Sure ok. I appreciate you taking the time to answer.

The issues you’ve mentioned apply generally to fluoridation anywhere. It sounds like the reason why it’s not present in Quebec is that the resistance was better organised.

There’s fluoride in the water here in regional Western Australia, but I fear that’s probably the least concerning additive. I’ve never really thought much about it but apparently there’s chlorine in the tap water, you can smell it from time to time. If you think about it, things love to live in water and keeping it free of things like cholera must take some doing.

That’s interesting. I thought it was more or less universal. Any idea why?

Most people don’t think that much about politics.

A woman might have a husband who’s generally a good guy and doesn’t talk politics.

A few days ago he comes home and someone at work had been talking about how some Trump policy would be better for their industry. Husband is going to vote for Trump.

Woman Google’s Trump, sees his abominable attitude towards women, sees tiktok about cancelling partners vote, votes democrat.

What a shit show, honestly.

Kenyon has not been charged with a crime and a police spokesperson confirmed he was not the suspect that officers were seeking as part of a theft investigation.

Hadn’t done anything.

You realise you’re discouraging everyone else from voting for Harris though right?

This is supposition but…

I imagine that disabling V2 is as simple as setting a flag during compile, at present. Obviously as the rest of the code base progresses it will become less simple to enable V2 support.

From a marketing perspective, the smart play is to say that you’ll continue supporting uBlock Origin and keep saying that for at least the next month or so, in order to gather up some refugees from chrome. Thereafter tell every one that your built in blocker is better than uBlock Origin anyway, and then drop support for V2.

Trump is likely to win this election. That’s not what I want, and certainly isn’t what Gazans want. What are you doing to avoid that outcome?

Loads of people use Google workspace and most email clients have this feature, or if they don’t most people in customer service would just keep a document they can copy & paste from.

Regardless, if an LLM helps you with these tasks then that’s great.

Hmm, needs more pouty.

That’s a patently absurd statement. Who wants genocide for the sake of genocide? You’re being dramatic.

No, I define attacking Biden and Harris over their support for Israel as helping Trump get elected.

You keep asking about my excuse after the election. To be frank, I just don’t care very much about the situation in Gaza. It’s sad, but it’s out of my control, as is every other conflict presently taking place.

I’m at a loss as to how you could surmise that I don’t care about who gets elected? Everything I’ve been saying is about who gets elected.

You can get as upset as you like about genocide any time, now or later, but maybe in the interim you can help avoid some suffering by not helping Trump get elected.

A few months back my GP asked if they could use a transcription thing they were trialling during my consult.

He seemed shocked when I declined.

I just don’t understand why anyone would actually want that?

I want my doctor to listen to what I tell him, and I don’t really want what I say to be used for any other purpose, because no other purpose would be to my benefit.

Next week they’ll be adding to share “basic characteristics” about me with third party “wellness partners”.

I understand your stated idealist position, “I won’t vote for someone engaged in genocide”.

… but the reality is that Trump win, which is likely without every possible Dem vote, will cause the worst possible genocide.

So by withholding your vote you’re not complicit in Harris-supported genocide, but you’re complicit in Trump supported genocide, which everyone understands to be worse.

As I often say in these threads, withholding your vote is precisely what the republicans want you to do.

Seriously, will your ideals be much comfort when Trump supported Netanyahu is grinding Gaza to dost?

Ok, that’s precisely why “unconditional” is reductive. It reduces a spectrum of possibilities to a binary “conditional” vs “unconditional” and produces a “both sides are the same” argument.

it doesn’t mean that griping about it makes me a trumper.

Except, it really does though? Complaining about Harris is precisely what the republicans, trumpers, and Netanyahu want you to be doing.

You might not like Trump, but you absolutely are (apparently unwittingly) carrying a lot of water for him.

Sure, but you have to acknowledge that of Harris and Trump, one of them would be more unconditional and enthusiastic than the other right?

Does anyone actually have jobs writing emails like that all day though?

Ticket systems often have an auto-response like “did you turn it off and on again”.

Most email clients or even gmail have canned response plugins.

IDK. This probably is a great use case and someone doing this might be quicker and better than me using canned responses or whatever… but only incrementally, not by an order of magnitude.

I don’t really know what you mean by “media pundits”. Some forms of journalism are biased and opaque, others are less so. You can’t just make a sweeping generalisation and say that someone listening to commentary from a variety of reputable balanced sources has been misled because “media pundits”.

Your on-the-ground insights are obviously something I don’t have, being that I’m in Australia, but they are of course anecdotal. There’s a lot of polling and research that doesn’t really support your perspective.

If you want to believe your direct insights rather than the accepted science, then I don’t really have much to say to you - that’s how people end up believing in a flat earth.

That doesn’t make any sense.

How can you evaluate how well the voting public is resounding to Harris by listening to Harris talk?

If only there were some way you could kind of collate the thoughts of voters and try to predict which way they were going to vote. Like a statistical analysis of voters opinions. You could call it an election survey. You could do it every week or so to get a trend showing the comparative effectiveness of each party’s strategies.

I mostly listen to the British and Australian public broadcasters. Both have journalists in the US. No media is completely free of bias but these are pretty good imo.

Regardless, I challenge you to find a commentator who’s saying Harris is on fire.