Even if the democrats weren’t actually holding their members accountable, it should be done. So what if dozens of politicians, both R and D get expelled as a result. Nobody should be upset that people who had bad ethics reports get expelled.

If you did it in the olde fashioneded way with a manual hammer, manually stoking the forge with a bellows, etc., then sure. But AFAIK modern blacksmithing is pretty similar to modern carpentry or welding or any other hobby where the machines do most of the work. It’s still a somewhat active hobby, compared to doing something with a computer. But, I don’t think a modern blacksmith is going to get huge arms from doing it.

A leather shop as in fetish gear, or a leather shop as in a place for leatherworking hobbyists?

Does listening to something count as reading? Hmm… I’m going to have to go with a no here.

A lot of these hobbies are wealth-adjacent.

Playing an instrument: a good instrument isn’t cheap, and music lessons can be pretty expensive.

Woodworking requires a lot of fairly expensive tools, and a space to do it. You can’t really have woodworking as a hobby if you live in a small studio apartment. You basically need a house, either one with a basement, a shed or a garage.

Gardening: requires a garden, something you’re unlikely to have unless you have your own house.

Photography: I don’t know anybody who is into photography who hasn’t sunk a lot of money into the hobby. There’s the cameras, the lenses, and even the software these days.

Astronomy: see above.

Hiking: not expensive on its own, but in North America it means being able to drive to a wilderness spot outside the city, so you pretty much require your own car.

Archery and blacksmithing: again, requires a specialized space

Now, I know that there are cheap options for a lot of these. A musician could be someone drumming on an upside-down pail. Someone who only has access to a hotplate could still experiment with food. Woodworking could be just whittling sticks found in the park. Gardening could just be tending to a small houseplant. But, are these the version of the hobbies the women are picturing when they’re imagining a potential mate doing the activity? Probably not.

Meanwhile, a lot of the stuff at the bottom of the list are very cheap hobbies. Like being influenced by the “Manosphere” just requires access to social media, same with porn and “arguing online”.

Honestly, it looks to me like if you sorted the list by “dollars per hour someone invested in that hobby is likely to spend” you’d get many of the same things at the top and many of the same ones at the bottom. Some of the few exceptions are writing and reading, which can be pretty cheap hobbies, but are still apparently very attractive.

Andrew Tate, Joe Rogan, Jordan Peterson. Basically online misogyny. People who blame women for everything, or think that there’s such a thing as an “alpha” man, or who use the word “cuck”. Basically incels, supposed “men’s rights activists”, date rapists and date rapists in training, etc.

There are plenty of people who go out for a drink after work. I don’t think they’d describe it as a hobby though, and if they did they probably wouldn’t just call it “Drinking”.

I like that Debating is rated at 30.?% but there’s a separate category for “Arguing Online”.

I guess that being a Master Debater who comments on people’s posts “Debate Me Bro!” doesn’t count for the slightly more preferred category?

It’s probably too rare. Like, woodworking is somewhat rare, but to do that you just need a basement or a shed or a garage or something. Blacksmithing actually requires a forge, so I’m assuming that far fewer people actually do it.

With it being so rare, I bet that the women who don’t have any experience with a man who’s into blacksmithing don’t think to mention it, or haven’t really thought of it. And the ones who do have experience have had a mixed experience. Blacksmithing is loud and dirty so I bet the charm wears off quickly.

* you’re

I don’t know how you managed to use it twice in the same way in the same sentence, and only get one of them right.

It’s worse than that.

Blockchain Capital LLC was co-founded by Steve Bannon pal Brock Pierce, a major crypto advocate, perennial presidential candidate, and close friend of Eric Adams. Pierce has dozens of other shady MAGA/Russia ties as well.

https://toad.social/@davetroy/113476797192400901

Dorsey’s already out, the people running the project are from the TESCREAL gang.

A feature that makes it easier for their users to migrate to a competitor? Blockchain Capital invests $15M in BlueSky. Insert that Anakin / Padme meme:

Anakin: Now that we’ve invested, let’s make that federation feature priority 0
Padme: As in highest priority, right?
Anakin:
Padme: As in highest priority, right?

The purpose of an apostrophe is to warn people that there’s an S coming.

What you see on TikTok are the most entertaining videos. I have no idea if they have to cut out 2% of the videos because they’re not entertaining, or 50% or 98%.

Viola?

I’d really like to have 100 randomly chosen Trump voters in a room and interview them to find out how knowledgeable they are about Trump, about his policies, about his first term, about the criminal cases, etc.

My guess is that at least 90% of them are brainwashed. I’m sure there are some that are completely aware of his record and are either single issue voters who are voting only on abortion. Some may be multi-millionaires who are voting just for lower taxes and don’t care about anything else. But, anybody who voted for him because of inflation / the economy has no idea what they’re talking about. Inflation was a worldwide problem and Trump’s policies made / will make it worse. Anybody who voted for him because he’s going to “fix immigration” has no idea what they’re doing because his policies are incoherent and will never work. Anybody who voted for him because of Gaza is an absolute moron because he’s just going to encourage the genocide.

It’s amazing the stories that Americans tell themselves about the American Revolution. They pretend that the “founding fathers” were heroic idealists standing up for honorable values against an evil despotic regime. The truth is much more complicated.

A major goal of the 7 Years War was about controlling the colonies in the Americas. Had the French won those wars, the modern people of North America would probably speak French. Look at how many US places still have French names, and especially are named after the French king: Louisiana, Louisville, St. Louis, Mobile, New Orleans, Baton Rouge, Detroit, Lafayette, Arkansas, Illinois, Calumet, Decatur, Boise, Montpelier, etc. But, the French lost the war, so the English took over all that territory. Fighting that war was incredibly expensive, but it was worth it for the English because they now controlled a whole new continent with all its resources. To pay for that war, they levied taxes. The English colonists in the US, who were largely the beneficiaries of that part of the war, decided they didn’t want to pay those taxes, so they rebelled. They got the benefit of a continent won for them by English armies, but without having to pay the bill for that fight. Now, again, it’s complicated. The English armies were integrated with the colonial armies. George Washington was initially an officer in the British army (and was part of starting the French and Indian wars, which became the 7-years-war). The US colonists were part of the force that fought against the French and their native allies.

Anyhow, it was complicated. But, the end result was that after a war that took place both in Europe and in the Americas, the British crown had a huge debt. I have no idea what proportion of that debt was due to the part of the war fought in Europe vs. the part of the war fought in the Americas, but overall there was a big debt and the English crown tried to tax whoever they could to pay for it.

Was the English king a tyrant? Sure. Did the Americans have fair representation in the English parliament? Probably not. But, their main reason for rebelling was the same one that is nearly always the cause of rebellions: the rebels are in an area that’s wealthy for some reason, and they don’t want to have to share that wealth with the rest of the country / empire. In fact, it was suspected that the colonists chose not to send representatives to the colonial assembly partially because they knew that if they did that it would undermine their “without representation” argument, and the real issue was that they simply didn’t want to pay taxes.

As for the English system being tyrannical, the reality is that it has been a very slow, gradual change from an absolute monarchy to a ceremonial one. The English crown is significantly less wealthy than Elon Musk, and arguably has a lot less influence on British politics than Musk does on American politics.

By the letter of the laws, the British system is still more classist and controlled by money than the American system. But, is that true if you look at the actual real way that power is used? It doesn’t seem like it to me.

We both know the government is never going to split them up

The American government isn’t going to. But, I do hold out hope for the EU. The EU already doesn’t like the US tech giants, and they’re much more driven by lobbying by European-based businesses, almost none of them on good terms with the US tech giants.

We’ve already seen what effect the GDPR had on the web, and it affects Americans even if the law doesn’t apply in the US. We’ve seen how Apple has had to design all its devices to use USB-C because of new EU rules. I think it’s pretty reasonable to expect that the EU might require Mastodon-type rules for social networks, that you can leave to an instance that communicates with your old one, and that your followers and followees change when you move. Facebook would hate it, but Google (whose social network efforts all failed) wouldn’t really be affected, so they might push for it just to spite Facebook. Some of the other big American tech companies might actually like it. Like, Netflix might like to be able to graft a social network onto their video watching platform so that people could watch and talk about videos together.

With the Biden administration going out and Trump going in, I think the FTC is going to go back to being a corporate cheerleader, but I still have some hope for the EU.

The only reason Facebook was at all successful is that they made it easy to migrate over from MySpace.

Before Facebook people weren’t locked into their social networks. In the early days of BBSes you were mostly on your local BBS, but you could sometimes communicate with another BBS if your BBS was part of FidoNet. When instant messengers like ICQ, AIM, MSN Messenger, etc. became popular, it was common to use a unified program that logged into all of them at once. But, already there was corporate consolidation. BBSes were often run by people out of their own homes, or at least by hobbyists. The early messengers were all commercial products.

Then there were the early social media websites: SixDegrees.com, Classmates.com, Friendster, (LinkedIn), MySpace, Orkut, and in 2004 Facebook. At first Facebook was closed to anybody who wasn’t a US university student. You even had to have an email address from a US university to register. But, when they wanted to grow, they made it easy to migrate from other sites, especially MySpace. They released a tool that allowed you to basically stay in touch with your MySpace friends from Facebook, but not the other way around. That slowly drained people away from MySpace until it eventually collapsed. These days, thanks to section 1201 of the DMCA, if you tried to release a tool that allowed people to migrate away from Facebook, you’d be nuked from orbit.

Now, every social media site is a walled garden protected by a moat and an electric fence. Every one is owned by companies worth more than $1b. People can’t leave because the FOMO is too strong, but they don’t want to stay because the sites are pure shit. You see that especially with Twitter. It is absolute shit since Musk took over, but many people feel like they can’t leave. And, when people do leave, do they go to Mastodon, which isn’t owned by a corporation? Nope, they mostly go to Threads, owned by Meta, or Bluesky, owned by a lot of the same people behind Twitter.

Unless the governments of the world step in and either break up the tech giants, or require that they are interoperable, I don’t know how we back out of this shitty situation.

Sure, because everyone who stayed home was a democrat. Every Republican voted.