Unbecredible

deleted by creator

Nah I approve of OPs wording. More people need that level of basic epistemological humility in their everyday speech.

It’ll be fixed?

Was he particularly in a position to stop that?

I feel the existence of an “export” option in a piece of software is noble in this day and age, and I’m so appreciative of it.

It says “look, I don’t WANT you to go to my competitor, but I’m not gonna try to hold your data hostage to prevent it.”

It’s class, as the Scottish would say.

You can’t keep secrets from the future.

Heard that once in a song about how all encryption is doomed to break against future math/computing power. Great eery phrase.

Sad little human. I have written my treatises into the warp and weft of reality itself. I have twisted my curiosity into the folds of your DNA and stamped my waxing madness into the ragged edges of the telomeres that mark your days as numbered. I have made of the stars a celestial QR code that burns across the skies of every planet, that burns across the eyes of every ape who stares into the night and asks “why?”. I announced The Work with a bang of gas and light and awe and set time itself into motion so my scripture could expand eternally into the infinite, benighted expanse.

He doesn’t mean he could end it at any time. He says “if I’m elected” cause he’s talking about the time period after he won the election but before he actually took office.

The moment you win the election and become the person who will DEFINITELY be the president in a couple of months, your bargaining power with other nations (and anyone really) goes through the roof compared to what you had as a mere candidate.

I’ve stated that last as a fact though it’s just what seems self-evidently true to me.

It’s a lemmy account setting. If the Boost app does not expose the show “show scores” setting you can change it in a browser and Boost should reflect the change once you restart it. To make the change, just go to https://lemmy.world/ and go to your account settings after you log in.

…kinda but also wtf are you talking about? It’s Taco Bell, of course it’s going to be greasy as fuck and delicious.

Not delicious in the way of fresher more authentic Mexican food. Delicious in the way of Taco Bell.

.89-cents-at-midnight-delicious

If you like politics+humor+eldritch-horror might I suggest Frankie Boyle and in particular his show New World Order.

so you think you will next time or nah?

Chair Khan? Am I the only one that things it’s a bad look to have that evil tiger from The Jungle Book leading the FTC?

You’re probably right about this specific dude’s motivations for posing the question, but I think I am right that this type of thought is entirely normal and even common to have. You are right about the dismissiveness too, sorry.

What do you think about the parallel I was trying to draw between the video I mentioned and this guy’s question about paying for rape? I thought the reason that someone’s interest could be caught by the video is similar in nature to the reasons someone might wonder “is it okay to pay to hurt someone”? And that train of thought leads naturally enough to “Well how much harm is permissible for what amount of money?” which leads naturally enough to imagining specific circumstances.

And those trains of thought are similar to the thought behind people’s ancient musings about other tricky question of morality like the trolley problem. It’s not peak philosophy it’s just ordinary human thought. You shouldn’t be so afraid or repulsed by it or whatever.

Don’t you think taking that hard-line stance kind of corners you into taking some nonsensical positions?

For example a physical power imbalance will always exist between two men of different sizes. Because the imbalance is there, you have to answer with a hard no when someone asks: “is it possible for two men of different sizes to consent to sex with one another?” But if someone asks “is it okay for two guys of different sizes to have sex?” you would presumably say yes.

Now you have been forced to say it is okay for sex to happen despite the impossibility of any consent having being given.

It can’t exist? As an exaggeration, is there no way for a woman to meaningfully consent to an offer from her male boss to swap packed lunches? After all, he might take offense and pass her over for the promotion if she declines.

And if consent is possible in that scenario, what makes it immediately impossible in the scenario where sex or romance is involved?

It seems obvious that consent has to exist on some kind of spectrum like almost everything else. But it’s spoken about and thought about in a very binary way. That seems problematic given how big a topic consent is lately.

I think it must be fairly normal to wonder things like this. Once I saw a video of a man standing on a busy sidewalk offering passersby the opportunity to shoot a staple gun into his bare chest for a dollar or so. It was immediately fascinating. The proposition was so direct: pay money to inflict pain. And people were taking him up on it!

Interesting, sort of in the same way that this Twitter guy’s question is interesting. The same way other moral thought experiments like “the trolley problem” are interesting.

Weird just means unusual (with slight negative connotations already) . So to use “weird” as an unqualified insult is to say that being unusual is a negative thing in itself. Which echoes the sentiment behind things like xenophobia and such. That’s why people are uncomfortable with this line of political attack, imo.

To say “there’s good weird and bad weird” doesn’t say much more than that there are ways of being unusual that you view positively and those that you view negatively. But that’s obvious and doesn’t resolve the issue I mentioned before.

What a memory this unlocked!! The physics of this game made you feel like you were 100% driving a real car. I almost want to play it again now, but honestly I bet that not being able to actually drive as a kid was half of what made it so mesmerizing.

Now it might just be like driving to work :(