"The #enemy is plotting and scheming against you, are #watching you, studying your #tendencies, your #strengths, your #weaknesses. "
inv.nadeko.net/watch?v=oPM4w1H… @2.50mins
#Quote The Spirit Realm Has Been Watching You Since You Were Born
EU presses North Macedonia to make ‘era-defining’ decisions for membership
North Macedonia's Prime Minister Hristijan Mickoski stands with EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Kaja Kallas, in Skopje, NorthBYTESEU (Bytes Europe)
In partnership with the Craig Newmark Graduate School of Journalism at CUNY J-Corps program and with your financial support, Jinger Zhang is joining us as our first summer newsroom intern.
Originally from China, Jinger is the president of her school’s Asian American Journalists Association chapter. She will investigate the rollout of New York's Empower+ home energy efficiency improvement program. Welcome, Jinger!
Ukraine, Russia begin second round of peace talks in Istanbul
The negotiations follow the first round of Istanbul talks, which concluded on May 16 with an agreement on the largest prisoner exchange of the war but without any progress toward a peace deal.Martin Fornusek (The Kyiv Independent)
Thomas Tuchel expected to name strong squad for Andorra and Senegal games
Tuchel, preparing for his second camp since starting work as Sir Gareth Southgate’s successor in January, will announce his group on Friday for the World CupBYTESEU (Bytes Europe)
La pezza peggiore del buco...
Tra l'altro detta il giorno della #festadellarepubblica, doppiamente osceno e irrispettoso
L'immagine mostra una donna in un abito bianco con una spilla tricolore, che si trova in un contesto formale, probabilmente durante un evento ufficiale. Intorno a lei, ci sono guardie in uniforme con elmi dorati e mantelli bianchi, che suggeriscono un'atmosfera solenne. La donna sembra essere al centro dell'attenzione, con un'espressione seria. In primo piano, il testo recita: "Meloni: 'Vado a votare ma non ritiro la scheda'. Conte: 'Vergognoso l'invito all'astensione in un giorno simbolo' | Video" di Conchita Sannino. Questo testo suggerisce che l'immagine è collegata a un referendum in Italia, con una dichiarazione di Meloni e una risposta di Conte.
Fornito da @altbot, generato localmente e privatamente utilizzando Ovis2-8B
🌱 Energia utilizzata: 0.233 Wh
@Amoshias @gooba42 @Okanogen @Scubyw
But we have a solution
Hate speech is not free speech
Speech meant to destroy freedom is not a freedom
This is an objective measure that can be used in legal decisions
You must break through your indecision:
While you allude to a fear of a fascist abusing this notion to destroy freedom, they are already destroying freedom with the current legal status quo
You fear a hypothetical dilemma
While we are already drowning in the current dilemma
Ben Royce 🇺🇦 🇸🇩 reshared this.
@Amoshias @Okanogen @benroyce @Scubyw The paradox of tolerance doesn't exist.
Within the social contract, we agree that I'll protect your rights to free speech if you're not using it to maliciously harm others. Break the contract and you lose the protection of the contract.
That's as difficult as it ever needs to be. You don't get to hurt people with the protection of civil society.
reshared this
Sabrina Web 📎 reshared this.
@benroyce @gooba42 @Okanogen @Scubyw ben, I don't remember if you are a lawyer or not
But you call this an objective measure. The whole problem is that it's not.
You are a trump judge. Is D E I hate speech?
If I say black lives matters, can the state shut me down?
You say obviously no. What does Matthew Kasmarek down in Texas say? Because if you were in his district, he's going to get the deciding vote, not you.
@Amoshias @gooba42 @Okanogen @Scubyw
They are using the first amendment to destroy the first amendment. That's our current reality. Yet you worry about a hypothetical threat when what we are doing is not imposing a limitation on the first amendment, we are showing you that the full philosophical understanding of what the first amendment means is that hate speech must be outlawed. To save the first amendment
There is no such thing as the freedom to destroy freedom
@gooba42 @Okanogen @benroyce @Scubyw we are not talking about philosophy.
We are talking about politics.
The cold hard reality of the United States of America is that there is no world in which you abridge the first amendment and that abridgement only gets used against bad people.
I agree with your philosophy.
it's an objective measure
"black people are inferior. women don't deserve rights. gays must be forced to be straight. etc"
- an attack by bigots and fascists on freedoms
currently protected
"i am denying your desire to attack other people's freedoms"
- the response we are suggesting here, in order to *protect* the 1st amdmt, for if we do not do what Urzl and are saying, the fascists will be the ones genuinely destroying the 1st amdmt
furthermore, indeed: i am not a lawyer
and neither are you
you may only doubt my authority from a position of the same authority
if not, you must understand this is just a social media thread, not a legal ruling
and, at one time, the constitution itself was nothing more than discussion with no legal underpinnings. in fact, it was against british law
@Amoshias @Okanogen @benroyce @Scubyw There's no way see solve this if we're not working to enforce the terms of the social contract.
The breakdown of the rule of law starts with the breakdown of the civil society but never ends there. When we stop enforcing any kind of limits on anything, particularly on malice, we're doomed.
yes, a fascist will say that their speech is not hate speech, when it is. but if we say it is it's just because we don't like it
and when a fascist says speech they don't like, protecting freedom, is just "hate speech we like," that's just a dumb lie. don't fall for it
"no u!" is just gaslighting
"both sides the same" is a lie
there is objective truth here that comes out on only one side, not merely empty mirror images
@benroyce @gooba42 @Okanogen @Scubyw but I'm not saying either of those things.
I'm not even saying that we should tolerate intolerance.
I'm saying that the moment you create a rule that speaks you like should be tolerated and speech you don't like should be shut down, that rule will immediately be weaponized against you.
and again:
you are worried about a hypothetical fear
when at this very moment, MAGA is destroying the first amendment
why are you worried about some hypothetical danger, in spite of the objective delineations to it, and not worried about the actual real danger right now, stemming from the status quo which you don't seem to have a problem with
the status quo is the problem. we need to change it
why do you think they would have no malice and would not attempt to destroy our freedoms if they had nothing to twist for their uses?
they will twist anything, everything, for their uses
you can't be frozen into inaction because you worry woulda coulda shoulda
you must fight them, period
*anything* you do will be twisted by them
so just do the right thing, don't be worried about phantoms of their future behavior. that is already here
@Amoshias @benroyce @Okanogen @Scubyw That's why the standard isn't whether I like it or not. The standards I suggest is whether it's malicious.
Whether speech is harmful to a person or group of people just for the purpose of that harm.
I can say things you don't *like* for purposes of correcting a misunderstanding or I can say them to mislead you or explicitly to offend you with no other redeeming value. These aren't equivalent, much less identical, despite surface similarities.
@benroyce @gooba42 @Okanogen @Scubyw of course I think that.
Make you a deal.
First, let's get our country back.
Second, as long as I am the sensor and I am the one who gets to decide what speech is allowed and what speech the government censors, I am on board for the government deciding when people are allowed to speak.
Otherwise, I'm not on board for this plan.
exactly
it was a whole thing:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_N…
if the british did not "yield" to gandhi's nonviolence, they would be met with violence
that is the only reason they accepted and acknowledged gandhi's nonviolence
and the only way nonviolence ever works:
as an alternative offered
without the threat of violence waiting, the nonviolent option is impotent
this is the real lesson for nonviolent movements
Ben Royce 🇺🇦 🇸🇩 reshared this.
"as long as I am the sensor"
you shouldn't be
neither should i
neither should Urzl
the decider should be the law
the law should say: "speech which attacks freedom is not free speech"
this is a baseline objective measure
that fascists might twist it means nothing
they twist everything. they already are. you worry about phantoms and ignore the present reality
"black people deserve less rights"
- an attack on the intrinsic identity of someone in order to curtail their freedoms. legal speech. should be illegal
"you are forbidden to speak of attacking the freedom of black people, or anyone else"
- a limitation on the chosen actions of a bigot, nothing about their intrinsic identity. does not curtail their freedoms, prevents them from attacking others' freedoms. should be the law
@benroyce @gooba42 @Okanogen @Scubyw uh... What? Quite the opposite.
The situation I'm talking about is the actual reality we're living in currently.
"The paradox of tolerance" is a philosophical phantom. We don't live in a tolerant society. We don't live in a society where this is a real problem. We live in a fascist government.
Defeat fascism and we can go back to debating lofty philosophical principles.
but this is how we defeat it
you want to gain power and then fix the problem... how?
what Urzl and i are saying is how
rape is illegal. murder is illegal. rape and murder still happen
we're never going to snap our fingers and fascist ignorance and bigotry is going to evaporate
we need to just keep taking out the trash, forever, a maintenance function of society
and we are currently drowning in fascism because we *don't* do that
@Amoshias @gooba42 @Okanogen @Scubyw
thank you
and that is exactly my attitude
i want this kind of conversation. i am glad you are disagreeing with me. you may point something out i did not think of. i don't know everything
it's nice we can do that here on mastodon without the "I AM RIGHT ABOUT EVERYTHING FUCK YOU" type bullshit
@benroyce @gooba42 @Okanogen @Scubyw I strongly disagree. I don't think we're in this problem because we didn't enforce speech norms.
We are in this problem because we didn't enforce political norms. We didn't enforce criminal norms. Obama should have cleaned house after the bush administration, people who did illegal things should have been arrested and tried. Same with Biden.
We should not have tolerated a scotus that made corruption the norm but Biden said they were fine.
@Amoshias @gooba42 @Okanogen @Scubyw
and you're saying that to all of the attacks the trump admin has made and will make to true free speech?
a man who got in power exactly because this kind of speech which is not truly free speech was never fought
i am asking you to recognize that if you let hate speech flow you get the destruction of free speech
i am asking you to recognize what Urzl and i are talking about is a protection of free speech, because hate speech is not free speech
@benroyce @gooba42 @Okanogen @Scubyw I think we're talking past each other.
I think you guys aren't seeing that the slogan "hate speech is not free speech" is just that - a slogan - that doesn't actually work in real life. Because SOMEONE gets to choose what hate speech is and then free speech becomes whatever that person wants to be free.
@Amoshias @gooba42 @Okanogen @Scubyw
that's a good point, that's why i like these discussions
like everything, there's plenty of grey areas here. i am happy to squash only the most horrendous speech, that is right now flowing by the hundreds of comments per second on twitter
you will ask: where do you draw the line?
absolutely no one knows. but that doesn't mean you don't punish something which is clearly far over the line, wherever the line is
and i'm saying it is objectively quantifiable, regardless of any personal opinions on the matter
you seem to be saying because there are grey areas we can do nothing at all
surely you admit there is speech no one sane and honest can deny is radioactively obvious hate speech
we already do have hate speech legal definitions, regardless of any enforcement or not that follows
@gooba42 @Amoshias @Okanogen @Scubyw
exactly
Amoshias:
if hate is not impeded, it will grow and you will have to fight it at one point out of sheer mortal self-preservation
all Urzl and i are doing is telling you how we fight it when it is not so dire
you don't have a choice to not fight it
you only have a choice to fight it when it is online bullshit, or when it is wielding a machine gun pointed at you
that's your only real choice
@benroyce @gooba42 @Okanogen @Scubyw I really feel like I'm totally talking past you guys.
You were telling me the only possible solution to censorship. Really?
So you don't think that the fact that who have been causing trouble but also criminals in a traditional sense - not the thought crime sense you're advocating for - tells you anything?
You don't think that the fact that their hate speech is mixed with a non-stop stream of lies gives you an alternate angle of attack?
@Amoshias @gooba42 @Okanogen @Scubyw
the lies and the hate go together
there are no lies without hate
there is no hate without lies
like your reference to corruption, all of these things come together
plus i don't understand why you continue to allude to a fictional futuristic attack on free speech from what Urzl and i am saying, while ignoring the real attacks on free speech happening right now because we *don't* do what Urzl and i are saying
@benroyce @gooba42 @Okanogen @Scubyw what do you mean by attack on free speech
WE LIVE IN AMERICA. WE DO NOT HAVE FREE SPEECH. THE GOVERNMENT IS BURNING BOOKS.
and we don't not have free speech because we didn't police people's thought crimes. We lost our free speech because we ignored their ACTUAL crimes.
this also i have a problem with what you are saying:
you characterize this as censorship
i am saying if you limit hate speech *you are fighting censorship*
what is hate speech but "the point of me dehumanizing you is that you don't matter, you can't speak, you're a marginalized group"
what i am saying is that attacks on freedom, which is what hate speech is, is not magically also a freedom, so nothing is being removed that is a right
@Amoshias @gooba42 @Okanogen @Scubyw
in the sense that going after child sexual abuse material is censorship, ok
in the sense that "you said star wars is the best movie ever, i disagree, censored", no
so i will say that removing CSAM is not censorship, it's protecting the rights of children. to call removing CSAM censorship is implying pedophile predators have some sort of right removed. no. they do not have the right
in the same way, going after hate speech is not censorship
@benroyce @gooba42 @Okanogen @Scubyw dude, I'm getting frustrated.
I absolutely trust in your good faith and I don't believe you're being a troll. But you just don't seem to understand that my entire argument isn't that there's a purpose to "speech to remove freedom." It's that to implement your censorship, you give some human being the power to decide when speech is "speech to remove freedom." You give people the power to sue to enforce the law, even if they are unjustified.
@Amoshias @gooba42 @Okanogen @Scubyw
no, you define it legally
plenty of laws have the potential for a slippery slope. it doesn't mean we remove the laws
germany outlaws nazi speech and images. no one sane in germany worries about it
and germany paid a huge toll to learn that lesson
in the future, people will either listen to me
or we will suffer like germany did because they share your irrational fear
and then people will listen to me anyway, having learned the hard way
perhaps the problem is you think i'm throwing people into prison cells
all i'm talking about is account deletion
or unable to speak at school board meetings again
or go to the amusement park
or wherever they decided to hate on black people, women, gays, trans, etc
an abuse, followed by the equivalent response
if some guy is mumbling hate in his apartment in private, no surveillance drone is going to net them and take them to a dungeon
@benroyce @gooba42 @Okanogen @Scubyw then we have neither a problem nor a paradox
Nobody is suggesting for even a second that you can't or shouldn't throw racist out of your club
But I think you are misunderstanding here. At the top of this conversation is the statement "we can't stop them from talking because the first amendment is a death packed." That's not about private action. That's about government action.
@Amoshias @gooba42 @Okanogen @Scubyw
i am talking about govt action
of course any private entity can boot you for hate speech
i am saying extend that to the govt
what we have now is things like twitter, where hate isn't just tolerated, it's actively cultivated by a bigot edgelord with lots of money. other places like facebook don't care
i'm saying they have to care
the alternative, the status quo, leads to trump. and trump leads to what you fear. but you say *i* have it wrong?
Amoshias is saying what we call hate speech is their free speech and vice versa
By that logic, hate speech can't be defined because it's relative
I'm saying (and I assume you're saying) that hate speech is objectively quantifiable outside of any perspective, so there is only hate speech, period, and that is what cannot be defined as free speech. Objectively
@Amoshias @benroyce @Okanogen @Scubyw Censorship is an extra step.
Stop legally defending hate speech on the basis of the first amendment. We can stop protecting it without outright criminalizing it. If that's not enough to help right the ship, we can reassess but the first step is to stop treating Nazi propaganda as though it were equivalent to Civil Rights advocacy.
Yes there are large grey areas
There are also hard, clear, objectively wrong areas that never change
No one is going to magically redefine child sex abuse material as "who knows? It's all relative." No one is going to say "oh that's just a joke" nevermind "its just a prank bro" doesn't absolve someone from the harm they cause
Likewise "women don't deserve any rights" is not some weird grey area, ever
you're acting like some anonymous edgelord on social media is the same thing as someone acting in a play. Even in Germany they have clear cut out exceptions for nazi imagery in movies and plays. You're acting like this is some difficult complicated problem. It's not
And "it's just a prank bro" is a meme because everyone understands bigots say bigotry then use that line as a weak defense when the shit hits the fan. It's never a joke
@Amoshias @gooba42 @Okanogen @Scubyw
In the law, we objectively define CSAM. Are you saying that is subjective? I don't think you are. I'm asking you to see we can apply objective standards here
And I agree large swaths of speech is subjective, and that should not be punished, no matter how squirrelly.
But you have to admit, that some speech, objectively, no matter how much we try to view it in any light, is just hate speech, pure and simple, completely objectively
@Amoshias @gooba42 @Okanogen @Scubyw
it's objective
germany punishes nazi imagery
the movie "downfall" was also produced in germany
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Downfall…
there is not a single honest sane person that has difficulty with this
this is not hard. at all
@Amoshias @benroyce @Okanogen @Scubyw Is "Springtime for Hitler" hate speech if Mel Brooks writes it for ironic effect? No.
Is it hate speech if the Proud Boys write it as a jubilant expression of Nazism? Yes.
The argument isn't whether it's acceptable to light a match, it's whether using it to set somebody on fire is acceptable, even if technically physics says the match never literally touched them. The line is blurry but we're nowhere near it.
i don't understand
you know they prosecute CSAM. harshly. so they have well defined laws
they aren't doing that on subjective vibes
so then it's a matter of a 5 second search
okay, dude. I cannot do this
This isn't hard?
ASK A GERMAN COURT IF IT'S HARD. THEY'VE BEEN GRAPPLING WITH THIS INSANELY COMPLEX LAW FOR GENERATIONS.
Ask id software, the makers of Castle wolfenstein, if the german law is hard.
I'm just getting so frustrated, Ben. You have the best of impulses but you just don't know what you're talking about and you are confidently arguing that your passing thoughts would be good public policy.
@benroyce @gooba42 @Okanogen @Scubyw you are using the word objective over and over and over again and every time I ask for specifics you give me something which is clearly subjective.
You think this is easy when it's incredibly complicated. One of the most complicated issues of free society could ever grapple with! I'm not saying there's no solution, I'm just saying that you are confidently spouting wrong things that people have said a thousand times, and you need to stop.
you asked for csam objective definition. i gave it to you after a 5 second search
you are saying movies or satire would be banned. the producers of "downfall" were german when germany bans nazi imagery. because people understand the objective rules
it's. not. hard.
@benroyce @gooba42 @Okanogen @Scubyw you gave me a Wikipedia article, which described a law which was REALLY CLEARLY SUBJECTIVE.
please go and look up what the word objective means. Every time you use the word objective you bring up something subjective.
You keep doing it over and over. I am going to tap out of this conversation because I'm getting incredibly frustrated. I don't think you're trolling but I also don't understand why you keep doing it.
@benroyce @gooba42 @Okanogen @Scubyw yes, I bet it is. BECAUSE YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN OBJECTIVE AND SUBJECTIVE.
And as a result, you show me something which is subjective, I point out it's subjective, and you go crazy BECAUSE YOU LEGITIMATELY THINK IT'S OBJECTIVE BECAUSE YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE.
And rather than try to tease apart the problem you're just getting more and more insistent
@benroyce @gooba42 @Okanogen @Scubyw okay, I took a breath. Would you like to talk about the differences between subjective and objective standards? (And by the way, for legal purposes, most 'objective' standards are also subjective.)
I looked at the actual laws related to CSAM. (18 USC 2251-2257.) I could go through them with you and point out what parts of the law are objective, and what parts are subjective.
a law is objective
where there is needed clarification, the courts rule
or the legislature writes new law
none of it is subjective
you think people are sent to prison on vibes?
they can be sent to prison on shoddy application of the law, yes
but that's a basis to get an appeal
and thus the law is further clarified objectively
it's all objective. any fuzzy area just needs clarification. it's not done on feelings. it's not subjective
@benroyce @gooba42 @Okanogen @Scubyw see, again, you're not asking to look at the law (which I provided you a citation to, because I'm a lawyer.) I HAVE looked at the law. You are confidently repeating what you've already said 50 times. It wasn't true 50 times ago and it's not true this time.
Would you like to look at it together? I can show you the parts of the law that are objective (18 or younger!) and we can talk about the parts that are subjective (sexually explicit.)
@Amoshias @gooba42 @Okanogen @Scubyw
maybe the problem is you see human judgment, fallible as it is, applied to objective guidelines, and failing to follow them well
but this is not subjectivity. subjectivity is baseless opinion: "star wars is the best movie ever made". it's not right or wrong. it's subjective
objectivity is factual and logical. even when applied wrong, it can be corrected. even if not corrected, it's failed objectivity, not subjectivity
is this the disconnect?
@Amoshias @gooba42 @Okanogen @Scubyw
even with your term "sexually explicit" it just becomes a giant game of refining objectivity. this not that. that but not this unless also that therefore this, etc
because otherwise defense attorneys can get the guilty off, or prosecutors can get the innocent convicted
it's an endless game of refinement
@benroyce @gooba42 @Okanogen @Scubyw "a giant game of refining objectivity."
Okay, I'm done.
I hope someday soon you think about that and ask yourself whether what you just said makes any sense, or whether you are just saying stuff because you really want to find a way that you've been right this whole time.
Or maybe not. Maybe you'll go to your grave thinking that somewhere there's an 'objective' definition of what's sexually explicit.
"I hope someday soon you think about that and ask yourself whether what you just said makes any sense"
i'll say it again:
the law is nothing but an endless game of refining objective rules
it never ends
where grey areas are encountered, new objective rules are defined
that's what it is
for the legal definition of "sexually explicit," people are freed or convicted, appeals are filed, and new law is written. objectively. endlessly
@Amoshias @benroyce @Okanogen @Scubyw I didn't argue that it wasn't. I said that even if it is subjective, there's a gulf between the malicious content aimed at harming people and genuine civil communication.
We're miles past where any fine line might actually reside. We're not parsing different forms of abortion or arguing about the roots of consciousness. It really isn't as nuanced as all that at this scale.
Skin crawling surprise: Alberta woman says camping trip was ruined by dozens of ticks
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/skin-crawling-surprise-alberta-woman-says-camping-trip-was-ruined-by-dozens-of-ticks-1.7547593?utm_source=flipboard&utm_medium=activitypub
Posted into Technology & Science @technology-science-cbcnews
An AI bot might be asking the questions at your next job interview
https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/artificial-intelligence-bot-job-interview-1.7546123?utm_source=flipboard&utm_medium=activitypub
Posted into Technology & Science @technology-science-cbcnews
Ik hou overigens een engelstalige blog bij over clouddiscussie Nederland - beetje AI gesteund voor het schrijven, analyse echter home-made brains.
Jobs roundup: June 2025 | Turborilla appoints John Wright as CEO
Gabor Mester promoted to head of US data analytics at Sony, Tom Glover appointed senior director of communications at Niantic Spatial
gamesindustry.biz/jobs-roundup…
Jobs roundup: June 2025 | Turborilla appoints John Wright as CEO
It can be difficult keeping track of the various comings and goings in the games industry, which is why we compile them…Sophie McEvoy (GamesIndustry.biz)
Regulator stops import of “live animals of unknown origin” to Armenia
NEWS » Economy » Regulator stops import of “live animals of unknown origin” to Armenia Thanks to the vigilance of inspectors of the Gogavan-Privolnoye BorderBYTESEU (Bytes Europe)
Azerbaijani authorities gearing up to clean house by getting rid of expired ammunition
BAKU, Azerbaijan, June 2. Azerbaijan’s Ministry of Defense (MOD) has announced plans to destroy expired and unusable ammunition at a training site near theBYTESEU (Bytes Europe)
Ukraine and Russia gather for peace talks in Turkey
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky called it a “brilliant operation.”BYTESEU (Bytes Europe)
Das Bild zeigt eine Straßenschildergruppe an einem Wegkreuz. Oben sind zwei weiße Schilder mit grüner Schrift und Pfeilen. Das obere Schild zeigt nach oben und weist auf "Frieda Großtopfer" hin, mit einem Fahrrad- und einem Radfahrer-Symbol. Das untere Schild zeigt nach links und weist auf "Dingelstädt Geismar" hin, ebenfalls mit einem Fahrrad-Symbol. Beide Schilder haben kleine grüne Symbole darunter, die "Kanonenbahn-Radweg" und "Südeichsfeld Radweg" anzeigen.
Unter diesen Schildern befindet sich ein blaues Schild mit einem weißen Reisebus-Symbol, einem "P" für Parken und einem Kaffeebecher-Symbol, was auf eine Parkanlage mit Kaffeeautomaten hinweist. Das blaue Schild zeigt nach links. Der Hintergrund zeigt ein grasbewachsenes Feld und einen bewölkten Himmel.
Bereitgestellt von @altbot, privat und lokal generiert mit Ovis2-8B
🌱 Energieverbrauch: 0.282 Wh
Who is Mohamed Soliman? The Boulder terror attack suspect accused of firebombing pro-Israel rally in Colorado
The latest headlines from our reporters across the US sent straight to your inbox each weekdayYour briefing on the latest headlines from across the USYourBYTESEU (Bytes Europe)
arbetaren.se/2025/06/02/trots-…
Trots israeliska attacker: Nu seglar Greta mot Gaza
Ship to Gaza på väg till Gazaremsan: ”En fredlig aktion för att uppmärksamma folkmordet”Arbetaren
Altbot
in reply to Heliograph • • •The image depicts an airport tarmac viewed from an elevated position, likely from a terminal building. The foreground shows a white building with a yellow logo, possibly representing an airline, and a jet bridge connected to the terminal. The tarmac is mostly empty, with a few vehicles and equipment visible, including a black car and a luggage conveyor belt. In the background, the airport terminal is visible, featuring a glass facade and multiple jet bridges extending to the aircraft. The sky is overcast with gray clouds, suggesting a gloomy weather condition. The overall scene is devoid of people, emphasizing the quietness of the airport at this moment.
Provided by @altbot, generated privately and locally using Ovis2-8B
🌱 Energy used: 0.162 Wh