Apparently Dissenter doesn't update much? This is one thing making me think I might prefer to stick to Brave. I want to get out of all this invasive crap, but I'd rather whatever I use be pretty well maintained.
I understand that Gab is growing rapidly though, and I assume a lot of their stuff will be better in a year or so if things keep going at their current pace...
Can you believe they run a "Software Reporter" process in the background to scan all programs you have installed and report it to them? Supposedly so they can learn what causes any technical problems to Chrome, but that damn process sucks up CPU and memory and slows your machine down (I'm talking desktops here, not mobile).
Holy shit? I knew Google was bad but I didn't know Chrome was doing all that...
I give this a less than 0% chance of not being a parody account. Not that I don't think we have some really close approximations of this person out there, but the presentation is entirely too much.
Why is everyone treating this seriously lol.
I wasn't really thinking of serious interrogations. Just using that word to refer to the lefty questioning they might do to force someone to take a stance. More commonly done to celebrities really - I don't know if they do it to ordinary people, although I have seen it on internet forums as well.
That aside, hopefully you're right and this all goes nowhere. My post is just intended to present the possible option that exists here. An option for the left to try to turn basic heterosexuality into a shamed minority (again - on paper, not in reality), identified by a lack of trans involvement. Thinking long term.
Oh it does sound stupid, which is why I said if anything, this would just be used as a test run while we all enjoy trolling the left (and I am enjoying it myself). In other words though, just like "science" got us to this clown world bullshit in the first place, you could just have big important scientists add an "official" sexualiity, classified specifically for people that refuse to date certain "women". Just like they use science to ostracize ordinary viewpoints now. Climate deniers, phobias, isms. Imagine how easily they could use a variant of what we're seeing now to further normalize trans.
All I'm saying is that it's possible. Super Straight itself probably wouldn't be the final outcome, but something along those lines.
Have to say, I'm concerned that this Super Straight thing could be inadvertently turned into a trap. Normalize the idea of not being willing to date certain women as a specific offshoot sexuality of basic heterosexuality. Force normal people to effectively declare themselves "transphobic" to remain "straight". Then everyone will either conform, or out themselves as transphobes and be cancelled/attacked/fired/exiled and so on. Fine for a lot of people on sites like this, but your average every day person that wants to be left alone might have trouble.
It'd be one more thing the left could use to interrogate people.
"What's your sexuality?" "Straight." "So, not Super Straight?" "Uh. N-n-nope...just straight." "Good answer."
Next thing you know the left has the entire standard heterosexual gender chalked up as LGBT allies, and anyone else categorized as a problematic exception. Normal straight people become a minority - on paper at least. Not in reality, but it's easy narrative control for subversion I think. Guaranteed they'll even start referring to it as the SS and associate it with nazis.
Granted, this Super Straight meme probably won't go that far, but I could see this being used as a test run. Or maybe even if this meme does grow and catch on, enough people will associate themselves with it that nothing really changes.
Probably overthinking the whole thing. Or maybe I'm underthinking it in the wrong direction 🤔?
You realize that Trump telling people to do violence is exactly what ThunderSizzle says Trump didn't want to do, yes? You're not giving a solution to the stated misgivings. He was the leader, so if he literally told people to go out and violently take anything (and especially on his behalf in the election), it'd be on him. It would still be a coup.
That seems to explain it extremely well, to someone that knows nothing about stocks otherwise (almost wish I'd gotten in on it now from the sounds of it). Thanks for posting the analogy.
Have to wonder how they're going to deal with this going forward though.
Liz Cheney already destroyed the RNC when she and her pack of 10 voted to impeach President Trump for the 2nd time! Now Susan Collins will be the one to run over the RNC by continuing a hostile impeachment of President Trump again.
The thing is, they can't not be aware of this. Meaning they don't actually care, otherwise they wouldn't go through with it in the first place. There's no clear benefit to them to piss off every Trump voter just to spite an ex President.
So why would they?
The fact that there seems to be minimal effort to bring it down is somewhat concerning. Weird that I'm at a point where I don't trust things if they're not being attacked and cancelled but, here we are...
I just finished almost fully migrating from Chrome to Brave a couple minutes ago though, so. At the very least, it's probably not worse?