A YouTube video and an opinion piece lol.

News investigation & report quoting correspondence between biosafety experts/researchers & their letters to journals?

a Nature article

Paywalled & also in the news section?

It’s possible despite lax biosafety, they didn’t leak the virus & didn’t have it. Based on what little I can read of the article: the word of a person at the center of the matter may be true; however, that’s considerable weight for their word to carry that leaves doubt over impartiality & independence. Findings of an independent monitor/investigation would be more convincing.

I don’t know what logically led you to that conclusion. Maybe you ought to self-reflect & work on your own biases/not jump to conclusions?

I’m linking to supporting references, and you’re not, so 🤷.

We ought to be vigilant about leaping to conclusions or letting biases creep in, and I can’t control others doing that.

Contrary to these things happening to an insane degree, it’s not clear the laboratories in question took adequate precautions.

Concerns about biosafety standards first caught my notice with this report stating that the laboratory may have been working with coronavirus at inappropriate biosafety levels as low as 2 (eg, unblocked respiratory paths of infection). Questioning the source (even though it seems coherent), I noticed other corroborating reports with references. If the reports are true, then these laboratories in the Wuhan Institute worked with infectious coronaviruses at inappropriate biosafety levels lower than their US counterparts.

Let’s be clear - if they were studying the virus in a lab and it “got out” from the lab or from the wild what difference does it make?

Firmer policies & enforcement of safety protocols? Informed selection of safety protocols?

Federal government reported the possibility without Trump in office:

• FBI reported it was likely
• Department of Energy joined them in saying it was possible.

Sources

• WSJ
• NPR

It’s not a wild conspiracy theory. Virological gain of function research & lax safety protocols could lead to unsurprising results that aren’t necessarily malicious.

The word “means” is also used for logical entailment

Yes in the contexts you gave.

No in this context: they’re referring to the ruling on the legal definition.

You think I’m defending the stupid ruling.

Where does it say that?

It’s a technical discussion of a legal definition. Defense/preference/endorsement is not implied.

if we’re going about precisely characterizing things

Pinning down legal definitions is what the legal system does. No one is claiming to personally defend it.

When does it not?

A definition identifies the meaning of the word being defined (the definiendum) with the meaning of the words doing the defining (the definiens). It declares their meanings identical, which implies equivalent, which implies symmetric.

The ruling makes law follow a precising definition, which imposes limitations on the conventional meaning to reduce vagueness.

Horseshoe theory

the far-left and the far-right are closer to each other than either is to the political center

are both fascists

Are closer doesn’t mean are the same: horseshoe theory doesn’t support your claim.

They’re both authoritarians that repress human rights. They’re as bad as fascists. Identifying those elements that make them as bad—authoritarianism & repression of human rights—clarifies discussion.

When we articulate problems accurately, we can criticize them in all guises.

What did OP directly say or do in their post to direct a response to them rather than the image? All we have is their image in no particular context, an interpretation of the image, & a hypothetical statement I wrote?

randomly criticize someone else over a meme

Someone else or the meme? Are we getting worked up over generic you?

The observation that perceived disapproval for “fighting fascists” around here may more often be someone deluding themselves, so the image rings false with self-delusion is a critique of the meme.

Semantics is literal meaning, though. Words mean things.

I’m sure there are many words for left-wing authoritarians: fascist isn’t it. Instead of making fascism meaningless, can we pick a correct word? Maybe authoritarian?

With all the fascism denounced around here, they’re a rarity, and it’s perplexing to know what say to the far more common left-wing authoritarians who argue against democratic values because they’re not left enough.

No problem: sometimes we all need a reality check when we go tilting at windmills as is custom around here.

Self-satisfaction at stretching the definition of fascism.

If you’re getting downvoted here where anti-fascism thrives, and you think it’s for criticizing fascism, then there’s probably something else going on (and you’re probably being an idiot).

tankie troika

Gotta admit that is way better.

Tankie Triad

Are tankies the pro- or anti-fascist crowd? I thought they were far left whereas fascists far right. It’s hard to keep track of all these vying affiliations.

identified by the police as REDACTED

REDACTED is such a sturdy name. I wonder if it’s a new naming trend.

He also said bluesky’s shift toward a traditional corporate structure and the introduction of centralized moderation tools were major factors behind his leaving the company, and he vouched for alternatives like nostr.

It seems a bit more challenging to pull shit like this on nostr.

• Roman people
• pull request
• parliamentary report
• press release
• prize ring
• proportional representation
• Puerto Rico
• Permanent Resident
• Progress Report
• Pressure Regulator
• Park Ridge
• Pattern Recognition
• PageRank
• Planning and Responsibility
• Performance Review
• Performance Rating
• Problem Report
• Papa Roach
• Personal Record
• Peer Review
• ⁝

‘illegal protests’

Then they’re safe, since protests are legal.