Now you got me curious. What's your theory on why I'm here? A bot? Foreign agent? Russian troll? I'm genuinely curious.

So by same logic we can then also assume everyone who voted for Kamala also wants U.S. to continue delivering arms to Israel, right?

Yeah, props to Apple for bringing back the card reader and HDMI. When I bought my early 2015 MBP I specifically went with the older model because these ports were removed on the newer one which also came with the shitty butterfly keyboard as well which they've also since discontinued.

Or does it only count in your book when the people dying “look like us”?

No that totally counts. Why do you need to imply I have some racist agenda here?

I think that if you add spaces around the keyword it then wont trigger if that word is contained within another word.

Another thing to note is that the post filtering also applies to usernames.

I don't think that being incorrect about something is bad in itself as long as one is not intentionally spreading disinformation. If one is confidently incorrect then they're probably going to get a reply from someone else who is confidently correct. I'm not so much imagining a tool like this to create a social media experience free of mis- and disinformation but rather just make it a nicer place for people to be while at the same time encouragining reasonability and intellectual honesty.

brake lines

You want people, their family and innocent bystanders to die because they bought a car from a company of which CEO you don't like?

Let's all just start vandalizing things we don't like. I'm sure that's a world everyone wants to live in.

blinking rear light

Blinking lights are my pet-peeve with cyclists. Cars don't have blinking lights - neither should bikes.

I’ve often thought about how social media might change if we had a fair way to rank users based on the quality of the content they post - perhaps with the help of a benign and truly competent AI for example. This AI could analyze everyone’s post history to assess how they engage with others. People who are intellectually honest and participate in good faith would be ranked higher, while those making broad generalizations, demonizing others, being mean, or just low-effort shitposting would rank lower.

If enough people fed up with online toxicity enabled such a filter, the most toxic users would suddenly find themselves shouting into the void. This would discourage toxic behavior and encourage users to put more thought and effort into their contributions. Unlike the current system, where saying popular things can easily rack up upvotes, this tool would hold people accountable for the actual quality of their engagement.

Ideally, everyone should be faced with information every day that they feel is a little uncomfortable and goes against their prior beliefs but also realise is probably true.

It's laminated glass. Those window breaking tools only work for tempered glass. You might get it to spiderweb but the plastic layer between the glass panels is still going to hold it intact.

There's probably arguments to be made both for and against this ruling. I don't assume this is all good just because I don't like Google.