It is a paradox because there’s no objective, universal definition of tolerance. It’s literally impossible to be tolerant of everything. So you’re left with different forms of what intolerance people deem acceptable.

People make the same mistake about bigotry. It’s impossible not to be a bigot. You just don’t want to be the wrong kind of bigot. Now if only we could all agree on exactly what that was.

It’s a bit too positive to encompass all that is elitism.

It’s not fishy (at least not intentionally so). It’s a limitation of their database. It can only show 1000 comments. So it won’t find your very old posts when you sort by them.

So they’re not restoring comments. It’s just very difficult to find your old comments to actually delete them.

That is certainly a better value option if you can still get the drivers and amps for a reasonable price over there.

I went the DIY route as well and build 2 of the VBSS style subs. I wanted to build something bigger, but my wife vetoed that. AVS forum has plenty of information on design options you have.

It absolutely makes a massive difference. But you unfortunately need to spend $500+ on a subwoofer to get something that outputs the full range of what you can hear. There simply are zero subwoofers below that price point with adequate output in the 20-35 Hz range.

With regards to 4k, I can understand not caring for it. I agree that for most viewing distances and TV sizes, there’s not a massive difference. However, 1080p TVs also don’t have good HDR or the wide color gamut.

Upgrading to a 4k TV with a good peak brightness (at least ~1000 nits) will be very noticable. I especially notice it in anything with fire. It looks so much better on a 4k HDR TV than on a 1080p SDR TV.

Not on my phone it’s not.

My opinion is that the next biggest upgrade is a receiver and a 5.1 (or at least 2.1) sound setup.

I disagree, because there are some fugly people out there. Boobs are certainly no longer good boobs when the nipple is below her belly button.

So it looks like most users aren’t seeing a handicap yet, but may start to see one in January if that block list size cap/updating the list is an issue.

What aspects are handicapped in chromium?

It’s not as of right now, but I wouldn’t say downvotes are the issue. The reality is that downvote = disagree no matter what rule you create that says it doesn’t.

What I’m talking about are the insults, mischaracterizations, and general non productive discussion on comments that others don’t agree with.

If you really want to test it, then you’ve got to post an opinion that disagrees with both of the two main dominant opinions and is a bit more complex rather than just staunchly for/against something.

So say that you’re against abortion, except advocate strongly for it in the event of rape or mental disabilities. And say that you’re not against gay people, but against same sex marriage and gay people should just be celibate their whole lives.

And if you really want to ruffle some feather, say that you don’t think pedophiles should be put in jail. Only child molesters/rapists should be jailed.

That hasn’t been my experience.

It’s still a very mixed reaction if you say something contrary to the dominant opinion.

And still just as likely to get strawmanned if you disagree with an aspect, but still overall agree with the conclusion.

Being friendly is far more effective than trying to punish people to make them agree with you. Especially when there’s no immediate and obvious consequence of their individual actions.

It doesn’t void the whole process. It may very slightly increase the degree to which it’s easier to launder money (I’m not convinced on that aspect since the money already originated from within the banking system).

Rather it prioritizes people’s right to their own property.

What you’re saying makes sense to me if you’re talking about a deposit of cash that was mailed. It doesn’t make sense to me for a wire or electronic transfer.

The person I responded to said discriminatory didn’t even make sense. I pointed out why it does make sense, because it is discriminatory and that’s perfectly fine.

Yes, that’s true and not in contrast with what I’ve said.

Then you shouldn’t let the transaction occur in the first place.

Sure, that sounds like it’s best addressed with enforcement of the requirements before keeping the money.

I’m not saying it’s a common issue. I’m saying that something like this should never occur.

I’m also not saying that I don’t value anti money laundering process. I agree those are very important.

However, I also think it’s even more important that people aren’t deprived of their money without due process. If you can’t accept it, because they’re not proving the required evidence then you should be required to return it unless there’s more to it. In order to keep the money, there needs to be some form of evidence showing money laundering not just an absence of evidence altogether.

I’m not seeing how that proves the transaction is clean.

If I put money in a bank account, then transfer it to another account, then back to the same one, the transfer back doesn’t obfuscate anything. If it’s not caught on the initial deposit in the banking system, then I’m not seeing how any subsequent transactions matter.

I understand that’s the law as it currently is. I’m saying that it shouldn’t result in any legal ramifications.

It seems they weren’t well setup, if they were then he wouldn’t have gotten to the point that he wired money before filling the required paperwork out.