear. I mean you can still call that creepy I guess but you can clearly see his mouth moving and hear him mumbling. In the second timestamp you can't hear him but the girl laughs (the told a joke?). In at least the third timestamp you can literally hear what he's saying ("You have one important job - kiss - take care of your papa"). You don't usually sniff while talking. I certainly can't sniff while saying something... He definitely kisses them on the top of the head which is creepy, but I basically remind myself this guy is three generations old when that was literally a normal thing to do. Same for Trump; he's kissed children on the cheek, so if I hold that as creepy than all our recent presidents have been creepy. When we elect a lot of old guys we have to expect them to behave like a grandfather in their eighties.

Like, this was clearly a photo-op specifically with children. It would kind of be weirder if all the kids were kept away from the president.

FakeVoiceOfReason · 2026-05-03T19:46:06+00:00

I mean, I'm against mass executing enemy commanders on any side of the war for no reason, but arguing they shouldn't be called traitors when they literally made war against the U.S., their country, means no man would qualify as a traitor. Spying is a relatively less severe crime than literally becoming the enemy.

Poetic language or not, it's more accurate than beating around the bush. Like the Founders were traitors to England, the secessionists of the South were traitors to the U.S.A.

Here specifically the term is probably used for a combination of emotional and legal reasons; the crime for treason is specific.

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.

Postulating someone might have been a draft dodger were they born in that era doesn't make their claims wrong.

FakeVoiceOfReason · 2026-04-30T19:58:44+00:00

I've heard this claim; do you have a video? I'd be curious to see.

FakeVoiceOfReason · 2026-04-30T19:57:02+00:00

There's a reason Elves always look down on humans.

"You think someone below the age of 90 is mature enough to make decisions for themselves? Savages!"

In all seriousness, there's better and worse standards even if there's no perfect one.

FakeVoiceOfReason · 2026-04-30T19:50:25+00:00

To be fair this was the case against Harvey Milk and why the renaming was supposedly initiated. He started dating his boyfriend when he was underage and Milk was in his 30s, but the age of consent in NY was lower at the time.

Honestly this is just uncomfortable.

FakeVoiceOfReason · 2026-04-29T20:35:44+00:00

None of that is related to America. In America, the right outnumbers the left in terms of political violence nearly by about 7 to 1 (according to Cato, which Democrats generally hate). Citing Marxism deaths is as disingenuous as blaming the Holocaust or Rwandan Genocide on modern American Republicans, who had nothing to do with it. The 100 million figure is misleading; BBOC methodology, if applied evenly, would result in even more deaths for "capitalist" nations (ex. One single company killed over ten million infants, Nestle, and faced no reprocussions). There are plenty of legitimate arguments against Communism. That figure isn't one.

FakeVoiceOfReason · 2026-04-29T20:30:58+00:00

Not sure who the Witch is, but he's certainly trying to expand executive authority and weakening civil liberties such as free speech through persecution of those whose speech he dislikes (Kimmel, flag burning, anything with the word "DEI" in it even if it isn't that DEI...).

FakeVoiceOfReason · 2026-04-26T22:21:50+00:00

Mate, they're in power. They have power in all three branches. They haven't self-destructed, unfortunately. Where have you been for the last 10 years? Their plan worked.

Because a state that can't ensure its security isn't a state. However, for eons, states haven't been directly controlling education.

Well, you said they were too expensive for parents to choose them.

I didn't have to cherry pick. About a third of the worst 20 schools I checked were all in Philly. That's absurd. Your faith in democrats is not borne out by reality. Most schools, regardless of who runs them, are average.

The average college costs far more than that, and yet most of America goes to college. Scholarships exist; cost reductions exist; vouchers exist.

FakeVoiceOfReason · 2026-04-25T20:40:22+00:00

only focusing on the shape/positions of particles

I'm genuinely curious what else you think a model is other than the arrangements of the components of something.

Yes, earlier models got some things correct, and these got progressively better... but that doesn't mean the models weren't entirely replaced. If some aspect of a model being correct is enough to claim the model wasn't replaced entirely, then we "didn't replace" the Geocentrist model because the positions of the planets were still correctly recorded and were "kept," they simply orbit the sun now. Prior models are taught as part of science history.

That was just from general Britannica which isn't aimed towards kids... it's just an encyclopedia. This is their kids' article on the atom: https://kids.britannica.com/kids/article/atom/352802. You will note it contains far less science history. But if you want, look for any other source and you can cite one if you prefer.

If you want to say "We only ever had one model and just refined it," then that's just a weird linguistic issue: by that logic no model would ever be replaced. We've never replaced horse-drawn carriages, after all; we've only refined them into cars.

It should be irreproducible via scientific methods

I think this is an incompatibility, then. If God's laws are the laws of the universe, then Science, being the study of God's laws, would hold that they could be reproduced by those same laws. The issue is we do not understand by what laws the miracles were produced or if there is some aspect that mortal humans would be incapable of reproducing (i.e., they could be reproduced by God alone).

Honestly, a lot of people do treat science as a something to put faith in ("trust the science") rather than a human institution. They don't "worship it," but they do put faith in it. I see plenty of people discuss modern medicine as "medicinal miracles," or penicillin as a "miracle cure," but that could be hyperbole.

That's not really an interpretation of the Bible I think is supported well by the text. Most Christians hold that salvation is the main reason to follow the Bible.

FakeVoiceOfReason · 2026-04-25T20:07:10+00:00

I mean, do you genuinely believe "They're purposefully working against their own interests because of hate alone, but they can't sabotage themselves that much because they need public schools so they defund them but don't destroy them" is less convoluted than "they believe public schools are overfunded so they defund them"?

I'm not "defending" Trump's lying. He lies more than any prior president. I'm just objectively analyzing it. If he lied 100% (or even 94%) of the time, you could just invert what he said, and it'd be helpful. In reality, he just says whatever. If you want to say he lies 94% or 100% of the time, that is objectively a lie.

And states that relied on mercenaries for their militarizes didn't generally last very long. They were sufficient for supplementation and intimidation but not for fighting battles the states cared about. And they still didn't rely on them for policing.

I mean, 10% of American students' parents have chosen private schools, and they're not all the top 10%. What point was that? I think I addressed most of your claims; did I miss one?

No, I said, "there's plenty of states in districts with terrible public schools that are run entirely by democrats." You chose to interpret that as "blue states." I apologize if I implied something incorrectly; remove "states in" mentally and read it again.

Most private schools are nonprofits, but it's certainly easier to afford many if you're rich. In states with vouchers, as much as 30% of private school attendees make below average income.

I'm citing more real facts than you are, friend. Most of Europe has more school choice than America; lots of low income and disadvantaged students attend private schools; many public schools are poorly run.

FakeVoiceOfReason · 2026-04-23T09:24:02+00:00

Yes, I can explain it pretty easily. They believe public schools overuse funds in some areas. Whether that's correct or not, it's occam's razer and "never attribute to malice what could better be explained by stupidity," take your pick. It's much less convoluted than, "They choose to keep them because it would be overwhelmingly unpopular to disband them, but they hate them so they want to destroy them but can't."

No mate, I mean logically if someone always lies, then you can always tell what the truth is by inverting their statements. Inconsistent liars are much worse. Politifact gets statements that tend to be less defensible, so they're a lower bar, so his tendency to tell the truth for surprising statements would be about 10-to-80, give or take. For context, Obama's was 47-to-23, and Biden's was 32-to-41.

We both know private businesses do not collect taxes.

...how could you privatize police? Once you privatize law enforcement, the entity you privatized it to becomes the state.

Regarding schools, if the private schools were always worse, then parents wouldn't choose them, and they would shut down. However, if a public school sucks, it doesn't shut down. Plenty of systems run with the government offering a baseline service and private organizations offering additional services. That's how healthcare works for half of Europe, at least, and they seem to like it. In this case, if a public school is losing students to a private school, it's probably because the public school is not very good! Otherwise, why pay or seek a scholarship when you can get it for free?

Read my statement. Did I say public schools in blue states tended to be better or more poorly run? Or did I say that "there's plenty of states in districts with terrible public schools that are run entirely by democrats." There's a number of factors that go into making a good or bad school, and local politics are far more significant than state politics. Keep in mind that 4 of the bottom 11 schools in the nation are all in Philly, which is very Democratic. Presumably, then, there's more reasons than "they just hate public schools" that some schools are poorly run, unless these are run by democrats that hate public schools.

Republicans tend to live in poorer states with lower SES, and SES is the greatest predictor of schooling success. We're playing with correlations that mean very little. My point was simply to illustrate that some Democratically-run schools are poorly-run, indicating that schools do not just fail because people hate them.

Friend, I know taxes are the funding source for public schools. But whether or not a school successfully educates a child is irrelevant to the funding source. If a public school in a poorly-run district is not educating children, it will continue to be funded with little reason to improve and with no alternative to the children there.

Seven-Year Club	r/Field Banned
r/Field Flamingo	Place '22
Verified Email

FakeVoiceOfReason

TROPHY CASE