The poster said it was a click bait headline because it should have said they threw soup at plastic. There’s nothing pedantic about pointing out, as you agree, that the whole point was the shock factor of throwing it at the painting.
Shifting the debate to some more nebulous “what the article is trying to do” is moving the goal posts because you can’t just admit that you realize I’m right.
relying on the media going for the shock factor
Yeah, the shock factor of targeting the painting which is why a headline that says they threw soup at the painting is not click bait. It’s literally exactly what they explicitly and intentionally did. You recognize that, so why argue the opposite?
Yet the law
I said nothing about the law. We are talking about a headline. I absolutely agree that, because they knew they wouldn’t destroy the piece so there was no real intent to destroy it, jail time makes no sense.
Way to miss the point and insult me and my reasoning in the process.
If anyone missed the point, it’s you. If you are arguing that they intentionally argued targeted the painting for shock value, but at the same time it’s misleading the say that they threw soup at the painting, then that requires abandoning logic. This is not an attack on you, but an attack on the argument.
No. But I don’t believe this is even remotely an accurate analogy.
Let me try this way. If it’s no different than throwing soup against a plastic sheet…why didn’t they just hang up a plastic sheet in their home and do it there?
The whole point of this act was to target a famous painting to draw attention. They even say this was their intent.
You literally have to ignore what they said, abandon all reason, and undermine their goal in the process to hold the position that the more accurate description is to say they were just throwing soup at a sheet of plastic.
Is this a joke? They literally threw soup at the painting, but the painting was protected. And you’re calling this click bait and propaganda? I’ve seen some pretty ridiculous whining about click bait, but this might now take the top spot.
That’s the joke, but worse.
Other than untracking tracked files, I see nothing in this graphic that isn’t easy to do with a gui. That might even be easy to do but it is something I do in the cli. Can I get some examples?
I would also argue that the common/basic stuff is 99% of what I do with git. And for this I can’t fathom why people would think the cli is better. Like logging and diffing is just so much easier when I can just scroll and click as opposed to having to do a log command, scroll, then remember the hashes, and then write the command. This is something instantly available to me in a gui.
Don’t get me wrong, if the cli is better for you more power to you. We moved from p4 to git and I did this almost exclusively in the cli so I could use scripts more easily. And sometimes I watch beginners use the gui and I have to bite my tongue because I know it would be faster in the cli.
But, especially for a beginner, i strongly recommend a gui.
I guess to each their own because having to hang a cheat sheet on my wall with got commands seems like the exact opposite of good aesthetics to me.
Why not just use a gui? I don’t need something hanging on my wall because it’s all just easy clicking around. And when I do want to use the cli, it’s very easy to bring up.
You can rest assured that, without fail, whenever there is a story about another Western country doing something bad, someone in the comments section is going to unnecessarily shit on the US. Bonus points for this one because it’s basically blaming the US for “teaching” them this.
Plenty of times I agree. However, no other game in the casino is one so heavily reliant on skill, and if you are skilled in it, it can pay off.
I generally agree, but poker is an exception where, if skilled enough, you can actually make money.
They’ve been calling it for basically the last whole war.
In fact, it’s been done pretty masterfully by not making one huge step, but small steps where no single one would force him to do something, but just over time each small step eventually gets to the point where he said he would have to do something…and hasn’t.
When I was leaving college a quarter of a century ago I briefly considered going into game dev…even back then everyone said it was low paid and gruelling work, so I passed.
It’s shocking that people still go into it.
They need to be maximally broadly appealing? That sounds like capitalism to me.
“broadly appealing” means “human nature.” This is my point. Capitalism is just a good system to figure this out. You want stuff that appeals to you, as do I. But that stuff is boring to most other people. Most people like this drivel, unfortunately. You just want a system that caters to you, and your niche interests (ones we likely share, BTW). You just want the stuff you want on what is available to the broad public. . . .But why is that fair to the majority?
And you know what? With things like youtube, podcasts, and streaming (all thanks to capitalism, BTW), all of that is available to you. Just not on inappropriately named cable stations. Why do you care? Do you even get cable? Who does anymore? Even my pre-boomer dad has cut the cord.
Don’t get me wrong. Capitalism certainly has it’s faults. There are certain things, like policing, fire protection, and health care, that simply don’t fit into the mold of capitalism well. Even as a well off American, I’m all for strong socialism for many things, like what we see in Europe.
I just find the concept that “these aren’t the original intent of the channels. . .what a failure of capitalism!” to be kind of funny. Who really cares?
Capitalism just takes advantage of human nature. That’s why it has clearly been the most successful system, at least as a starting point, for the overall well being of a nation.
The issue with these channels is that most people just don’t give a fuck about the information. They want to be entertained. Capitalism is just good system that enabled that to be figured out.
Your issue is not with capitalism, but human nature.
But there are letters on ABC.
Checkmate, atheists.
Sounds like something an idiot would brag about.
I think it’s fair to call The Useful Idiot a victim.
We need more people like you.
Lol go back and read my first post and then tell me how I’m moving the goal posts. Don’t worry, at this point, I don’t actually expect you to.
It was hardly an assumption. It’s pretty typical behavior for people to not want to admit they are wrong. And you’re kind of proving I hit the nail on the head by completely abandoning actually defending your position and throwing out the equivalent of “I know you are but what am I?”