floofloof

The U.S. company — whose phones are still sold in Russian stores despite the firm officially leaving the market due to the invasion of Ukraine...

Apple taking a brave stand as ever.

You know, houses, apartments, roads, cities, hospitals, schools, the usual targets.

Nintendo once again treats its fans with contempt and hostility. It's not a good look.

He just wants them to have one day to kill all the non-whites, non-straights, trans people, non-subservient women, etc. And he's dumb enough to believe, as the Nazis did, that this will lead to a better world rather than a hell on earth.

Except when someone is a proven fascist with a long history of proposing the violent oppression of women, non-whites and minorities, and affiliated with a large political party that shares this aim. Then it's probably malice.

Also total f------ Nazi. That bit's important too.

Hey, Israel just needs a little living space.

This is pleasing to the USA because the machine needs more money too.

You know what they meant by the first one. The second one is about people not being interested in dumb products like the Logitech AI mouse. Corporations are all jamming AI into their products and marketing materials not because users like it (they don't) but because they hope it will attract investors. So AI is more interesting to investors than to people who don't want it in their mouse.

It's just that the NYT isn't the progressive institution people wish it was. Its thing is old-fashioned liberalism that will say progressive-sounding things when nothing much is at stake, but will go quiet, or distract with "lifestyle" articles or vapid opinion pieces, when it matters.

His poll numbers aren’t looking great,

They're not looking anywhere near as bad as they should. 44% for Trump and 48% for Harris doesn't mean much when the states' election infrastructure has been systematically compromised by Republicans and the election all depends on a few swing states. There's still a good chance of Trump being the next President.

The problem is, he has no idea about policy and really no interest in it, except when the decision obviously benefits himself, or benefits those who pretty directly benefit him. So whatever he's saying at this point is just stuff he thinks sounds good. It bears no relation to what he'll do, except where there's obviously something in it for him and his associates. That's why "I'll take vengeance on my opponents" or "I'll increase fossil fuel use and suppress green technologies" are the kinds of statements to take seriously from him, but "I'll sort out your water problems" is not, unless we can find a benefit for him in it. The question to ask is, "Is he saying this because he thinks it benefits him to say it, or because he thinks it benefits him to do it?" (And for him, making people he dislikes suffer counts as a benefit.)