[-] GTKashi@lemmy.world 3 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)
[-] GTKashi@lemmy.world 4 points 6 days ago

Long overdue on some of these. I don't like it, but I don't disagree with them. I wouldn't have minded them biting the bullet and taking Sol Ring out at the same time, though.

More support here for buying one copy of something and proxying the rest for your decks. When they ban something you only lose value on one copy.

[-] GTKashi@lemmy.world 23 points 1 month ago

They appear to be mistaking the shorthand for the Supreme Court ruling to be the name of a law. In fairness, bills do often have overly patriotic names that hide their paradoxical purposes.

[-] GTKashi@lemmy.world 21 points 2 months ago

Apparently he would do all three of becoming a cybernetic dictator ruler of the illuminati, while also plunging humanity into a dark age without technology, but also connect them all to one consciousness.

[-] GTKashi@lemmy.world 27 points 8 months ago

I'd have loved Bernie to be in the general... ever, but it just isn't what happened and pretending it was some conspiracy just isn't healthy. The candidate you're in love with doesn't always resonate with everyone else, and that's okay.

[-] GTKashi@lemmy.world 27 points 8 months ago

That sounds reasonable and so it's probably not even remotely close to what actually happens.

[-] GTKashi@lemmy.world 22 points 8 months ago

Over time I see less and less of the need to be like "lol I don't like who I'm voting for, but I feel like I have to." I see absolutely no regret in 1) voting against obviously they worst thing ever and 2) voting for someone who seems to a least try to do things that aren't horrible and are generally pretty good? They only time you're going to agree with everything a candidate says or does you'd be on the ballot yourself. Even then it's probably healthy to disagree with yourself a bit.

[-] GTKashi@lemmy.world 25 points 8 months ago

Never trust your eyes or ears again in this modern digital hellscape! https://youtube.com/shorts/55hr7Tx_7So?si=db5hROJWYjdQRMTD

194
Cheese in the tree (lemmy.world)
submitted 9 months ago by GTKashi@lemmy.world to c/cat@lemmy.world

He's a bit too big to reach such great heights these days.

533
submitted 9 months ago by GTKashi@lemmy.world to c/cat@lemmy.world
[-] GTKashi@lemmy.world 15 points 11 months ago

I thought the pacing of things was fine and didn't really feel like too many scenes overstayed their welcome. The 2001 opener I thought was pretty great. A few things did stick out a bit for me, though.

  1. The fantastical version of reality. A spelled-out theme of the movie is how hard it is being a woman, which Mom-lady really lays out for the Barbies. It makes some sense because the Barbies clearly don't know what real is like. The trouble is they say it instead of showing it. We don't see Mom-lady having any particular problems specific to her being a woman in the movie's world. The audience is supposed to nod along approvingly because she's saying things that many real women feel, but she's also from some surreal version of Earth where people in gaudy cowboy outfits can wander into a school and talk to the kids and steal library books and they don't get tackled by security. We really needed some scenes with some biting misogyny to give that speech some impact.

  2. Pitting the Kens against each other seemed convoluted. Ultimately the solution to the crisis is... voter suppression? Really?

  3. The old film montage near the end seemed really gratuitous.

[-] GTKashi@lemmy.world 47 points 1 year ago

The age bit here isn't a big deal. This just catches national law up to the already lower end of prefectural laws (all 16 to 18 I think). The bigger change is that the victim no longer needs to prove they physically fought back for it to be considered non-consentual.

view more: next ›

GTKashi

joined 1 year ago