Oh yeah, libel per se is a -bitch- if you're nailed with it. In libel per quod ("lost-cause libel"), you have to prove damages. Generally, this is what prevents people from filing lawsuits every time someone calls them a dick on 4chan.

Libel per se is different. Oh, it is SO different. Libel per se means y'all fucked up. Y'all fucked up BAD. In LPS, what you printed was such bullshit and so obviously damaging, the plaintiff don't have to prove SHIT; they sort-of name a figure and the judge works from that.

In the case of Dominion, I'm 99% certain it'll be LPS. Also, the Gold Standard defense against libel -- what you printed is actually true -- will not apply here, and it'd be comedy gold if the defendants actually tried this defense. At that point, the three fastest winds ever recorded on the planet would be Typhoon Li, Hurricane Katrina and the explosive laughter and legal pimp slap from the bench. It'd make Rudy's immense clusterfucks in court seem like goddamn Perry Mason cross-examining a 6-year-old.

It gets better.

So, on the billion-to-one chance you win a libel per quod suit, you get "damages", which can be surprisingly little as you have to prove every single dollar in very narrow legal ways. Libel per se, on the other hand, is the BIG PRIZES. Your ass is at least catching dollar damages that would make Jerome Powell say "Y'all niggas need to tone them digits down, yo!". Those damages are ANYTHING THE COURT DECIDES. Again, LPS means the plaintiff doesn't have to prove a single dime of loss to claim damages of damned near any amount. Given that Dominion is asking for a cool bil-point-something, I wouldn't be hugely surprised if another zero wasn't slapped on the end of that figure.

That's just the "actual" damages. If you egregiously fucked up, like claiming a company overthrew a US election and was in league with a dead dictator, you get to spin the wheel of punitive damages. Punitive damages are how the court hands out spankings, only they're not spankings, they're that scene from 12 Years A Slave, only with less tickles and kittens. Given the shitstorm that followed the lies about Dominion, those damages could make the initial billion-dollar claim look quaint.

(By the way, you can't discharge the settlement in bankruptcy, given that libel per se is considered 'malicious', meaning the laughter from the judge presiding over your initial case will be roughly 1/10,000th the laughter coming from the bankruptcy judge.)

If I was Newsmax, OAN, Fox News, Rush or Alex, I'd be lawyering up but good, because the Wrath of Fucking God is coming and there ain't no rock big enough to hide behind.

Couldn't happen to a nicer group of traitorous, America-hating, back-stabbing cocksuckers (and good luck to them on their per quod claim should they decide to sue me over the previous statement).

Aside: TIL I've only seen the new Mad Max.

Oh, I know. I'm not waiting for Bartertown, per se. I'm waiting until, say in the case of inequality causing civil unrest, rich people getting strung up in public by huge mobs.

You know, stuff that happens in movies but is coming to a city near you. Literally.

I have access to many White Castle locations. I don't visit regularly, as the food isn't for meals, per se. At 2am, in one of the right states of mind, it is the food of the gods. Particularly the jalapeno sliders and mozz sticks.

Oh, and when they have them, the cheese curds are shockingly good.

You're actually calling the Democrats in congress obstructionists? I'm reasonably certain we have as many federal vacancies as we do largely due to the Republican congress of the past several years doing their damnedest to block every single thing Obama tried to get done. That accusation is phenomenally hypocritical. I certainly acknowledge the current congressional Democrats have been voting no or voting to not proceed quite a bit lately, but they've also been cut off from the process of lawmaking to the highest degree possible. You can't expect cooperation from people that you don't even let sit at the table while laws are being drafted and discussed.

That last word was a joke of course - there's been damn near no discussion of this bill. The last time the United States had a major tax overhaul was also under republican oversight, in 1986. During the course of creating that legislation they took over 6 months and had more than a dozen hearings on it, ensuring reasonable transparency. This latest bill was slapped together over a few weeks and had a completely opaque process.

You claim the Democrats "fucked Americans" because they added 8 trillion to the debt. My understanding is this bill, over the next 10 years, will add a minimum of another trillion. The fact that it's so negative overall will also, due to existing law, require a balancing by way of cutting other programs - Medicaid at the least is expected to see major cuts, just as a side effect of this bill. Of course, it isn't really a side effect per se, they just couldn't get enough R votes if they either made the necessary changes to keep the bill deficit-neutral or included the provision that would've waived the mandatory cuts. So it's laughable to claim the current Republicans in congress really have an interest in being fiscally conservative or even moderate.

I'm likely wasting my time here though, as I don't think you're actually interested in engaging in an honest conversation, nor do you seem to be open to changing your viewpoint at all. I wonder though whether you know enough about politics from the last several decades to have a guess as what Republicans from the Reagan era would think about how things are being done today. My guess is they'd be appalled, but perhaps I'm overestimating them.

@newtboy -- I used a credit card (Discover) almost exactly as you described while I was going to college. Get a balance to pay for normal stuff, but pay it ALL off at the end of every month.

But I don't think the credit card companies hate people like us for 2 reasons:

1) For every one of us, there's a buttload who pay the minimum rather than the entire balance.

2) In my case, I think that in 4 years of college I forgot to pay off my balance (simply forgot to send in the check) once or possibly twice. I remembered a bit late and called Discover to see what to do, and they would tell me to pay the balance (or the minimum payment, not that I actually did that) plus a late fee.

I can't remember how much the late fee was. Maybe about $20? Anyway, at the kind of monthly balance I was running (not high), I'd wager that $20 was equivalent to maintaining an actual balance and paying the interest for a month or two or three. Which makes Maher's argument that they are "profiting from people's mistakes" reasonably accurate.


...On the other hand, Discover had "cashback bonus" awards of .5 to 1% or so, from which I stocked up and claimed somewhere in the $50-100 range over the 4 years, definitely enough to keep me in the net positive range in spite of a $20 late fee or two. That tells me that the magnitude of my "mistakes" must have been tiny in comparison to average credit card users.

I don't think Discover is an evil company per se for "preying" on people that don't use the card in the same way that you or I would. Paying a $20 late fee was a fully reasonable thing to charge me with. On the other hand, there's many many examples of predatory type fees that really do take advantage of people for "offenses" that are way less egregious, even things that have previously been considered standard use of the product / service in the past (paying WAY more for an extra inch of legroom, checked bags, food, etc. on airplanes comes to mind). Many of those arguably do cross the line into "evil" territory, I think.

uBlock Origin here (same as eric3579 mentioned), but the issue wasn't technically an "ad", per se. I guess the YouTube terminology is "embedded endcard", which many channels use to promote other videos on their channel.

The uploader of the original embed did so, in spite of the fact that it completely obscured the ball, and largely obscured the kid's reaction.

So I guess I should have complained about it as "omnipresent (self?)promotion" as opposed to straight-up advertising. But anyway, @eric3579 's uBlock filter from that Reddit link worked to remove embedded endcards from all YT videos for me, and at least in my case I feel like nothing of value was lost by making that universal. Also prompted me to do google searches of reddit for other blocking scripts, with some mixed success. Found one that blocks all "sponsored content" on Slashdot (and works), and one that blocks autoplay video on fansided sports blogs (but unfortunately left the audio playing with no video window to mute/kill it in).


BTW, thumbs-up on changing the embed to one that doesn't have that issue, @Spacey (I think, although I guess with the new script I wouldn't know if it was still there). Wasn't intending to catch you in the crossfire of my bitching about it originally; I know it wasn't your choice to put that endcard in there.

i have to agree that when the election was nearing the end,and it was time to vote.the choice was pretty clear.

i never liked the "lesser of two evils" argument,but when faced with a choice of:

soft fascist,narcissistic used car salesman,who spoke in bombastic and racially charged rhetoric,but really said nothing.

or...

a war-mongering corporatist,who never saw a war she didn't want to send your kids to go die in,or a corporation she didn't want to extract donations from for political favors and who basically said nothing as well.except for 'well,at least i am not that THAT guy"--->points to trump.

i am still gonna say...go with the corporatist.

because in the end,at least on domestic policy,hillary would have been adequate.oh she would have signed the TPP,and fucked millions of american workers,and she would have most likely expanded the drone campaign,and continued with the american empires policy of "regime change",but she had/has the knowledge and capabilities to actual lead a government.

hillary knows how to politic,and understands how shit gets done in washinton,and things would have remained relatively unchanged here in america.maybe..maybe.... some incremental change due to the political pressure the sanders campaign brought.

so i get it,and maher is not exactly wrong per se",but i think he is missing the bigger picture that so many in the beltway have missed,and CONTINUE to miss,because they reside in their own,tiny and insulated bubble.

the american people were desperate for change,and they have been for decades.after obama's campaign of 2008,and his "hope and change" platform,which ignited the american people,only to see,not "hope and change" but rather "more of the same".

and what was hillary offering?
a new message or vision? a new path for america that would include everybody to blaze a new path of invention,creativity and imagination to create an america everyone could be proud of? and feel a part of?

nope..she was offering "more of the same".

well,americans had already had their fill of "more of the same".they had lost faith in a system that appeared to no longer represent them.so they chose the nuclear option for change.terrifying and horrifying change.

so go ahead and blame the "bernie bros".feel free to slap responsibility on those "uneducated and redneck hillbillies".cry and whine and point the finger at those liberals who refused to abandon their principles,and by all means bask in the glory of your own self-righteous moralizing,and condescendingly condemn anyone who voted for trump,or who refused to vote at all.

you can sit in a small room with everybody else who voted for hillary,and self-righteously smell each others farts and call it a rose,because you are obviously a better quality human being than the rest of us.

and by all means,refuse to examine the fact that hillary ran a shit campaign,and had no real message,vision or path to the future.ignore the corruption and blatant,and politically motivated shenanigans of the DNC.god forbid you experienced a moment of honesty.

is trump going to be a disaster of presidency?
well,it sure is shaping up to look that way isn't it?
but we have survived horrible presidents before,and we shall survive trump.

and on a positive note:
trump has brought many people out of their apathetic slumber,and they are scrutinizing everything he does with a fine toothed comb.the amount people who are becoming politically engaged is quite impressive.

there is nothing in our representative democracy quite as powerful as people gathering together to put pressure on our elected representatives.

town hall meetings,that used to be wastelands,are now being packed to over-flowing.with citizens calling out their representatives..to their FACE..on how unhappy they are.

so go ahead and ridicule those who voted for trump,but it is due to trump that so many have gotten off their couches and are taking it to their congressmen and senators.

just a non-controversial,and easily predicted side effect,when you put someone like trump in power.

man,the politics in my country is getting really fucking interesting!i cannot WAIT to see what happens in the next episode!

what do you guys think?
/end rant

*promote

One thing I don't like about this safety announcement is that it makes it seem like rips as these underwater murder machines just lurking out there trying to kill you.

There is nothing inherently dangerous about a rip current per se. Surfers use them all the time to get out quickly into the lineup quickly without having to duck dive the heavier sets.

The real danger of rips is to inexperienced or poor ocean swimmers. The rip can carry you out to water that is too deep to stand in very quickly, so if you're not comfortable floating or treading water for long periods that's going to be a big problem.

Most people drown because they panic when they realize they can't touch the bottom and try to swim back against the current to get to a place where they can stand again. In their panicked state they forget about floating or treading water and exhaust themselves. As long as you swim perpendicular to the current you should be fine. The number one mistake people make is that they forget to stay calm and take breaks by doing the side-stroke or treading water until they're ready to do the crawl stroke again.

All that said, lateral rips (rips that run parallel to the shore rather than out to sea) are some scary shit, as they can move basically as fast as a river. During lifeguard training in my younger days I got caught in one while doing a training rescue and was swept in literally seconds into a wooden jetty. Thankfully I was able to ride the crest of a wave up to the top of the jetty, pull myself up, and then sprint down back to the shore before the next set of waves washed me back into the ocean and carried me even further down the shoreline. After getting back, I took a lot of shit from my instructors and peers for nearly having to be actually rescued during a training rescue.

It doesn't make a difference to your ability to make a statement per se, but speaking to a friend of mine who is a physicist his answers are somewhat different. He's suggested that reading more about it will make it more confusing and that we are invariably wrong and don't know shit. I happen to agree with him. That's not to say one shouldn't attempt to gain as much knowledge as possible, but that it's not always as easy as "go read a text book and it should be nice and clear", because reading it should hopefully generate more questions than it answers. Hopefully I've worded that so it makes sense.

Anyway, the sum of human knowledge is dynamic steaming pile of shit. Yes, it's gotten us a long way. But we're still like dung beetles tending to it and it will be a long time until we can transform it into something close to the truth.

Maybe when we can integrate AIs into us we'll accelerate things a little.

I think human errors and series of failures are often brought about by situations exactly like rushing to complete a deadline?

That's when people stop following the checklist/procedure or are overtired and not paying enough attention after a long shift or the third week of overtime.

I'm not referencing this particular situation per se or the blame part, but that's what came to mind when I read your comment.

It doesn't make it more nutritious per se, but it does mean that your body has to expend less energy digesting it, so you get more nett energy (joules/calories/whatever) from eating cooked food (particularly meat).

@newtboy
still missing my main point.

which may be my fault,i tend to ramble.

i can agree that:
choices have consequences.
i can agree that an employer had a right to fire according to its own dictates and standards.
i can actually agree with much of what you are saying,but it is not my point.

i am simply pointing out the larger and greater societal implications of how social media,youtube,instagram,tumblr etc etc are being used as bully pulpits by those who feel morally superior to admonish,chastise and ridicule other people into submission.sometimes rightly so,other times not.

there is already a growing number of people who have been directly affected by this new paradigm,and what i find disturbing is that so few are even bothered by this new development.

people have lost jobs over facebook posts!
for posting an opinion for fuck sakes!

and nobody seems to have a problem with this?
this is perfectly acceptable in a supposed "free" society?

lets use a totally hyperbolic example,but the parameters are the same:
during the salem witch trials it was later found to be common practice that one farmer would accuse his competition of witchcraft.

was this neighbor actually practicing witchcraft?
probably not,but what an effective way to rid yourself of competition.

we can use an even more recent example of afghanistan,where farmers were turning in their rivals for cash.they get rid of competition and their neighbor is whisked off to gitmo.

do you see what i am saying?

the larger implications are vast and easily abused.
and this is most certainly a PC police issue,because it is actually punishing offensive speech,opinions and positions.

west baptist church are a repulsive and offensive group of religious thugs,but they have a right to speak and express their vile opinions.

and i will defend their right to be offensive and vulgar,while totally disagreeing with their position.

this is social control by proxy.
don't say anything offensive,or there shall be consequences i.e:job loss
dont say anything controversial or there will be consequences,or post anything racy or contrary to social norms.

in fact,because more and more people are paying the price for saying/posting a controversial view or offensive opinion,just be quiet.

sit down.
shut up.
and obey.

or the PC police will band together to expose your offensive,controversial and subversive opinions and destroy your life.

so you just sit there and think your thoughts,but don't you dare voice them,or the morality police will expose you for the subversive you are.

this tactic is already reaching orwellian levels.
and nobody seems to be bothered.
nobody seems to be giving this the scrutiny and examination it deserves.there is a real danger here that many of my fellow citizens seems to be either unaware,or just dont care the larger implications and that is disturbing to me.

because some of the examples are just like THIS turdnugget.
a reprehensible,vulgar and ignorant example of a human being.so it is easy to feel good about him getting a "comeupance".

because we hate him and what he represents.so it is easy to ignore the larger picture and the implications of social warriors taking things too far.which i could literally type all day laying out scenarios where this form of PC police/social warriors could easily be abused (and already HAS in some instances).

and that should have us all standing up and taking notice,because it is those very implications and the relative silence that is disturbing me the most.

so yeah,this turdnugget is an easy target and easily dismissed as getting what he deserved,but what happens when it is YOUR behavior being villified? something you were doing ,maybe in the privacy of your own home or out with friends that made its way to youtube,and someone found offensive.what if you were taken out of context? or the video was edited?

how would you defend yourself?
better yet,WHY would you have to defend yourself when you were not harming anyone,but some overly-sensitive fuckwit was offended and decided you should be punished?

there is a plethora of historical examples i could use where tyrannical governments,despots and police states have literally quashed dissent,differing opinions and abhorrent behavior by simply creating fear..not of the government per se,but rather by their own neighbors.

which is EXACTLY what the PC police and social warriors use to silence their opponents.fear.

you are totally within your right to disagree with me,but my main argument is how easily this tactic can be abused and if we dont start paying attention now.we may not get a chance later.

it has happened before.
it can happen again.

*intent to harm is an actual legal charge,and can be prosecuted.

there was no harm here.except for feelings and racist/derogatory language.

i guess you could make the "emotional distress' argument,but in a 5 minute video you would be hard pressed to prove actual,irreparable harm.

i am rambling again,and probably lost the plot somewhere,but i hope i at least got my main point across.

there is a real and present danger here my man,and it threatens some of this countries core ideas and is ripe for abuse.

because the truth is:this tactic works and it works extremely well.

Seems like a bit of a departure from his caricature roles, more of a serious drama, thinking persons zombie flick perhaps? Nothing wrong with "zombie" per se if it's done properly. I'm interested.

I don't think reddit is better for discusion per se, there's just a lot more of it there. So, odds are, you might find some incredibly funny or insightful comments but there's also a huge mountain of circlejerk bullshit to (ahem) sift through.

That said, I'd like to see some reddit stuff 'ported' over here. Especially saving ("bookmarking") comments.

I have some personal opinions on why the sift has dropped in traffic but skipping those, I think the major problem is the entrance barrier. I'm not talking about needing star powers but just, what the fuck is this site and how does it work etc. I think it's very confusing for new people in general. It doesn't help that the only explanation is found through an obscure link in the footer.

But seriously, it has to suck to feel like a piece of zebra meat walking through a lion's den all the time.

It's obviously a cultural thing that makes that behavior acceptable. It's human nature for men to have obscene thoughts about what looks to them like a hot piece of ass, but it's an unspoken agreement among "those people" that it's okay to actually act on those thoughts.

My wife has often been the target of strangers' attention, but I think neither she nor I would consider it harassment per se, though she has many times felt uncomfortable, ignored people, and tried to get away from them.