StupidBrotherInLaw

joined 2 years ago

Tankies: the "woke" of room temperature IQ Lemmings.

To be fair, what yanks call donating plasma is a misnomer. This confuses the rest of the world, who would call it what it actually is: selling plasma.

[–] StupidBrotherInLaw@lemmy.world 10 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Coulda fooled me since you're spouting conservative American propaganda.

[–] StupidBrotherInLaw@lemmy.world 16 points 3 days ago (4 children)

ROFLMAO. This bloke. Fucking Americans.

We absolutely see lots of news about these violent communist uprisings. Definitely not something you're imagining. Not at all.

[–] StupidBrotherInLaw@lemmy.world 8 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Yeah, those tankies sure love rich capitalists.

[–] StupidBrotherInLaw@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

You're responding to a follow-up comment from a different user who is disagreeing with the first comment as if they're the author of the original comment and their clear dissent is actually them agreeing with themselves somehow. Of course, you're arguing with anyone who points out you're confused.

Literal fucking insanity, mate.

[–] StupidBrotherInLaw@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

Wow indeed. We're only a few comments deep, so you can see the comment. This one:

Continuing the analogy, government agencies can absolutely eavesdrop on in-person conversations unless you expend significant resources to prevent it. This is exactly what I believe will happen - organized crime will develop alternate methods the government can't access while these backdoors are used to monitor less advanced criminals and normal people.

I challenge you to show where it suggests a "want for uncompromising privacy is a US only thing." Then point out where they show support for government access to communications.

[–] StupidBrotherInLaw@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago (5 children)

I'm telling someone who says that a want for uncompromising privacy is a US thing that it's not

But their comment doesn't say or suggest that.

and that these compromises they speak of would be akin to telescreens if applied to a non-digital situation.

And they don't say anything about the compromises except that they'd be used for spying on citizenry.

This isn't my fight, I saw you were confused and thought I'd help. My mistake, you really are one of those double down or die types.

[–] StupidBrotherInLaw@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (7 children)

Telling someone who says government access will be used to spy on citizens but will be useless for combating serious crime that they want telescreens, a fictitious device used for government spying, doesn't make any sense. Either you don't know what a telescreen is, you have poor reading comprehension, or you're a fairly clever troll. Maybe some of all the above.

[–] StupidBrotherInLaw@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago (9 children)

I think you do, you just misread their comment.

view more: next ›