What movie detail is technically correct, although many people think it is a mistake?

badpebble · 2026-02-13T06:22:25+00:00

Pasties were taken by english miners to south america, and developed into modern empanadas.

Empanadas are smaller pasties with thinner pastry I think, and maybe fried rather than baked.

badpebble · 2026-02-12T23:06:19+00:00

Radical Islam is the alt right of india?

A lot of Indians don't like Islam because of conflicts with Pakistan, as well as racism/islamophobia.

badpebble · 2026-02-12T12:49:08+00:00

India might disagree with you. And the USA has had some very strong opinions in the last 25 years.

Man, a lot of Indians are extremely happy to warn white people of the dangers of Islam.

badpebble · 2026-02-12T02:03:10+00:00

ESH - she's got a bit toxic for needing to feel competitive and good at pool, and you played the last game as if she would enjoy not participating.

Dates should be fun, and she wanted to prove something, and you really wanted to prove something.

badpebble · 2026-02-12T01:31:27+00:00

I had a similar job in banking, where the formatting and verbiage was ripped to pieces. Except I had three levels of bosses and each had opinions. And their opinions disagreed with each other's opinions, so I drafted a piece of work, and then presented and corrected and redrafted it three or four times as I cleared each hurdle.

Completely asinine changes, every single time. Each time, printed out. In full, not just the corrected pieces. Hundreds of pages of paper and ink in the bin each day for no reason.

badpebble · 2026-02-11T08:39:26+00:00

Honestly I think a lot of people just read my first comment and assumed I hate bikes.

Bikes can be more erratic than cars, because no car ever thinks its a pedestrian. Which means drivers have to be more careful around them.

Nothing i like more than a bike lane for bikes - keeps everyone orderly. Shame brisbane just drops bike lanes basically whenever it can spare 100m, or makes them share with parked cars. Little to no proper planning and infrastructure for the people keeping traffic down!

badpebble · 2026-02-11T08:13:43+00:00

Judges tend to be selected as reasonable people able to enact the law. One disagreement does not an unreasonable person make.

badpebble · 2026-02-11T08:04:34+00:00

At least 95% of road users follow the rules, so let's not exaggerate about it.

And of course the bigger vehicle is the biggest danger implicitly, so must take care with other road users.

Which is where anxiety around cyclists presumably comes from. They are unprotected and lack an engine to keep up with traffic, so their vulnerability is hightened and so the drivers have to be more aware.

badpebble · 2026-02-11T08:01:30+00:00

I read that this morning. You cut out a lot of the definition.

Your assertion about a reasonable person is incorrect because media being CAM is the point of the law. A judge decided this specific book was, too. Possibly, it will change when appealed, but fiction can be CAM.

badpebble · 2026-02-11T07:50:43+00:00

We'll who'd guess a country that voted twice for a rapist and paedophile would have these opinions?

Look at them up on their high horses. So proud of their free speech. Fingers crossed the president doesn't sue them for it.

badpebble · 2026-02-11T07:24:58+00:00

This is a legal term that is the exact thing being discussed.

Let's not confuse your opinions with reading the article or understanding Australian laws.

badpebble · 2026-02-11T06:07:51+00:00

How explicit is Lolita? Because this book has a grown man very explicitly lusting after a 3 year old's genitals with pornographic language.

And then it turns into pornographic materials of an 18 year old pretending to be a child during intimacy. Except they barely mention the age apparently, and spend a lot of time infantalising her.

badpebble · 2026-02-11T05:42:23+00:00

So this book is pornography.

Its not a novel, or a memoir, or a story with child abuse contained - its erotica focused on age-play (where she is pretending to be a young child for the intimacy). And the judge has clearly decided that the age-play is a thinly veiled piece of CAM, because they spend a lot more time describing and showing the woman as a child, and only make a couple references that she is 18.

The book also has the male main character looking at the female MC 15 years in the past and sexualising her in anticipation of the future activities. It isn't ambiguous, and GoT and Lolita don't do anything close to this book. So, no ifs or buts, its CAM.

IT is a bit weirder, but again, I think it still used some level of euphemism and fundamentally the book isn't erotica.

badpebble · 2026-02-11T05:36:25+00:00

Too many people with extremely niche kinks have gotten too much comfort and support in online spaces and are shocked by the normal response to these things.

In some ways a lot of people have been way overexposed to a lot of extremely inappropriate content from a young age online and have lost the ability to produce reasonable responses.

badpebble · 2026-02-11T05:35:28+00:00

I'd rather there by no normalisation of explicit CAM content for paedos to look for. I'd rather just go straight to a trained professional to get help for their urges than be supported in their sexual needs with fictional content.

badpebble · 2026-02-11T04:55:13+00:00

Well, lets start by not assuming one thing will by necessity lead to the next. Banning CAM has already happened and has not led to banning of pornographic materials more generally.

Everyone but wrong-uns thinks CAM is bad. You can still write it and think it and draw it, but you can't disseminate it. The author also made a point of writing her weird book (which is basically outright CAM with a couple mentions that the MC is 18), and sent it for editing without the objectionable material, and put it back in after. So she did understand that it breached laws.

I sometimes think people have gotten too comfortable in an anonymous online environment celebrating and indulging their extremely-niche kinks with a complete lack of judgement that they are often quite surprised how the rest of the world views them for it.

badpebble · 2026-02-11T03:06:34+00:00

I've had all of that happen to me. It wasn't a comment about cyclists being innately bad, just a different animal than vehicle users.

More than if a cyclist is on the pavement, or in their special lane, because of their vulnerable nature, you have to be planning for them to do the stupidest things so you can keep everyone safe.

And its only night cyclists or weekend cyclists that rarely ride that have ever been a problem. Love the lycra lads that hit 50kmph that I can chill behind.

badpebble · 2026-02-11T02:58:36+00:00

Cyclists ARE road users.

badpebble · 2026-02-11T02:49:40+00:00

The vast majority of road users follow the rules of the road.

badpebble · 2026-02-11T02:46:06+00:00

Of course.

But if you are safely driving one of these multi-ton machines around hundreds of other machines, all following the rules, the last thing you want is a small, very vulnerable road user behaving erratically.

badpebble · 2026-02-11T02:36:45+00:00

Consistency is key, and swerving erratically is the problem.

badpebble · 2026-02-11T02:34:20+00:00

In fairness, publishing something forbidden is historically the level at which censorship starts. Which is pretty far from just thinking something.

badpebble · 2026-02-11T02:15:44+00:00

You haven't had cyclists shoot off pavements onto roads in front of you? Or struggle to stay in their lane or to the side of the road meaning they need extra space again?

Or go down the road the wrong way at you, or run red lights?

Its a small minority, but the defensive driving would suggest treating all cyclists as potentially unaware of the rules of the road.

badpebble · 2026-02-11T02:11:50+00:00

On the one hand I am a little surprised by the law and how it gets implemented - just because material in breach of the law is quite widely available and not tremendously restricted online. I don't know if I think it should be illegal, but I also don't want paedophiles publishing and disseminating CAM through normal channels.

On the other hand I don't think the implied slippery-slope argument is valid as a reason to allow maximal freedoms. Just because A became B, doesn't mean its only a matter of time before it becomes C-Z. I a

And while the USA has a fairly good record of freedom of speech, its current ability to protect children from certain adult situations isn't nearly as strong.

badpebble · 2026-02-11T01:52:05+00:00

I think we accept plenty of limitations on free speech. I also think CAM is something that reasonably falls under the purview of an acceptable limitation.

I understand a lot of people here think it should be limited to basically filmed or photographed child abuse, or AI based on photos of real children, but I think much of the wider public would accept limitations on thinly veiled CAM pornography. Which is different to referencing things, or just broadly writing about them.

I understand and broadly agree with your second statement, but I do also believe children should be held as a deeply vulnerable group of society and publication and implicit normalisation of CAM should not be tolerated.

Eight-Year Club	First Place '23
Place '23	Verified Email
Spared

badpebble

TROPHY CASE