alekwithak
@alekwithak@lemmy.world
- Comment on I'm right and the other vegans are wrong 1 day ago:
Also a good restatement of the comment I’m replying to, yes.
- Comment on I'm right and the other vegans are wrong 1 day ago:
“google ai overview told me exactly what I wanted to hear so I’ve decided to look no further”
- Comment on Video games 4 days ago:
Church climbing simulator?
- Comment on A reminder 1 week ago:
Yeah, and I’m sure Elon makes nothing off of the daily bet on the number of times he’ll tweet, too.
- Comment on A reminder 1 week ago:
I mean it’s true for Polymarket, you could just place a bet on a local forest catching fire and then light it.
- Comment on UK cinema chain won’t screen new Ali G film 1 week ago:
Okay. Project harder.
- Comment on UK cinema chain won’t screen new Ali G film 1 week ago:
Oh, now I’m a “cracker” too?
And I’m the “Dumb Fucking Racist?”
I get your point and met your point and tried to have a genuine discussion with you and you meet me in turn with ire and actual slurs. There goes any shred of credibility you might have had. Did you read I Have A Dream?
- Comment on UK cinema chain won’t screen new Ali G film 1 week ago:
You’re gonna call me a dumbfuck with the same breath. Let’s set aside that I’ve already thoroughly refuted your insistence that it’s a slur, words meaning and their etymology are separate. Further when you censor historically accurate pejoratives from being used in their proper historical context you allow for the revision of that history. If you care about these out groups as much as your ridiculous comments suggest, then you’d want their struggle preserved accurately, no? Furthermore when you dismiss the message for choice of word you discount good messages entirely and allow bad actors to sneak damaging messaging past just because they more carefully selected their words.
- Comment on just sayin 1 week ago:
Everyone knows Judgement Day was successfully postponed until July 25, 2004.
- Comment on UK cinema chain won’t screen new Ali G film 1 week ago:
As a minority myself I absolutely detest racism, and I am here in this comment section specifically to call it out. I came to this you with open arms and open eyes and gave you every opportunity to explain your reasoning, but instead you choose to attack me. You have said nothing substantial so far and this has been fun but I’m done wasting my time with you now.
- Comment on UK cinema chain won’t screen new Ali G film 1 week ago:
George would like a word with you. .
But putting aside the fact that no tf it isn’t, you cannot separate something from the context in which it originates. You don’t get to revise history because you don’t like a word that was used to make fun of white suburban kids who acted like black urban youth. Now if you want to tell me who that word is supposed to offend and why I’m all ears, or eyes, but I’m not gonna let you use a single word to invalidate me because you’ve got a victim complex.
- Comment on UK cinema chain won’t screen new Ali G film 1 week ago:
The fact that you make memes comparing Dolly Parton to Hitler should have been a heads up to me that just because someone can write that doesn’t mean they’re literate.
- Comment on UK cinema chain won’t screen new Ali G film 1 week ago:
Mhm, okay so are you black?
- Comment on UK cinema chain won’t screen new Ali G film 1 week ago:
Sorry, what? Ali G exists to poke fun white brits appropriating black culture. I’m not a fan, but we have to call things what they are.
- Comment on UK cinema chain won’t screen new Ali G film 1 week ago:
LOL of all the reasons to boycott Sacha, I don’t think 'Ali G being basically blackface" is one of them. Happy to listen to the affected demographic on this, but from the original show and movie it was clear he was a wigger and he made himself the butt of every joke. Unless that dynamic has been flipped for this newest movie then I don’t see how it’s blackface. I certainly agree they shouldn’t screen it or give him any undue attention, but I can think of many better reasons for that than the one given.
- Comment on Mar-a-Lago resigned 😂 2 weeks ago:
Are there… Ads embedded in this meme?
- Comment on Discussing past Presidents? 2 weeks ago:
Okay I gotta see your bottom ten list.
- Comment on New Delhi - during lockdown vs now 2 weeks ago:
All evidence aside from the evidence you supplied that said the opposite? I mean really, ALL evidence? All of it? But you can supply none? But it’s ALL the evidence? Right. You are literally just saying things. You could fit every single human being on earth into one metropolitan area. It’s our behavior that is unsustainable, not our population. Go lick a boot.
- Comment on New Delhi - during lockdown vs now 2 weeks ago:
The reality of ignoring all evidence to validate wishing you could kill most people for no reason? And I’m the one living in a fairy tale? Okay.
- Comment on New Delhi - during lockdown vs now 2 weeks ago:
Reality is malleable. Sure, the circumstances or how resources are divided and used is reality. The current population is reality. We are both discussing ways in which our reality can be transformed to the benefit of all. Your suggested path involves the death of billions of people, while my suggested path involves some people having slightly less exorbitant lifestyles. Your suggested path is not only extreme, but it wouldn’t even work according to the very scholars you are citing. THAT is reality.
- Comment on New Delhi - during lockdown vs now 2 weeks ago:
Did you actually read what you provided? It’s really not the defense of your point that you are making it out to be. Lead author, Corey Bradshaw (Who also co-authored Human Population Reduction is Not a Quick Fix for Environmental Problems), argues that our current consumption system is unsustainable. I couldn’t agree more!
The 2.5 billion figure cited within is not some immutable physical limit on the number of human bodies Earth can contain. The authors explicitly acknowledge that a “sustainable” population depends on things like standard of living, economics, social conditions, and resource consumption. Their ecological-footprint estimate of 2.35 billion specifically assumes today’s average material standard of living and current consumption distribution, including the enormous consumption of the wealthiest people.
You’re taking a model of how many people our planet can sustainably support under particular socioeconomic and consumption conditions and treating it as evidence that the people themselves are the fundamental problem. That’s not what the evidence shows, though. Not even the evidence you yourself brought to the table, sorry!
- Comment on New Delhi - during lockdown vs now 2 weeks ago:
If your only problem is that you want more resources available for yourself, I can see how you’d come to that conclusion, but you’re wrong. It wouldn’t solve the underlying problems, and in fact it would create a whole set of new ones. Modern civilization depends heavily on economies of scale, and your magic finger snap does nothing to change how resources are produced, distributed, or consumed.
You’re also assuming that every human consumes resources at roughly the same rate. They don’t. Not even close. A tiny fraction of humanity consumes vastly more resources than billions of other people. Your finger snap doesn’t address that inequality at all. The same people and systems that concentrate resources now would simply have an even larger pool of resources to hoover up afterward. Then what? Snap your fingers again?
And follow the logic to its conclusion. If reducing humanity to 100 million “solves” problems because fewer people are consuming resources and competing for them, then 1 million should be even better. Five thousand better still. Ultimately, zero humans means zero poverty, zero war, zero homelessness, zero human carbon emissions, and zero human suffering. Problem solved!
Except obviously it isn’t, because eliminating the people who experience a problem is not the same thing as solving the problem for those people.
We don’t have billions of people living in poverty because there simply isn’t enough stuff on Earth to go around. We have enormous disparities in who controls resources and who gets to consume them. Fantasizing about eliminating most of humanity while leaving that system completely intact makes you a stooge for the oligarchs.
- Comment on New Delhi - during lockdown vs now 2 weeks ago:
If I could snap my fingers and have people wake up from the capitalist propaganda they’ve been forced their whole lives, I would. Population is not the issue, it’s a deflection.
- Comment on The System does not work. 4 weeks ago:
“The most educated and most indebted generation” is referring to Millenials.
Also it’s*
- Comment on There's always money in the banana sta... Flock cameras 5 weeks ago:
Skametboard
- Comment on No. 5 weeks ago:
- Comment on Don’t you lie to me 1 month ago:
Immediately assume there’s some nearby surveillance and take Akbar’s advice.
- Comment on Nintendo says users voluntarily paid higher prices, have no right to tariff refunds | Nintendo says Switch buyers got what they paid for, urges court to dismiss lawsuit. 1 month ago:
Probably not, but I have kids and even though they’re very understanding I’d still like to provide if alternatives allow.
- Comment on Nintendo says users voluntarily paid higher prices, have no right to tariff refunds | Nintendo says Switch buyers got what they paid for, urges court to dismiss lawsuit. 1 month ago:
I can’t speak to how they are now now, as this was about ten years ago, and I don’t want to be too specific as they are extremely litigious lol, but…
I applied for a jr position, something I was not overly qualified for but could have easily done at the time with some training. I am now a Sr in that position, so the capacity was there. Anyway, round one interviews are fine, nothing stands out there, but like I said it was ten years ago, at least. Then for the next interview I had a call with the director of the department I was applying for. He was short with me from the start, and I remember being incredibly taken back by his attitude before we’d even gotten into the interview. I have extreme social anxiety and am admittedly terrible in job interviews, so being thrown off right at the beginning of the call didn’t help things. Then there seemed to be a misunderstanding on his part about which level of job I was applying for. He clearly thought I was underqualified either way. He asked me what I now can confirm were insanely technical and architecturally specific questions and then when he’d finally managed to trip me up on an answer he completely unloaded on me. For several minutes he berated me for wasting his and Nintendo’s time and then told me I was being blacklisted and to never apply for a position anywhere at Nintendo ever again. Which, no problem. Even though I understand he was just a jackass, I’m still recovering from it to be honest. But extrapolating how he must run his department and what that must mean for the culture over there, I have not been surprised by the downfall of Nintendo in the least. Shit is as shit does, my friend. - Comment on Nintendo says users voluntarily paid higher prices, have no right to tariff refunds | Nintendo says Switch buyers got what they paid for, urges court to dismiss lawsuit. 1 month ago:
To be fair I went to a job interview at NoA once, and if that’s anything to go off of then they treat each other like crap, too. It just seems to be the culture over there.
