Analysis of two decades in the UK, where in 1997 they banned video games and mental illness:

    1996: 16 children and their teacher shot dead
    1997-2018: 0 shot dead

I take your point but, prior to Dunblane, I believe there was one death and 4 injuries in school shootings. All with shotguns.

I have a suspicion that the handgun ban and the lack of subsequent school shootings might not be completely causal.

BTW that's not to suggest that the ban was wrong. I was entirely supportive and still am. I think the UK's approach to guns is laudable and should be encouraged elsewhere.

Analysis of nearly two decades in the US where they banned planes and Muslims:

2001: 2,996 people killed in plane attacks

2002-2018: 0 people killed in plane attacks

How does a nation ban mental illness?

(original post is obviously sarcasm: the UK banned handguns.)

And I'm pretty sure the UK still has video games?

That's what I thought as well but cannot confirm.

Sorry, it was a reference to some people claiming the causes of gun sprees are video games or mental illness.

In fact in 1997 the UK simply banned handguns.

Thanks for the clarification, I also did not realize the sarcasm.

Gotcha, my bad, did not realize the post was sarcasm.

whoosh

I was going to ask if they had banned RT, since it took four pages of mostly Guardian and BBC links to find an RT submission.

For "world news" they have virtually no links to media outside the US/Europe.

I guess they did something to stop what you describe anyway.

Why even mention Guantanamo. Pol Pot's popularity and rise was enabled by the USA's absolutely monstrous and indefensible atrocities committed against Cambodia (and Laos) during the "Vietnam" War.

After Pol Pot's genocide was stopped (by the Bad Guys, Soviet-backed Vietnam), the US (and China - its commie BFF since throwing Taiwan under the bus) supported the Khmer Rouge as the Cambodian representative in the UN until the 1990s.

You know, like having the Nazi Party represent Israel or Poland until the 1960s.

The US armed, funded and kept alive the Khmer Rouge in the 1980s, and Reagan's British poodle Margaret Thatcher even sent the SAS to train them.

"ASEAN wanted elections [in Cambodia] but the U.S. supported the return of [Pol Pot's] genocidal regime." - Singapore diplomat Bilahari Kausikan

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegations_of_United_States_s...

> They also helped fund terrorist organisations like ISIS.

Do you have a link to this? All I can find on Google (apart from six members of staff being fired over a "mock beheading video") is a story about 13 HSBC customers who had links to ISIS.

"HSBC to pay $1.9 billion U.S. fine in money-laundering case"

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-hsbc-probe/hsbc-to-pay-1-...

Google "hsbc money laundering scandal" for more info.

Here's one you don't need to register/sign up to use:

https://news.aioe.org/

As for Solani:

> The email from solani reiterates "If you don't want to use your real E-Mail-address, please use an address from the top-level-domain ".invalid""

They mean on posts you make to Usenet. Put that ".invalid" address in the From field on your Newsreader.

You should probably check with Solani if they display your IP address on posts though (NNTP-Posting-Host), because some news servers do.

> renaming Hitler to Mr. Heiler

I don't know if it's the same Wolfenstein but I was somewhat amused to read, or see on Youtube, recently they renamed Himmler to Hoeller. (Himmel being heaven in German, and Hoelle being hell.)

> no JavaScript

Not to knock an otherwise nice site (CTRL & + improves readability for me personally, though), but:

    (function(d, s, id) {
      var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];
      if (d.getElementById(id)) return;
      js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id;
      js.src = 'https://connect.facebook.net/en_US/sdk.js#blahblahblah';
      fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs);
    }(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk'));

AFAIK, even for sites that want to feed the monster, that's unnecessary:

http://chrisltd.com/blog/2015/04/social-share-like-buttons-w...

https://sharingbuttons.io/

So I decided to test the christld ones:

Twitter seems to work (brings up form).

Facebook redirects to an error.

Linkedin seems to work (brings up form when logged in).

Pinterest seems to work (brought up create board dialog when logged in)

Google+ seems to work (brings up share form).

I do have to say that for me that these would actually work and the JS likely wouldn't in some cases, since I make heavy use of Firefox's containers now to sandbox a lot of online identities, and just have new windows for certain URLs automatically load in the correct container.

Thanks, that's interesting. The chrisltd blog is from 2015, so I did wonder if some of it might be out of date by now.

AFAICS (which I didn't notice at first) sharingbuttons has a slightly different FB URL, which may not give an error:

https://facebook.com/sharer/sharer.php?u=YOUR-URL

Compared to chrisltd's:

https://facebook.com/sharer.php?u=YOUR-URL

If someone did call Euros a joke because of a Euro ponzi scheme, would anyone who has Euros in their bank give the slightest shit, never mind write an article about how the Euro is being "slandered"?

Why do hodlers of cryptos get so irate then?

I recognize how my previous comment read, so I will try to explain myself better.

I have never owned any amount of a crypto, neither did I waste more than a few watt-minutes running a mining algo. I would actually be on the other end of the stereotype, "the bitter bitcon hater that has known about it since the early days (mainly from HN) but never invested a cent in it" but alas I do not fit there either.

I am a neutral observer, interested in debate about novel forms of currency rather than any single implementation. The initial point I was trying to make is that I find the argument about ICOs (the vast majority of witch are obvious scams) detracts from the actual technology. The way the trading markets are acting does not help either.

Ah, sorry if that came across as directed at you specifically. It was more just about the 'cultishness' around Bitcoin that I think marks it out as somewhat different to regular currencies.