Seasoned_Greetings
@Seasoned_Greetings@lemm.ee
- Comment on How come people who are against abortion are in favor of the death penalty? Kind of seems like a contradicition/ 1 month ago:
I think it’s not necessarily a contradiction to hold your pro-choice and anti-death penalty stance, but it’s still a contradiction to hold the pro-life and pro-death penalty stance if your reasoning behind the pro-life stance is that all life is sacred.
I agree that a person’s body autonomy and the state’s power to execute citizens should not overlap, but I still think that giving the “all life is sacred” line to justify pro-life and then being pro death penalty amounts to hypocrisy.
- Comment on The theory that we live in a simulation involves simulants running their own simulations; wouldn't that require impossibly more resources for the main sim? 5 months ago:
My mind is blown. This is very well written. Thank you
- Comment on Freeloaders 5 months ago:
Aiding the less fortunate in society benefits everyone, same as maintaining roads or building libraries.
For decades republicans have artificially raised the bar for that aid and lowered the aid actually received, for no reason than to appeal to the crowd that thinks taxation is theft but uses modern public amenities anyway.
- Comment on Close enough for government work 5 months ago:
And this is why my math teachers never gave multiple choice tests
- Comment on math checks out 6 months ago:
I like the idea of an infinitely exponentially growing base of users seeking help from some poor call center
- Comment on Why isn't jerking off more valorized as an easy dopamine hit that's also literally good for you? 6 months ago:
Touché
- Comment on Why isn't jerking off more valorized as an easy dopamine hit that's also literally good for you? 6 months ago:
You can die of cirrhosis from drinking too much for too long, but it’s still culturally held as a stress reliever. You can die from diabetes if you eat too much sugar for too long, but it’s still sold to children as edible happiness. Hell, you can die slowly and painfully from taking too much Tylenol, but it’s still the world’s most popular painkiller by far.
Too much of anything kills eventually. That doesn’t bare any significance to whether or not it’s good for stress in some amount.
- Comment on Country music 7 months ago:
Antarctica is technically not a country
- Comment on How come liberals dont hate conservatives the way conservatives hate liberals 7 months ago:
most of the time for no reason at all
Not for no reason. It’s a form of control. If you genuinely believe that the opposing party is going to bring the country to ruin, you’re a lot less likely to consider their position in politics.
Look at the affordable care act. Conservatives hated/hate it because “obamacare” was portrayed as giving free health care to the lazy poor that you have to pay for as a hard working conservative. When asked if we should repeal Obama are, conservatives poll something crazy like 95% yes, simply because it’s a bad word they learned.
Many of those conservatives have health care through the ACA and get mad when Republicans take it away because they need it. Those same conservatives mostly aren’t even aware that what they have is literally obamacare.
It’s control all the way down.
- Comment on How come liberals dont hate conservatives the way conservatives hate liberals 7 months ago:
Politics is fundamentally different for conservatives. They have have someone to hate. It’s drilled into them by their media outlets.
The tactic is a form of fear based control that conservative media has been working on since Nixon.
Seriously. Nixon’s think tank conceived the conservative media outlet as a catch-all, exclusive source of news that as a primary function would steer conservatives to not trust other news sources.
They did this because they did not want another Watergate, where conservatives turned against Nixon because of hard evidence laid out by popular unbiased news, which at the time conservatives still were informed by.
The Frankenstein’s monster of a party that that tactic has turned conservatives into requires manufactured rage to fuel the fire. If the outrage ever simmers, you begin to see smarter conservatives recognizing what their party has become and it begins to fall apart.
So there’s your answer. It’s because the hate is necessary to continue the control. If you don’t believe me, turn on Fox news. There’s always the manufactured rage-of-the-day filling the air time.
- Comment on "Also, try our new deep dish special." 7 months ago:
Obligatory “Sounds like Nightvale” post
- Comment on What kind of institutional gaslighting is this? 7 months ago:
Oh absolutely. In Japan for example if you are unable to work or you get removed from your career, it is socially understandable for you to consider suicide. Lots of Japanese citizens put their job before even their families or the potential of having a family.
It’s actually pretty fuckin crazy what Japanese work culture does to their citizens.
- Comment on What kind of institutional gaslighting is this? 7 months ago:
Quiet quitting has always referred to the extra bullshit that employers pressure employees into doing.
In America we’ve created this work culture that implies you aren’t really part of a team unless you are constantly putting forth more than what the employer is paying you for.
The undertone of this headline is that managers feel uneasy because so-called “quiet quitters” won’t take on extra work or hours or exhibit overwhelming enthusiasm, but just do literally what they have to at a passable or high quality.
The gaslighting part is that those workers aren’t doing anything wrong, but they aren’t bending over backwards so corporate America wants to paint the picture that those workers are awful time thieves instead of just burnt out wage slaves.
- Comment on Boredom births creativity 7 months ago:
The truth is this is a repost of a huge number of reposts. I think I saw this for the first time like 10 years ago.
Somewhere down the line this most likely got posted to a mom group or something where it was censored and nobody bothered to uncensor it.
- Comment on Casually dropped this tidbit 8 months ago:
No black best
This isn’t the point? That the vast majority of animals don’t have a working concept of “none” or “without” that they can form other logic with?
- Comment on Why there are 861 roguelike deckbuilders on Steam all of a sudden 8 months ago:
I meant that to say, it’s a genre that deserves to be distinguished from just one of the many games that define it.
As a rephrase of that comment, defining the 5 games I listed after one game that basically just came before them would be dishonest because of how different those games all are from Slay the Spire and each other. That’s why the genre is named after what they all have in common, which is a mashup of two existing genres.
What you’re proposing would be like renaming the first person shooter genre to “halo-like” or “call of duty-like” just because those games predate a lot of others and people like them. It’s unnecessary and loses the descriptive quality of the name it has.
- Comment on Why there are 861 roguelike deckbuilders on Steam all of a sudden 8 months ago:
The genre can be called “rogue like deck builder” all you want, we all know what it really is: “Spirelike”
Well, you did. And you also directly acknowledged that the genre already has a name.
It seems to be your opinion that it needs another one, even though the name it has is already so well established that it has its own steam tag.
- Comment on Why there are 861 roguelike deckbuilders on Steam all of a sudden 8 months ago:
I do see your point, but in this specific situation the genre already has an accepted name
- Comment on Why there are 861 roguelike deckbuilders on Steam all of a sudden 8 months ago:
Are there any other genres named after games? I’d say rogue is the exception.
- Comment on Why there are 861 roguelike deckbuilders on Steam all of a sudden 8 months ago:
I think the “rogue” in rogue-like refers to the fact that you start over if you die. Not the similarity to the actual game. Am I misunderstanding you?
I think I get what you’re saying, that rogue-like was named after the game and therefore this genre should be named after slay the spire. But I think Rogue named the genre because there wasn’t anything else like it. Slay the Spire is still at the end of the day a mashup of two existing genres.
- Comment on Why there are 861 roguelike deckbuilders on Steam all of a sudden 8 months ago:
I really think it deserves its own genre. Games like Cobalt Core, Balatro, Tower Tactics Liberation, Alina of the Arena and Loop Hero are all unique in their own right and very different from Slay the Spire but still hold to the deck building rogue-like core.
Slay the spire is the granddaddy of the genre, but isn’t the single defining example by far.
- Comment on Hypersensitive tankie mod 8 months ago:
I start almost every comment I make on those instances with
I know this will net me a ban
to play a bit of reverse psychology with the mods there, who don’t touch my comments when the denizens there inevitablely say
Oh yeah you think you’re so smart well we don’t ban opposing opinions unlike some places
And the mods there have their hands tied because banning me would prove their own guys wrong.
It’s worked pretty well so far.
- Comment on Jon Stewart Says Apple Told Him Not to Interview FTC's Lina Khan 8 months ago:
Find this episode of the daily show if you can. It’s the April 1st episode. It’s a fantastic double whammy of the reality of AI pushing workers out their jobs and how companies control the conversation on monopolies.
Good stuff, that this article only covers a small slice of.
- Comment on No Man's Sky Orbital Update brings full ship customisation and a complete space station overhaul 8 months ago:
and we don’t need games anyway as they’re unproductive
So you come to a games community to shit on games and brag about how your shitty OS doesn’t play them?
Make it make sense
- Comment on But Claude said tumor! 8 months ago:
Fair enough
- Comment on But Claude said tumor! 8 months ago:
Unpopular opinion incoming:
I don’t think we should ignore AI diagnosis just because they are wrong sometimes. The whole point of AI diagnosis is to catch things physicians don’t. No AI diagnosis comes without a physician double checking anyway.
I also don’t think it’s necessarily a bad thing that an AI got it wrong for that reason. Suspicion was still there and physicians double checked. To me, that means this tool is working as intended.
If the patient was insistent enough that something was wrong, they would have double checked or she would have gotten a second opinion anyway.
Flaming the AI for not being correct is missing the point of using it in the first place.
- Comment on "I wish you well in your future endeavors" 8 months ago:
Look, I’m not going to sit here and debate the ethics of a precautionary behavior with you because you, like many other men, misinterpret the behavior itself as a slight against men as a whole.
There’s no way I can do that without venturing into the realm of defending that kind of prejudice, which you’ll inevitably take as an invitation to just say is wrong on principle.
I’d probably say they are prejudiced but that might be out of fear rather than malice and rather focus on what to do about that.
Here’s the thing. The kind of person you’ll be responding to will cover their ears and say prejudice of any kind is wrong. You won’t convince anyone that way.
I literally had someone tell me the last time I had this discussion that the act of determining to do something based on the gender of someone is the very same as determining to do something based on their race. So it’s also racism.
There is no winning that. Once someone is bent on being against prejudice on any order, they will make false equivalencies to bludgeon their point.
that might be out of fear rather than malice and rather focus on what to do about that.
Let me ask you something: For a solution short of reeducating the world’s men, how come the onus is on women to be forced to take a chance with someone they don’t know anything about?
Why are we looking at a situation where a woman might say “I shouldn’t walk alone from the gym to my car because there was this one guy staring at me and I saw him go out just before me” and saying “That woman is obviously a bigot, what can we do to correct that behavior?”
I honestly don’t think there’s anything to do about this. There’s no way to make women be less prejudiced against men in these situations that doesn’t also inherently raise their risk of being assaulted.
The only thing left is a man who will insist that a woman take the chance of raising her risk so that his feelings don’t get hurt. But here’s the thing. The worst that can happen to that man is his feelings get hurt because a stranger doesn’t trust him. The risk to a woman is an actual, physical thing.
- Comment on "I wish you well in your future endeavors" 8 months ago:
How come?
I directly answered that in the same comment. Unfortunately, people who are offended will find a reason to take exception of the situation. There’s no amount of drawing examples that will satisfy the type who only sees that they personally are being attacked and not that it’s more about mitigating risk.
I try to illustrate the reasoning every time. As I have with the following example I made to you. The usual reaction is “well actually the woman in question is still a bigot for avoiding me on the street because she doesn’t know me”, or a similar sentiment in which the offended person runs head first into the point and still misses it.
I’m not talking about someone switching to another side of the street because of my gender or skin colour or any other reason one might discriminate, but rather the discussion that talks about a group as thing singular thing and makes it seem like it was all of of them. Not to mention going after people who obviously take offense to being labeled in such a way. I find it fucked up and I don’t see any reason to do that.
Well first, I’d like to congratulate you on being the only person I’ve encountered so far who’s interested in the discussion and not the reaction.
But also, I’d like to say that anyone who hears the reasoning “women have to be cautious around men because some men are capable of violence” and jumps immediately to “women think all men including me are violent and that’s wrong” are sorely missing the point.
No one is going after men who take offense at that line of logic so much as those men who are loudly voicing their misunderstanding of a concept which goes on around them all of the time that they have only just noticed. It seems that your concept of “going after those men” is just people who understand the situation trying over and over to explain it.
As someone interested in the discussion side of this issue and not the actual conflict, which you seem to understand, please tell me how you would handle someone strongly asserting to you that women are bigots because they avoid men or treat them differently when they don’t know how they’re going to react.
I’m interested to hear how you might improve an exchange with someone who doesn’t allow the reasoning that women should be allowed to cross the street 100 ft before crossing you in the interest of their safety.
- Comment on "I wish you well in your future endeavors" 8 months ago:
You’re completely correct. Normally, I’m on the side of not assuming people’s gender and I’m of the mind that you shouldn’t judge a book by it’s cover.
But, because of the safety and personal ramifications crossing the wrong person can have, I think it’s important that we acknowledge a woman’s right to seek safety in a situation she perceives might possibly go south for her. That includes the prerogative of not putting herself in a situation that she perceives as risky to begin with.
Maybe that concept would be better accepted if it were expanded to “Anyone should have the right to avoid danger they think they might be in”
- Comment on "I wish you well in your future endeavors" 8 months ago:
Easy solution would be to talk about it in a manner that doesn’t need a clarification that’s you don’t think all men are like that. That’s really the issue with the way this is discussed.
Believe me, that’s not the solution you think it is.
Nobody is denying the situation here, but rather taking offence to being labeled because of their gender.
Unfortunately, people who take offense will find ways to deny the situation. The fact is, if you’re walking down the street and a woman 100 ft out moves to the other side before crossing you, she understands that there is a slight chance you might be a danger to her.
That’s discrimination that you can neither control nor fight against as a man. It also doesn’t affect you if you weren’t planning on assaulting that woman. But just the fact that it is done rustles so many jimmies because the knee jerk reaction men have is “well I wasn’t going to assault anyone so that’s messed up”. But that line of thinking is a way of framing the situation to make it about you. It’s not about you.
What I’m saying is, women don’t think all men are like that. That would be completely ridiculous. But statistically, enough of them are to warrant not being immediately trusting of strangers that can biologically overpower them in every situation.
I’m sorry but receiving end of what?
Bro. I quoted you. The receiving end of “a negative blanket” against men