Bamboodpanda
@Bamboodpanda@lemmy.world
- Comment on Bought to you by the central limit theorem society 1 day ago:
Sciencey with a wiff of shit post. I like it.
- Comment on Tabletop convection oven 1 week ago:
A true air fryer cooks by blasting hot air from directly above the food. The fan and heating element sit on top, and the food rests in a basket with holes that let air flow underneath. This creates a fast-moving vortex of heat that surrounds the food, cooking it evenly and making it crispy with very little oil.
A small tabletop convection oven works differently. Its fan is usually in the back or on the side, pushing hot air around the chamber instead of straight down. The air moves more gently, and the food often sits on a solid tray or rack that blocks airflow underneath. It still cooks evenly, but it produces more of a roasted texture than a fried one.
Personally, I prefer tabletop convection.
- Comment on Lasagnaius 1 week ago:
Gyozaius.
I like it!
- Comment on 5 weeks ago:
- Comment on I Got This Right, Right? 5 weeks ago:
This is one of the biggest problems with our current state of polarization: we’re quick to box people into a binary; either “red” or “blue,” “left” or “right.”
Real people rarely fit neatly into those categories. When you take the time to actually map out someone’s beliefs, experiences, and values, what you find almost never looks like a solid block of one color. Instead, it’s more like a mosaic: someone might lean conservative on economic issues, progressive on social ones, independent when it comes to foreign policy, and undecided on others.
Reducing all of that complexity down to a single partisan label is not only misleading, it also fuels division. It makes it harder to have real conversations, because instead of engaging with the full person (their reasoning, contradictions, and growth), we engage with a caricature. Recognizing that most people carry a mix of beliefs forces us to slow down, listen, and resist the urge to collapse identities into overly simple categories.
The challenge is that this feels counterintuitive, especially for people who haven’t examined why they hold the views they do. It’s easier, and often more comforting, to inherit an identity or adopt a team than it is to wrestle with contradictions and gray areas. But when we refuse that deeper work, we not only misunderstand others, we also misunderstand ourselves.
In other words, the messiness is the point. People are complicated, and when we acknowledge that, we create more space for dialogue, empathy, and genuine understanding; the very things that binary polarization squeezes out.
- Comment on Posting for the "Now guys he was MURDERED! Don't celebrate!" Crowd 1 month ago:
Yup. I totally understand why it rings hollow and why feels good that a nazi died.
authoritarianism isn’t waiting for permission. But there’s a difference between “they don’t need justification” and “justification doesn’t matter.” Yes, Trump was always going to crack down on dissent. But Kirk’s assassination transforms that from “Trump’s authoritarian overreach” into “necessary response to political violence.” It shifts the narrative from aggression to self-defense. Did Goebbels need Wessel after his death in 1930? No, but it sure as shit worked to mobilize the base.
My point is that we, the true patriots upholding actual freedom, lose here. We all lose here and its frustrating that so many people are caught up in the cosmic justice that they can’t see that this is EXACTLY what they want.
- Comment on Posting for the "Now guys he was MURDERED! Don't celebrate!" Crowd 1 month ago:
Instead of telling me how I feel, name a single “good thing” that has resulted.
Kirk’s organization is stronger, his ideas are martyred, his followers are more radicalized. You tell me I am afraid, but I am observing reality; historical and present.
Show me the improvement, because all I see is fascists getting exactly what they want.
- Comment on Posting for the "Now guys he was MURDERED! Don't celebrate!" Crowd 1 month ago:
It appears you do not want to know more.
- Comment on Posting for the "Now guys he was MURDERED! Don't celebrate!" Crowd 1 month ago:
Ohhh! I love Starship Troopers! The book, not so much, but the movie I adore.
Let’s dig into your choice to respond with this scene.
That’s the moment where Verhoeven shows us ‘Federation Victory’! The good guys have won! They’ve captured the Brain Bug! It’s afraid! Humanity wins!
Except what’s actually happening is fascists celebrating the torture of a sentient being. One that extracted human minds just as they’ll now extract from its mind; each side justifying their horrors by pointing to the other’s. All while convincing themselves they’re heroes.
The Federation doesn’t attempt communication or diplomacy. They literally probe its brain for intel while cheering its terror. The troops cheering ‘It’s afraid!’ aren’t the good guys. They’re Verhoeven’s mirror showing us how righteousness becomes the very tyranny it claims to fight.
NPH’s character literally becomes a full SS-uniformed intelligence officer who feeds his best friends into an endless meat grinder. The bugs were defending their home. The Federation manufactured its own eternal enemy. And everyone cheering becomes complicit in forever war.
You’ve sent me a scene about people so drunk on their enemy’s fear that they can’t see they’ve become the monsters.
So either you’re agreeing that celebrating suffering makes us indistinguishable from what we oppose, or you’ve accidentally proven my point by quoting the villains as heroes.
Either way, I couldn’t have picked a better metaphor myself.
- Comment on Posting for the "Now guys he was MURDERED! Don't celebrate!" Crowd 1 month ago:
I understand finding comfort where you can, but consider: Kirk not being here to “see it through” assumes his death diminishes his impact. The opposite is true. Alive, he was one voice that could be countered, fact-checked, and eventually forgotten. Dead, he becomes eternal; forever young, forever wronged, forever useful to those who will absolutely be here to see it through. The solace is hollow when his absence strengthens everything he stood for.
- Comment on Posting for the "Now guys he was MURDERED! Don't celebrate!" Crowd 1 month ago:
You’ve identified something crucial that others miss: we don’t defeat dehumanization by becoming better at it. The moment we celebrate death, we’ve accepted their fundamental premise that political disagreement justifies violence.
Your terror is appropriate and I feel it with you. Not just at the violence itself, but at watching people you agree with politically abandon the very principles that distinguish us from what we oppose. The hardest battle isn’t against fascism; it’s maintaining our humanity while fighting inhumanity.
- Comment on Posting for the "Now guys he was MURDERED! Don't celebrate!" Crowd 1 month ago:
Your “cool story bro” response is exactly the kind of thinking that creates space for demagogues to thrive. When someone offers strategic analysis about why celebrating political violence backfires, and you respond with a thought-terminating cliché, you’re demonstrating the same anti-intellectual reflex that makes populations vulnerable to manipulation.
Think about what made Charlie Kirk successful: he offered simple, emotionally satisfying answers to complex problems. “Your problems aren’t from complicated economic systems, it’s those people over there.” His audience loved him because he never asked them to think harder than a bumper sticker.
And here you are, faced with someone explaining why emotional satisfaction isn’t political victory, why martyrdom empowers the very ideas we need to defeat… and your response is a meme. You’re operating at exactly the level of discourse that Kirk counted on: where snark replaces strategy, where being dismissive feels like being strong, where “cool story bro” seems like a clever response to warnings about tactical disaster.
The movements that win understand complexity. The movements that lose mistake attitude for analysis. When you brush off strategic thinking with internet catchphrases, you’re not fighting against the Charlie Kirks of the world. You’re proving that their reduction of politics to tribal reflexes and emotional reactions was right all along.
The system that produces Charlie Kirks depends on people refusing to think beyond the satisfaction of the dunk, the own, the sick burn. Your dismissal isn’t rebellion; it’s compliance with the exact intellectual laziness that powerful interests count on to keep populations manageable and movements ineffective.
- Comment on Posting for the "Now guys he was MURDERED! Don't celebrate!" Crowd 1 month ago:
You’re right that they manufacture pretexts, but there’s a crucial difference between forced fabrications and genuine ammunition. When they have to invent threats, their propaganda requires constant maintenance and reality-bending. When we hand them actual violence to point to, we transform their lies into prophecies. Yes, probability ensures incidents will occur, but the question is whether we contribute to that probability or work against it. “They’ll do it anyway” becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy that absolves us of strategic thinking. I say, let us not make the Fascist’s job easier.
- Comment on Posting for the "Now guys he was MURDERED! Don't celebrate!" Crowd 1 month ago:
I get the impulse, truly. He spread hate and did real harm, and the anger at that is justified. But celebrating his death doesn’t hurt his cause, it builds it. The right has shown us the playbook: when left-wing leaders are killed, they shrug it off, Trump even said it ‘doesn’t matter.’ Yet with Kirk, before there’s even a suspect, they’re already framing it as the start of the left’s downfall. When we celebrate, we feed that narrative. We give the Nazis exactly what they want. The real strength is being better than them, and making sure their ideas lose.
- Comment on Posting for the "Now guys he was MURDERED! Don't celebrate!" Crowd 1 month ago:
Here’s the frustration and why this should not be celebrated:
Charlie Kirk spent years dehumanizing people, making lives measurably worse, and profiting from hatred. The cosmic irony of him being shot while calling trans people dangerous and minimizing gun violence feels like the universe delivering a punchline he wrote himself. There’s a cathartic release in seeing someone who seemed untouchable suddenly silenced by the very violence he dismissed.
But that catharsis is blinding, vile, and destructive. Every celebration post, every “rest in piss” meme, every “fucked around and found out” joke is already being screenshot and weaponized. The worst people imaginable, those eager to exploit violence, are being handed exactly what they want: supposed proof that “they were right,” justification for crackdowns, and, most dangerously, a martyr whose blood sanctifies every awful thing he stood for.
Celebration may feel like a dunk on fascism, but in reality it accelerates it. It may feel like strength, but it exposes a movement so strategically bankrupt that it mistakes emotional satisfaction for political victory. Kirk alive was one influencer among many; Kirk dead is a rallying cry that will outlive us all.
The rage at what he represented is justified. But celebrating his death guarantees those very ideas will flourish. American democracy is dying, and a gravedigger falling into the hole is no victory when it only deepens the grave.
His ideas needed to be defeated. Instead, they’ve been immortalized.
- Comment on No brainer 1 month ago:
Free Gravel?
This one is clearly the best choice. That shit is expensive!
Start a gravel business, destroy the competition, and create a gravel empire.
- Comment on That's an impressive drop. Any ideas why? 1 month ago:
Do you count more if you have sex 3 to 4 times a week?
- Comment on leading ai company 1 month ago:
Yeah but can you spew that nonsense at millions of people on your very own shitty platform? Gotta get on muskies level.
- Comment on Modern Windows in a nutshell 1 month ago:
My wife came to me saying her laptop wasn’t working. She was on it last night. It was forcing a Windows account login. Shift-10 disabled so I couldn’t bypass.
Microsoft can straight fuck itself after this. Trying to brick an 8 year old laptop with a local account. Fuck that noise. My wife is gonna have to learn Linux.
- Comment on A small art gallery in Japan just happened to have these pictures next to each other. And then it morphed into a popular meme template 2 months ago:
Shhh. Don’t tell them. You’ll ruin the fun!
- Comment on Gallium 3 months ago:
The news of it happening doesn’t land like the video of it happening does.
www.instagram.com/reel/DMMm-ePtVfU/
It’s fucking brutal.
- Comment on [deleted] 3 months ago:
This is my life. Plus 2 cats.
- Comment on Oatmeal 3 months ago:
Egg Drop Soup.
Egg Drop is a cute name.
- Comment on Interesting 3 months ago:
I was raised to love my neighbor, to respond to hate with compassion, to tell the truth even when it hurt. I was taught that these were Christian values and by extension, American ones. We were the country that believed in freedom of thought, the integrity of history, and moral courage.
But now I see many of the same people who taught me those values embracing a movement built on denial, grievance, and revisionist history. They’ve tied themselves to a man who mocks truth, glorifies cruelty, and demands loyalty over integrity.
And the saddest part? We used to look at other nations and say, “That could never happen here.” But it is happening here. And it’s not being forced on us, we’re choosing it.
The cost of that betrayal isn’t some distant consequence we’ll face down the road. It’s already here. The values they abandoned didn’t slowly fade, they were cast aside, willingly, and replaced with something hollow. This isn’t a detour. It’s the destination. And the people who once preached righteousness have no intention of turning back.
- Comment on We live wasted lives 3 months ago:
What I love most about this is he works in health care insurance and his boss tells him he’s not denying enough claims. Very American indeed.
- Comment on Always there 3 months ago:
You forgot to put “Trump’s Third Term” at the bottom to finish the timeline.
- Comment on I'm gonna mute this one 4 months ago:
I won’t defend Schumer’s choice here. It was a bad call, and the anger from House Democrats and the base was completely justified. You’re right that the party leadership sometimes folds when they should fight. They make strategic decisions that feel disconnected from the urgency the moment demands. And yes, Democrats have corporate-aligned figures who blunt the force of reform, but that is also a reality of our current system that we have to work within.
But, sticking to your example, there is a key difference: when Democrats cave, it’s often to avoid causing harm, like a shutdown that would devastate working people. When Republicans cave, it’s to secure more tax cuts, more deregulation, and more authoritarian power. The intent and the outcome are not the same, even if the compromise leaves a bad taste in everyone’s mouth.
It also matters that Democrats have factions pushing from within. The anger from House Dems, from AOC, from the base, that’s real pressure that can move things. Republicans don’t have that kind of internal accountability. Their party punishes dissent and rewards obstruction.
And while it’s easy to say “they always have excuses,” the reality is that even when Democrats had a trifecta in 2021, their margin in the Senate was literally 50-50. One or two bad actors (like Manchin or Sinema) could tank an entire agenda, and did. That’s not an excuse. That’s a math problem, and the only way around it is bigger, more engaged progressive coalitions.
So yes, Schumer failed in that moment (and many others). Yes, we should be furious. But walking away or writing off the party entirely means handing power back to a movement that’s not just flawed. It’s actively hostile to democracy, human rights, and the planet. That’s not moral purity. That’s surrender.
- Comment on I'm gonna mute this one 4 months ago:
I’m frustrated with the reflexive “both sides are equally bad” response that shuts down any meaningful analysis of what’s actually happening in our politics.
I’m not naive about the Democratic Party’s problems. They struggle with internal divisions, sometimes cave to corporate pressure, and they’ve made compromises that disappointed their base. But when I look at voting records, policy proposals, and legislative priorities, I see meaningful differences that have real consequences for people’s lives.
On issues I care about (healthcare access, climate action, voting rights, ext.) one party consistently proposes solutions and votes for them when they have the numbers. The other party doesn’t just oppose these policies, they fight tooth and nail to undermine them, delay them, or dismantle them entirely. That’s not a matter of opinion. That’s a matter of public record.
When Democrats fail to deliver, it’s often because they lack sufficient majorities or face procedural roadblocks. When they do have power, they’ve passed significant legislation on infrastructure, climate investment, and healthcare expansion. Meanwhile, when Republicans have unified control, their priorities have been tax cuts for the wealthy and rolling back environmental protections.
I understand the appeal of cynicism. It can feel sophisticated to dismiss all politicians as equally corrupt. But that cynicism serves the interests of those who benefit from the status quo.
If you can’t tell the difference between someone trying to reform a broken system and someone actively working to keep it broken, you’re not offering insight. You’re providing cover for obstruction.
Does this mean Democrats are perfect? Of course not. Should we hold them accountable when they fall short? Absolutely. But pretending there are no meaningful differences between the parties just because neither is perfect makes it harder to build the coalitions we need to create the change we actually want to see.
- Comment on The audacity 4 months ago:
Yeah. Should be suits pulling them down. I really don’t like that this denigrates the wonderful people who actually do the work.
- Comment on The joy of quitting a shit job with an asshole boss 4 months ago:
This isn’t about pouring yourself out for an employer that doesn’t care. It’s not about “going above and beyond.” It’s not about grinding harder or giving more than you’re getting. That’s not the standard I’m talking about.
What I am talking about is the foundation. I am talking about the basic, essential qualities that every relationship (personal or professional) is built on: reliability, respect, integrity, follow-through.
If you say, “I’ll be there at 5,” then be there at 5. That has nothing to do with giving more or going the extra mile. It’s about whether people can trust your word. Whether your actions line up with what you say. Whether others (teammates, friends, partners, family) know that your word has value.
When you’ve built that foundation of trust, life’s inevitable curveballs become manageable and explainable. When you have a genuine emergency, when circumstances beyond your control interfere, people believe you. They extend grace because your track record speaks for itself. But if you’re consistently unreliable, every excuse (legitimate or not) gets met with skepticism. You’ve lost the benefit of the doubt.
The employee I mentioned wasn’t being asked to sacrifice for a system. He was being asked to keep his word. He said he would be there. He wasn’t. He has never been mistreated or underpaid. The opposite actually. He was hired with no experience into a well-paying, supportive environment. Every failure has been met with encouragement from leadership. But honestly? That’s not even the point. Because the values I’m talking about matter regardless of whether the system is fair or not.
Why? Because these values belong to you. You take them with you wherever you go. They make you stronger, clearer, more capable of building relationships that matter. They are what open doors (not just in jobs, but in life). And they’re what create the trust that protects you when things go wrong.
I’m not calling people to give more to bad systems. I’m calling people to give more to themselves. To build a foundation they can stand on so when they do need to call out injustice, advocate for change, or walk away, they do it from a place of strength, not reaction. Not out of anger, but out of clarity.
So yes, I am trying to convince people of something. Not to serve power. But to be powerful.
And the truth is, you can’t build anything strong (anywhere) if people can’t count on you. That’s not a corporate value. That’s a human one.
