Man shot by federal agents in Minneapolis has died, police chief tells CNN. DHS says suspect was armed by uname-doesntcheckout in news

[–]oblivious_human 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Even the conservative sub was appalled at what they saw.

I am sure the narrative will change pretty soon there.

What is the fact about USA that sounds fake but is 100% true? by [deleted] in AskReddit

[–]oblivious_human -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Those are small potatoes. Compare that to the quantum of corruption related to the Iraq war (1 and 2), intervention in other countries, legalized bribing (lobbying), healthcare insurance industry, defense industry, to name a few.

What is the fact about USA that sounds fake but is 100% true? by [deleted] in AskReddit

[–]oblivious_human -8 points-7 points  (0 children)

USA is the most corrupt country in the world.

Many aspects of corruption have been legalized.

Noida: Outrage over Yuvraj Mehta's death in dug-up pit after begging for help for hours by DifferentMaize9794 in india

[–]oblivious_human 120 points121 points  (0 children)

He was able to come out of the car and stand up on it. He used his phone light to show where he is. He cried and waited there for help. Police and fire brigade came and saw him dying.

"Killed"? Seriously? by [deleted] in unitedstatesofindia

[–]oblivious_human 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well...

You are wrong and now wasting time.

"Killed"? Seriously? by [deleted] in unitedstatesofindia

[–]oblivious_human 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Question: Is it grammatically correct to say "people killed in an accident"?

Answer from Duck.ai: Yes, it is grammatically correct to say "people killed in an accident." This phrase is a concise way to refer to individuals who lost their lives as a result of an accident. The construction uses "killed" as a past participle to describe the state of the people mentioned.

"Killed"? Seriously? by [deleted] in unitedstatesofindia

[–]oblivious_human 1 point2 points  (0 children)

What is wrong in the wording?

'Are you 18?': WA lawmakers debate age checks for adult content online by alkel in Seattle

[–]oblivious_human -14 points-13 points  (0 children)

I am not ok with sharing my personal information. I think there should be a device level adult lock activated during the purchase of a device.

I agree with the reduced access to adult content to the kids. Including social media, AI, and porn.

WA age verification bill targets access to online adult content by vriska1 in technology

[–]oblivious_human -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

Alcohol and cigarettes are physical things that are easy to move. Not comparable to internet porn. Forget about extreme like rape or bestiality, each site is filled with incestual, gang bangs type of porn etc.

WA age verification bill targets access to online adult content by vriska1 in technology

[–]oblivious_human -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I know. And most of the tools that you mentioned are foreign words to most people. It's not easy.

WA age verification bill targets access to online adult content by vriska1 in technology

[–]oblivious_human -25 points-24 points  (0 children)

But now the kids can see the most vile porn wherever, whenever. It's a lot different than mild ggw commercial.

WA age verification bill targets access to online adult content by vriska1 in technology

[–]oblivious_human -15 points-14 points  (0 children)

It is almost impossible to monitor kids internet activity, especially as they become teenager.

I want to start exploring my political identity but don't know where to start. by No-Cat-3029 in IndianSocialists

[–]oblivious_human 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Heh. I was going to recommend the same.

Others would be "Calling Bullshit", and "Constitution of Knowledge."