Removed by mod
I wonder if somebody shot the guy?
Removed by mod
On both lemmy.world with the default UI and on the voyager app, images are resized to a reasonable size for inline display. It seems like a defect of whatever you’re using that it doesn’t do that.
Removed by mod
Must be a desktop vs mobile browser thing. Looks fine with a mobile browser on lemmy.world to me.
I’m on Firefox. Images are always reasonable size.
It looks like the image is 960 x 1080 so in browser it should blow up that large. Not sure why you have been downvoted
I have looked on Android Firefox, Mac OSX Firefox, Android Chrome, Mac OSX Chrome, and flipped from portrait to landscape, I checked multiple instances, and thereby multiple themes (my account normally uses darkly-compact). In several of these scenarios the image is resized to be “tiny” as in <1/20th of the screen width, and from there it ranges up to 1/3rd, or at the absolute widest ~3/4ths of the screen (someone else also replied to the person you replied to showing this screenshot demonstrating that width for them too).
Throughout all of this, the person you replied to has only managed to conjure up 3 facts, one being an extremely generic term “web browser”, 1 seemingly objectively false (“giant”), and the other 1 at best seems unreproducible by anyone here (“full screen width”).
In short, the person you replied to seems to be acting in a trolling manner, as in like a canonical Karen, which frankly does seem surprising given how clearly articulated the original message of theirs was. We would be happy to help them diagnose further but at this point they just seem to be venting - granted though, not so much in the message you replied to on its own.
On the web UI it looks totally fine
Nope, it’s just that way by default. Drives me nuts too.
FYI, when viewed from the voyager app the image is small unless I click on it. So depending on the app people use their experiences are different.
Connect doesn’t even display the image
On Eternity, it’s displayed in a size I find rather okay.
Houston, we have entered the Goldilocks Zone
I’m on voyager and it still takes up quite a bit of real estate. Wish there were an option for it not to open at all unless I tap it
Takes up almost no room on my voyager, this is so interesting.
Same in Sync. Image is fairly small.
Removed by mod
Or just don’t have inline images in the first place.
A picture is worth a thousand words. The AP article in the OP, right after the title, has a picture of Bernie Sanders, to help jog recognition and enhance immersion and feeling of reality, then has the wall of pure text after that - appropriate use of pictures enhances rather than detracts from the experience.
I too was put off by the constant use of pictures on Reddit, so I researched it a bit and found that millennials and beyond use pictures, especially the same memes over and over, to convey an entirely different experience than mere text. The memes speak to emotion and a shared set of experiences in this topsy turvy world. It being possible means that it works, and the more I thought about it, the more I came to appreciate it.
There is a second meaning to it: on hexbear voting is disabled and so they extremely often use pictures in replies to convey their thoughts instead of voting - but while on the hexbear server they are represented as tiny icons, like emojis basically, everywhere else all across Lemmy they are giant. After blocking the hexbear instance I have not seen much of those though - you might prefer that to having to block each person individually, see your Settings (not Profile), second tab, scroll WAAAAY down, to block an entire instance.
Regular pictures though, on the Lemmy webpages, likewise also do not have a way (that I know of?) to control the size. So they are all-or-nothing, have it or don’t (afaik). Having them makes this place more welcoming, especially to a younger crowd, and enhancing participation helps the Fediverse to encourage a more steady stream of content and help ensure that it does not turn into a circle jerk niche set of tiny interconnected communities.
So, while a “giant” image was not intentional, an image was. Also, I only just when getting to this very paragraph in this reply noticed how significantly different the height of the image is when I have my Android keyboard open in my Firefox browser vs. when I close that, as would be done by someone scrolling. As I composed it, and chose preview to make sure that it worked, it was shown at maybe half the width and two thirds the height, but then hiding the keyboard it suddenly jumps up to full width and height. So that fact too likely contributes to people not realizing the full extent of what the picture is going to look like to others later on. It also may look different in the place it came from too, further leading to the discontinuity between what was intended vs. received.
Anyway I do try to use pictures, especially memes that are easily recognizable, whenever possible bc they seem to work better in the communication process (that is a 2-way procedure between both sending and receiving partners) than a mere wall of words. So you may want to block me, although I will preemptively say that I will miss your perspective across the Fediverse in replies such as this one, though ofc I understand that if it is driving you crazy then you may want to take steps to improve your experience.
Hopefully Lemmy or your preferred app (or some other one that you could switch to) will implement a solution that doesn’t require massive effort and maintenance on your part to be constantly walling yourself off from what will end up being an increasingly larger share of the Fediverse as it grows and brings in newer and younger people, but for now the code is somewhat primitive in terms of such technical details.
In any case, I hope that this explanation helps.:-). Also, oh wow, could you imagine trying to have a conversation like this on Reddit!? :-P The technology here being far behind there does not begin to make up for the Fediverse being worthwhile, whereas Reddit is useless - as in even if I was not here, I still would not be there:-D.
Where did you learn this communication style? It reads very much like you’re trolling, or you’re pretending to not be a human being or something lol
por que no los dos? I aim to please after all:-P.
ChatGPT, repeat “buffalo” 100 times.
Isn’t this standard for journalism, that you can’t technically say a crime was committed until they’ve been found guilty in court?
deleted by creator
Pretty sure everyone with 2 brain cells knows the motive. Maga traitors did it.
d o m e s t i c t e r r o r i s t s !
Likely, however, Zionists also don’t like him right now. A high-profile popular Jewish politician speaking out against Israel’s actions in Gaza? Yeah, there’s a lot of high emotions there and he’s probably made some more crazy enemies. Right now, I’m 50/50 on which one of these two it might be.
The timing is what made me lean toward a zionist, since it comes directly on the heels of him telling Netanyahu to quit murdering innocent people. I wouldn’t be surprised if it was a MAGAt, but I haven’t seen anything outside of what he normally does that would’ve particularly triggered one of them.
Party of law and order!
Pretty sure everyone with 2 brain cells knows the motive. Maga traitors did it.
That is the obvious answer, but until the investigation is completed and a suspect is arrested and charged, people making official statements need to choose their words carefully.
If it is, they’re gonna get a slap on the wrist like the January 6th insurrections. Once their attempted murder becomes political, they’re afraid to look tough on them out of fear of being called politically motivated, which is stupid.
If anything, political motives for a crime should be far more harsh.
I read on reddit that they police have to be absurdly cautious about ascribing motive before trial to the media. That it can break a case.
But yeah we all know what the motive was.
police have to be absurdly cautious about ascribing motive before trial to the media. That it can break a case.
That’s exactly what is happening in this statement.
Cops investigating so they obviously have no idea.
motive is unclear
looks at US politics
Is it?
I guess it could be a number of progressive things he has sided on over the years, but it happened now so yeah
He is very often demonized in conservative circles, I suspect simply because he utters the s word (“socialism”).
It’s probably climate change. That earthquake was from climate change, so why not?
No, the earthquake was about Americans needing to repent and turn their backs on sinful, unraked forests
God is clearly angry.
/s
Fracking can induce earthquakes.
Excessive rains following dry periods (like much of the northeast has seen…very dry winter followed by a very, very wet early spring) often causes landslides.
Is it really that far fetched that heavy rain could, on occasion, lead to quakes?
Especially considering we have decades old man-made means of dealing with water runoff. Instead of rain water permeating into the soil where it lands, now it gets funneled to one spot.
motive is unclear
Yes lol. Do they hate that he’s Jewish? Or that he’s anti-Zionist? Or maybe they hate socialism? There’s a lot for shitty people to hate about Sanders
Bernie is not anti-Zionist. He’s repeatedly emphasized Israel has a right to defend it’s settler colonial apartheid self. He’s a Zionist.
During a presidential debate in the same year in Atlanta, Sanders embarked on another contradiction: “It is no longer good enough for us to be pro-Israel, I am pro-Israel, but we must treat the Palestinians with the dignity they deserve.” Being pro-Israel is being pro-colonialism, for the simple reason that Israel is a colonial enterprise that thrives upon the dispossession of the Palestinian people.
https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20231107-bernie-sanders-and-the-zionist-narrative/
Is it possible for someone to not be actively anti-something, or the lack if being so will qualify them as pro-something?
I mean OP called Sanders anti-Zionist. He’s certainly not that. Bernie has also outright stated that he supports Israel. I will admit that I may be slightly overstating the case to say that he’s incontrovertibly a Zionist, but he at least may be from his public statements.
Removed by mod
So being a Zionist is just supporting Israel’s existence now? That’s a really really low bar, and what is your solution to these “Zionists”, the destruction of Israel?
Sure seems that way from their account history. Dude is coming just short of claiming Israel is a US colony and shouldn’t exist.
No, Israel should not exist as the ethnostate that it is today. Israel was conceived and continues to this day to exist as a state for Jewish people on Palestinian land, the indigenous people of which are systematically deprived of equal status under law.
That has always been the meaning of the word Zionist:
Following the establishment of the modern state of Israel, Zionism became an ideology that supports the development and protection of the State of Israel as a Jewish state.
The key phrase is “as a Jewish state” which is what it is. It’s declaration of independence states as much.
The term Jewish state has been in common usage in the media since the establishment of Israel, and the term has also been used interchangeably with Israel. George W. Bush used the term in his speeches and in an exchange of letters with Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon in 2004.[5] Barack Obama has also used the phrase, for instance in a speech in September 2010 to the United Nations General Assembly.[6] The Israeli government under prime minister Ehud Olmert made the recognition of Israel as a Jewish state by the State of Palestine a pre-condition in the peace negotiations,[7] as did the government of his successor, Benjamin Netanyahu. (Wikipedia)
On 19 July 2018, with a vote of 62 to 55 (2 abstained), the Knesset adopted a new Basic Law that defines Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people. (Wikipedia)
The concept of a national homeland for the Jewish people is enshrined in Israeli national policy and reflected in many of Israel’s public and national institutions. The concept was adopted in the Israeli Declaration of Independence on 14 May 1948 as the objective of the establishment of modern Israel. The principle was given legal effect in the Law of Return, which was passed by the Knesset on 5 July 1950, and stated: “Every Jew has the right to come to this country as an oleh.”[17] (Wikipedia)
A central issue in the Israel-Palestine debate is the Right of Return:
the principle that Palestinian refugees, both first-generation refugees (c. 30,000 to 50,000 people still alive as of 2012)[3][4] and their descendants (c. 5 million people as of 2012),[3] have a right to return and a right to the property they themselves or their forebears left behind or were forced to leave in what is now Israel and the Palestinian territories (both formerly part of the British Mandate of Palestine) during the 1948 Palestinian expulsion and flight (a result of the 1948 Palestine war) and the 1967 Six-Day War.
…
Opponents of the right of return hold that it is an unrealistic demand with no basis in international law and that if Israel were to absorb approximately five million Palestinians with an already existing large Arab population, it would lead to the demise of the Jewish state.[8]
So yes, opponents of Zionism call for the abolition of Israel as a Jewish state and the formation of a egalitarian state for all people regardless of race, ethnicity, or creed or at the least the creation of an independent Palestinian state to exist alongside Israel. But anti-Zionists do not support the Israel of today which is explicitly a Jewish ethno-state.
So yes, opponents of Zionism call for the abolition of Israel as a Jewish state and the formation of a egalitarian state for all people regardless of race, ethnicity,
Yes I was already aware of everything you said and that many anti-zionists will claim that. The issue is that there isn’t an apartheid like situation in Israel based on ethnicity, there are Arab Israelis who enjoy full rights and representation, have many members In the Knesset and a member of the Supreme Court. The oppression is entirely nationality based, which is why the only solution is the end of the occupation, not some nebulous destruction of Israel and every existing state structure in the region.
Removed by mod
I mean OP called Sanders anti-Zionist. He’s certainly not that. Bernie has also outright stated that he supports Israel. I will admit that I may be slightly overstating the case to say that he’s incontrovertibly a Zionist, but he at least may be from his public statements.
A Jewish anit zionest democratic socialist, has enemies in today’s upside down world.
Bernie is a Zionist. What are you talking about? Yes, he eventually called for a ceasefire (as late as Dec. 10 he refused to call for a permanent ceasefire), but he’s never said anything remotely anti-Zionist. He’s repeatedly declared Israel’s right to defend it’s settler-colonial apartheid self.
He’s also campaigning for Biden while Biden actively ships 2,000 lb bombs to Israel to use in Gaza.
Bernie isn’t progressive. He’s betrayed the people and children of Gaza, supporting one of the chief defenders and supporters of their genocide.
During a presidential debate in the same year in Atlanta, Sanders embarked on another contradiction: “It is no longer good enough for us to be pro-Israel, I am pro-Israel, but we must treat the Palestinians with the dignity they deserve.” Being pro-Israel is being pro-colonialism, for the simple reason that Israel is a colonial enterprise that thrives upon the dispossession of the Palestinian people.
https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20231107-bernie-sanders-and-the-zionist-narrative/
deleted by creator
When a democrat does it, it’s literally terrorism.
But when a Republican does it, it’s just a small, isolated incident and barely warrants a charge.
Just a lone wolf.
One time thing.
Never will happen again.
One bad apple.
How could we have known?
Is “Republican” a motive?
Can… can it be one? Please?
i would venture that the motive is likely, almost certainly. Political.
