This is the repeated part right here. If this article was primarily targeted towards Denmark, it wouldn’t be written in American English. You danced around that point. English is a second language for Denmark. An article targeted at Danes would be in Danish.

You’re a manipulative POS.

Quit it with this gaslighting shit.

The AP is headquartered in NYC. They write their articles in American English. They spend a wholly disproportionate time covering US news, and the closest relationships they have are with US institutions. The author of this article has an American education at a state-managed university.

The national language of Denmark is Danish. 15 percent of the nation doesn’t even speak English.

This is 100 percent an article meant for US audiences, from a primarily US news organization.

A danish news organization will have articles about what Danes think of tariffs. The same with a Canadian news organization, a German one, etc. Yet for some reason almost all of what American sources talk about is what citizens of other countries think.

I think the fact that American establishment publications put out more articles about what citizens of other countries think of tariffs than what Americans think of tariffs is part of the reason why Trump won.

The upper 10 percent of liberal America seems to think of themselves as citizens of the world, and seems to spend more time caring about anything other than Americans outside their hyper-specific socioeconomic niche.

The end result of this mentality is that Trump was able to make huge inroads with groups that were historically democrat’s bread and butter in 2024. Even if he was lying through his teeth, he and his team made real efforts to appeal to issues that were important for demographics.

I’m willing to bet you could find people from Hawaii to Mississippi altering their spending habits in fear of Trump’s tarrifs. Maybe the press should spend more time reporting on them.

Obviously, neither Trump nor MAGA is the answer. However there needs to be a way to talk with how out of touch so much of our establishment is without sounding like a Trump supporter.

Dude should have just added comments indicating that the code was part of some security test but was unfinished and extremely dangerous.

Change a few file names, add a comment how it will never run under normal circumstances, and you’ve got plausible deniability.

I feel like bluesky is just an attempt by a lot of institutional powers that lost a platform when Elon took over Twitter to make what essentially is a clone of Twitter circa 2018.

What a lot of people forget is that, even before Elon, Twitter had become super toxic. It was basically some pseduo-progressive echo chamber dominated by lazy journalists, virtue signaling politicians, and toxic hot takes divorced from reality. The moderation system was just selectively enforced based on whatever Twitter’s SF HQ thought was relevant that day.

I like the idea of anyone being able to spin up their own server and have a space for discourse. While it can be dangerous, I’d strongly argue that having a centralized private organization deciding what is/isn’t acceptable is a lot more so.

I swear most of you are just assholes looking for manufacturer moral justification to bully people.