Right. The John Sturges that was born in 1910 was directing films in 1890, twenty years before his birth, and also pioneered color and sound films several decades prior to their patents. Cool.

You’re not a very effective or amusing troll.

The Magnificent Seven was released on October 12, 1960.

The Seven Samurai was released in 1954, six years prior.

A number of Kurosawa films have been remade for American audiences. Take The Hidden Fortress; it was remade as Star Wars. Meanwhile, Kurosawa did take inspiration from western playwrights, such as Shakespeare’s MacBeth (Throne of Blood) and King Lear (Ran).

And, BTW, I happen to absolutely love chanbara, especially and including the schlock garbage like Sleepy Eyes of Death, Zatoichi, Lady Snowblood, Lone Wolf and Cub, and especially Hanzo the Razor. Samurai film share a lot of similarities with western films, and many of the low-budget sword-fighting films were modeled after the western genre films (only with a funk and jazz soundtrack).

Kurosawa Akira’s The Seven Samurai was released in 1954. John Sturges’ The Magnificent Seven was released in 1960.

So, uh, first, The Magnificent Seven was the remake, not the other way around, and second, it comes only 6 years after the inspiration, rather than close to a century. If The Magnificent Seven had been made 80 years prior to The Seven Samurai, it would have been made in 1874. …Which would have been before some of the firearms used in the film were even invented, and only 10 years after the US Civil War.

One of my favorites that I don’t often see mentioned is Upgrade. It’s very nearly perfect as a near-future cyberpunk dystopia.

…80 or 90 years? You sure 'bout that?

Uh. I know a whole bunch of people that have bounced at multiple clubs in Chicago. I know one guy that was loss prevention at a store in Chicago that used to love chasing people down, because he enjoys that shit.

Tell yourself that if you want to, but the truth is that bouncers are going to have to know how to fight to at least some degree, because they’re going to end up in fights.

Four hours after I had a laminectomy, discectomy, and foraminotomy on the L4-S1 vertebrae and discs, the nurse was telling me that I had to get out of bed and walk up and down the hall. That was pain that morphine didn’t seem to touch, and was easily my worst experience moving.

A bouncer isn’t usually going to be fighting to survive; they’re throwing some dude the fuck out of a venue, or subduing them until cops show up.

As far as my comment about Shiv Works - I stand by that 100%. Look them up. They train with bare hands, knives, and guns (firing non-lethal training munitions), and in awkward spaces (such as you might experience in a car jacking).

Any discipline that forces you to act while under pressure is going to improve your odds if you end up in a situation where fighting is your only real option. If you get sucked-punched on a subway, experience in e.g. boxing is going to be far, far better than nothing at all, despite the fact that boxing has rules. IDPA/USPSA will not, contrary to claims, get you kilt in da streets, because practice moving and shooting is better than not.

The idea that there’s a real distinction between self-defense and martial arts in general is nonsense. If you’re good in MMA, this is going to translate almost 1:1 to self defense. Here’s the blunt truth: most of the people that are going to attack a person have a LOT of experience fighting. If you want to defend yourself, you’re going to need to give yourself a lot of the same experiences, even if it’s in a more controlled setting, and “self-defense” classes aren’t going to do that.

And, BTW, I know a guy that teaches wu shu (Eagle Claw, I think?) that also works as a bouncer. He is very, very effective, and uses the things he teaches as a bouncer. He’s small–like, 5’5", 150#–and he punches well above his weight.

It depends on whether you believe that people should be allowed to use narcotics or not. I tend to believe that people should be able to make that choice for themselves–as it’s their own body–and ordering narcotics online decreases violence in the drug trade since there’s no longer obvious fights over territories, etc.

The same interagency cooperation that makes it easier to track down one groups of people and punish them also makes it easier to track down other groups of people that you might agree with.

Depending on what you’re doing, that probably wouldn’t be a significant hinderance to law enforcement. Child sexual abuse, drug trafficking, etc., all tends to get lots of interagency cooperation, regardless of political issues.

This is a difficult question.

If you’re a bouncer, then yeah, mixed martial arts is definitely useful (e…g., something like both muay thai and Brazilian juijitsu). For a typical person that’s unlikely to ever need to defend their life, probably not.

As far as which martial art you should take, if you’re going to take one… It depends on what you want. If you want a physical activity that doesn’t have to be practical, then take up something like kyudo, kenjutsu, or aikido. If you want something that’s practical, then look into juijitsu and things based more in grappling. If you seriously worry about getting into a confrontation with someone that’s armed, then look up Shiv Works, and see what they have in your area.

A concealed carry permit can be useful, yes, but it’s very, very situational, and requires practice. Moreover, ever single bullet you fire outside of a range has to be accounted for.

I’ve tried to use it, but have not managed to get it to work. Which is a bummer.

I should probably try again now that I have a new computer. My old computer was so old that a lot of stuff wasn’t working correctly.

ISPs definitely keep records. At least some VPNs claim that they don’t, and that their networks are set up in such a way that they can’t. Some organizations claim to validate the claims of the VPNs, but it’s unclear if they’re trustworthy.

So your choice is to use something that definitely keeps logs, or to use a company that at least says that they don’t/can’t.

And this is covered by freedom of the press.

Their freedom of the press isn’t what’s in question. Their ownership is. They are welcome to continue operating as long as they are not owned by a Chinese company based in China and subject to Chinese national security laws.

But, even if it’s really, truly, a 1A issue, no rights are absolute. You can not, for instance, publish classified information, and then claim that it’s a free speech issue. National security interests can, and do, outweigh individual and especially corporate rights to free speech.

especially when the justification seems to be about the speech on that app

But that’s not the justification. The justification is first, access to data, and second, manipulation of that data. The gov’t is arguing that TT is hoovering up massive amounts of data on users, and then is manipulating the content that is shown to them in order to unjustly influence international policy, and all done with no transparency at all. It’s on-par with Russian election interference, although perhaps a little longer lasting and more subtly done.

…That does not, in fact, make it any better.

That makes it even more terrorism.

People that are registered Republicans, consistently vote Republican, or hold Republican views make up a little under half of the overall population, current population in the US is around 340M (last time I checked, it’s been a minute), so 140M is a fairly conservative (ha!) guess at how many people would more-or-less be Republican, or lean Republican.

Oh, and the flip side of that is that there are a larger number of people that are registered as Democratic voters, consistently vote Democratic, or tend to lean Democratic in their views, even if they don’t vote/don’t vote consistently.

…It’s not even close to the majority of people in the GOP. It’s not even a particularly large minority

Jesus fucking christ.

Even if it was 100 people every single day that were being, caught, arrested, or convicted for CSAM or sexual misconduct of some kind with a minor, and every single one of them was in the GOP, that’s still 365,000 out of about 140,000,000, which is .2%, on an annual basis. Two tenths of one percent is about fifty percent away from being a majority.

Not a war crime; terrorism. Hezbollah is a political organization.

After all its not hard to make a corporation in the US

…A US corporation is subject to US laws.

ByteDance is subject to Chinese laws.

If TikTok wants to do everything that it’s currently doing, but under US law and under US scrutiny, they’re more than welcome to do so. But they’re currently evading any serious scrutiny. Hence the reason to shut them down if they refuse gov’t oversight.

National security interests are the interests of the people though.

The fundamental issue is that, assuming I’m not leaking national security information, I can say nearly anything I want on Facebook, Twitter, etc. (as long as I’m not in violation of their terms of service). The US largely does not censor people using the power of the gov’t. If I am an authoritarian communist, I’m more than welcome to spread these views on any American social network that I choose without gov’t interference. I can spread anti-vax and Q nonsense if I wish, and the worst-case scenario is that my neighbors will stop talking to me. I can attack the very foundation of the country if I want, as long as I’m not spreading military secrets.

This is not the case in China. Spreading pro-capitalism and pro-democracy messages can quickly get you arrested. Trying to share accurate information about what really happened in Tianamen Square in 1989 can result in you disappearing. Words and phrases are actively censored by the gov’t on social media. The Chinese gov’t takes a direct role in shaping social media by what it promotes, and what it forbids. Anything that’s perceived as an attack on the political system of the country, the party, or any of the leaders (remember the internationally famous tennis player that abruptly disappeared when she accused a local party leader of sexual assault?) will put you at risk.

This isn’t a case of, “oh, both sides are the same”.