A friend of mine had six wisdom teeth. Does that mean he’s especially wise or especially judgemental?

Does it make a difference?

Injustice remains injustice, even if those in power declare it to be just. However, if they ignore the law and no one holds them accountable, there can be no hope for improvement, because that is only possible in a state where the law no longer matters.

What interests me is when this happened. It was apparently a gradual transition, unlike in Nazi Germany, where the law was explicitly changed to justify inhumanity.

The U.S. Nazis thus seem to be pursuing a different strategy to seize absolute power—a strategy that U.S. citizens are evidently enabling them to carry out because what they do is blatantly illegal, but the law is not enforced.

I can’t understand how you can still believe you’re living in a functioning constitutional state.

Everything you say is completely refuted by the Epstein case alone.

I can’t understand how anyone can be so blind.

As I said, in Germany, massive violence was necessary to bring about Nazi rule.

In the U.S., that doesn’t even seem to be necessary, because its citizens apparently view blatant injustice as the norm.

The point at which the U.S. legal system endorses absolute injustice has long since been reached. Even the Supreme Court agrees.

That was a long time ago—here in Germany, it was 1933 when Hitler enacted the so-called Enabling Act.

Nazi Germany was defeated in World War II, but U.S. billionaires made sure that their counterparts were never held accountable for their crimes.

That is why, in light of recent events, I ask

They still aren’t doing that, quite the opposite, in fact, which shows who’s really running the U.S. and what a farce this so called democracy is—the very democracy they supposedly always defend around the world. For example, in Israel, which also had the very best connections to Epstein, as evidenced even by the little information that the so-called U.S. law enforcement agencies are willing to disclose.

The U.S. is presumably in the process of fabricating a bogus case against these two despicable rapists so that it has a pretext for not extraditing them to a country where they would, in all likelihood, actually be convicted.

In other words: Now that he’s no longer getting any money from Google, he’s suddenly upset that no one is visiting his site anymore, because most of his former visitors now find the answers to their questions directly on Google—the very company to which he sold all of his website’s content.

Well, he could have figured that out sooner. What a moron—but hey, he’s already pocketed the money for all the content he stole from his own users.

It’s a good thing Aaron Swartz doesn’t have to witness all this, especially since the greediest of all corporations are now raking in money with complete impunity for the very thing he was supposed to go to prison for years—even though he had no intention of enriching himself at all.

Things are still going pretty well. I’ve been doing this for about four years now. Being an employee is definitely less stressful, but hey, at least I know who I’m working for, and that’s worth it to me.

All in all, I can’t complain.

When I was still an employee, I did that for a while. The “reward” was always that I had to work unpaid overtime, and once the project was finished, someone else—who had absolutely nothing to do with it—took all the credit.

So I went into self-employment.

That reads exactly like this absurd video message from a power trippin reddit mod after he was removed for promoting a scam.

It’s just as completely out of touch with reality that you almost have to feel sorry for guys like that, because it’s obviously pathological.

On the other hand, though, people like that are a threat to others—in this case an immediate threat for freedom of expression and open discourse, the cornerstones of the Fediverse.

Once a year we throw a garden party, and my neighbors also have barbecues in our front yard from time to time and invite me over when I’m passing by. That’s why I know everyone in my building—it’s a pretty multicultural group of nice people.

I also know the neighbor in the apartment next door, since his balcony is at the same level—he’s a fellow Linux user, so we have something to chat about.

You can’t really say, though, that I’m friends with any of my neighbors. We just see each other every now and then and get along well. They’re all great people: tolerant, friendly, and nobody makes a scene out of anything (I used to have neighbors like that, which was really annoying).

I’ll do anything for you, Mr. Bigglesworth.

Lately, a cat from the neighborhood has been stopping by my place a lot. The first thing it usually does is jump up on the counter—I don’t mind that the little guy takes his liberties. I’ve already moved everything out of the way that could be dangerous or break, and I just give it a quick wipe down once he’s had his fill. That way, we have a tacit agreement that the counter is fair game…

No official Israeli response yet.

What’s the point of their comment anyway?

It’s all well and good to follow standard journalistic practices and let both sides have their say—but then it would only be appropriate to actually do that as a matter of course, which is unfortunately not the case at all in the NYT’s coverage of Israel’s crimes, because, objectively speaking, there can be no doubt whatsoever that Israel is committing genocide and is guilty of the most egregious crimes against humanity. An article like this is the absolute exception in U.S. reporting.

To believe that Israeli officials would have anything to contribute on this matter other than the usual lies and threats is pure mockery. You could might as well ask Donald Trump about Epstein…

I think the best approach is to find reviewers whose tastes largely align with your own. Their reviews can serve as a good reference when you’re looking for a movie you haven’t seen yet.

There are simply too many criteria you could apply. The “Cinesiasts”, for example—who like films like Citizen Kane or works by Ingmar Bergman, Aki Kaurismäki, and the like—naturally know a great deal about their field. However, that by no means means their reviews would be a good reference point for the general public, who simply want to be entertained and don’t place too much value on artistic merit or the most elaborate technical skills of filmmakers.

“Hmmm, what kind of lackluster movie is this supposed to be…”

That makes it pretty clear that most executives are the worst possible people to run a company. Well, that’s just how it is when ruthlessness and greed are the only criteria used to select top executives.

But hey, even if they were to lose their jobs because they’re burning through so much money, things will go on as usual: Anyone who’s ever held a top management position will always be hired for the same role somewhere else, because competence is definitely not the deciding factor here. Never was, never will be.

I’m afraid that’s just as hard—if not impossible—as figuring out which artists created all those iconic Disney characters. That’s just how soulless corporations are.

I could never handle building a site like that myself because just doing the research would be so absolutely depressing.

This is exactly what those who are broadly portrayed as visionaries want.

Unfortunately, it never seems to have dawned on the general public that those who market themselves this way were never the visionaries.

Take Dennis Ritchie, for example, one of the original creators of C, who died just days before Steve Jobs: The media went out of their way to emphasize what a loss humanity had suffered, while failing to acknowledge that someone had died to whom humanity owes a great deal. They celebrated only the greedy capitalist who knew how to market a technology, but not at all the rather humble man who made a tremendous contribution without enriching himself at the expense of the common good.

That was a long time ago, but today’s world is still exactly the same - it even got way worse from there: no recognition for those who actually achieve great things, but only for those who step into the spotlight and thus appear to be the ones to whom humanity owes something.

In my view, this encapsulates everything one needs to know about our time—the absurdity of charlatans desperately wanting to be billionaires or even trillionaires.

This attitude has nothing to do with the real world, and it is a hubris that no halfway decent person would ever presume to have—yet humanity is ruled by exactly these megalomaniacal monsters because it collectively allows it.

So we are ruled by the worst that humanity has to offer—by unscrupulous opportunists who live only for themselves, have no sense of community, and have set up a system of undeserved triumph in such a way that only their own despicable kind can follow them.

It is a system that is directed against humanity itself.

Epstein-related services, I guess…