aleph

The danger is that by introducing the threat of civil or even criminal charges against those who are accused of being antisemitic under this strict definition, it will have a chilling effect on freedom of speech and academic debate/inquiry.

You should read this opinion piece by the lead drafter of the IHRA definition itself, talking about the dangers of Trump's 2021 executive order (essentially what this latest bill is proposing to enforce by law). In it he warns about the definition being weaponized, saying:

Starting in 2010, rightwing Jewish groups took the “working definition”, which had some examples about Israel (such as holding Jews collectively responsible for the actions of Israel, and denying Jews the right to self-determination), and decided to weaponize it with title VI cases. While some allegations were about acts, mostly they complained about speakers, assigned texts and protests they said violated the definition. All these cases lost, so then these same groups asked the University of California to adopt the definition and apply it to its campuses. When that failed, they asked Congress, and when those efforts stalled, the president.

The real purpose of the executive order isn’t to tip the scales in a few title VI cases, but rather the chilling effect. ZOA and other groups will hunt political speech with which they disagree, and threaten to bring legal cases. I’m worried administrators will now have a strong motivation to suppress, or at least condemn, political speech for fear of litigation. I’m worried that faculty, who can just as easily teach about Jewish life in 19th-century Poland or about modern Israel, will probably choose the former as safer. I’m worried that pro-Israel Jewish students and groups, who rightly complain when an occasional pro-Israel speaker is heckled, will get the reputation for using instruments of state to suppress their political opponents.

For those who aren't aware, this bill aims to effectively enshrine into law the IHRA definition of antisemitism, which has been a controversial doctrine since its inception because critics say it unnecessarily curtails freedom of speech.

Hell, even the Zionist Anti-Defamation League say on their website that the IHRA definition is a guideline that should not be codified into law because it could be used to infringe the First Amendment:

ADL does not support the adoption and application of the IHRA Definition in a manner that would create new categories of legally prohibited speech that are subjected to either civil or criminal penalties – something we believe the First Amendment and principles of free speech would prevent.

This bill does very little that existing legislation does not already except have a chilling effect on freedom of speech on university campuses, and the fact that it got such widespread support from both Democrats and Republicans in the House is an absolute farce.

That's quite uncharitable. We don't know anything about the woman, much less that she thought school shootings elsewhere were "fine".

It's pretty normal for people to mentally compartmentalize these types of shocking incidents as "things that happen in other places" rather than their own local community.

Consumer Reports do in-depth annual reliability assessments of numerous car manufacturers and typically the only European brands that score well are usually in the upper end of the market (BMW/Porsche). The rest are usually in the middle of the pack, or right near the bottom.

Here are their rankings for:

• 2024

• 2022

• 2021

• 2020

And those are just the newer vehicles. If you look at used car markets, you'll often see that European brands generally don't hold their value nearly as well as the Asian brands, primarily because they fare even worse once they have 80,000+ miles on the clock.

So there would be no practical benefits of switching?

this old man shot this young man for seemingly no reason

That itself is reason enough for this story to go viral. The racial element was just the icing on the cake.

I understood some of those words...

Not nearly enough, evidently.

European cars are generally badly made, overpriced, or both. The only thing keeping them going internationally was brand status, and now that's eroding away as well.

Also, for people on distros that don't have an OOTB solution like OpenSUSE have, I recommend snapper and btrfs-assistant. You just install both packages, open the assistant GUI and create a profile for your root partition.

You can then also install a snapper plugin for your package manager, if one exists (I know DNF and pacman have one), which automatically take pre/post snapshots like OpenSUSE does, so you can quickly roll back if something goes wrong after a particular update/install/removal.

I've been using the above with EndeavourOS for a year now and it's come in very handy on a couple of occasions.

Well, if we look at humans as a species then obviously the greater part of that is prehistorical. Clearly our "nature" is not incompatible with collectivism when looking at small communities and groups.

However, I think you have a point when it comes to more complex societies with increasingly larger populations, which, as a rule, have tended to form hierarchical class systems that are antithetical to collectivist ideals.

So we could say that humans have historically been fine with communism up to a certain point. It's when they start to form nation states and larger communities that societies have generally gravitated towards hierarchy and plutocracy, for whatever reason.

That's how it goes all too often with these settlements, sadly. Remember when Fox News got to settle with Dominion over the fact that they knowingly pushed election fraud claims that they privately knew to be false? They just paid their fine and went right back to business as usual.