Opinionhaver
@Opinionhaver@feddit.uk
Independent thinker valuing discussions grounded in reason, not emotions.
I say unpopular things but never something I know to be untrue. Always open to hear good-faith counter arguments. My goal is to engage in dialogue that seeks truth rather than scoring points.
- Comment on Does a one cat get lonely without other cats, or is the company of humans good enough? 2 days ago:
I had a cat for 18 years and never got the impression that it would’ve been lonely in any sense. No doubt having a friend would probably be better but it’s not one of those animals you absolutely must have atleast two of.
- Comment on Tinder tests letting users set a 'height preference' 3 days ago:
Setting a height preference to 6ft filters out around 80% of potential partners if you’re in the U.S. Now imagine how many of the remaining 20% actually match the rest of your criteria. And on top of that, the tiny fraction of a person left after all the filtering still has to find you attractive.
If you want to date on hard mode — by all means.
- Comment on 10 to 100 Times Faster than a Starlink Antenna, and Cheaper Than Fiber: Taara Unveils a Laser Internet That Could Shatter the Status Quo 5 days ago:
You need quite a bit of masts to cover the entire globe and that still doesn’t work in places like in the middle of the ocean. Satellites most likely are easier to deploy and cheaper as well.
- Comment on 10 to 100 Times Faster than a Starlink Antenna, and Cheaper Than Fiber: Taara Unveils a Laser Internet That Could Shatter the Status Quo 5 days ago:
Not very compareable systems. One covers the entire globe with satellites and another is just a fancy version of Wi-Fi. If you live somewhere remote you’d still need a bunch of masts within line of sight from eachother and if you’re vanlifer or such then it’s of no use.
I mean, cool technology but serves a bit different purpose. Especially in the edge cases.
- Comment on [deleted] 1 week ago:
It’s all about how certain the bank is that they’ll get their money back. Like you said, they’re very wealthy - so it may well be that their overall wealth is still greater than the amount they owe. Lending money is profitable for the bank as long as the borrower has the means to repay it, along with interest.
This is actually how many wealthy people fund their living expenses. Their wealth is usually tied up in property and investments, and rather than selling those assets, it’s often easier to borrow money at a lower interest rate than what they’re profiting from their investments.
For example, I could pay off my mortgage if I wanted to - but I won’t, because the average yearly return from stocks is around 7%, whereas the interest on my mortgage is 4.452%. The returns from my investments outweigh the cost of my debt.
- Comment on Why is it okay for shit to go down the drain but not food? 1 week ago:
Careful what you ask for.
- Comment on Why is it okay for shit to go down the drain but not food? 1 week ago:
No, grease does accumulate throughout the entire sewage system. It’s the solids that most easily clog the P-trap.
- Comment on Why is it okay for shit to go down the drain but not food? 1 week ago:
Food itself isn’t the issue - it’s the big chunks and oil/grease/fat. It’s better to pour it down the toilet, since the volume of water you flush it with is greater and the drain diameter there is larger as well (110 mm) compared to the pipes under your sink, which are usually 75 mm in diameter, sometimes even just 50 mm. Solids are also more likely to clog the P-trap under your kitchen sink.
Eventually, it all ends up in the same drain system anyway, so in that sense there’s no real difference.
Source: I’m a plumber.
- Comment on When I tell people I don't know the answer but where they can find it and they don't go and read where I told them to read. 1 week ago:
Or when they don’t watch the 50 minute YouTube video I sent.
- Comment on Why can I get a credit card for $2,000 at best buy for dumb shit but can't get a care plus card for dental work? 1 week ago:
Credit card for dental work sounds quite american
- Comment on Is there a community dedicated for serious discussion? 1 week ago:
I actually found pretty much what I was looking for. Not very active community and I don’t know how well it’s moderated but at least I can give it a chance next time such topic comes to mind.
!actual_discussion@lemmy.ca
Crazy what amount of pushback I’m getting for even daring to ask such thing. It clearly must be fascism and pedofilia I want to advocate for in there because why else would someone want to have serious conversations…
- Comment on Is there a community dedicated for serious discussion? 2 weeks ago:
This looks promising. Funnily enough I’m even subscribed to it.
- Comment on Is there a community dedicated for serious discussion? 2 weeks ago:
I’m not sure I get what you mean. I don’t see why one community couldn’t cover all these topics under the same set of moderation principles. I’m imagining something like a philosophers’ conference, where you can seriously discuss even seemingly ridiculous topics — like “why can’t we eat unwanted babies?” — and no one would be tempted to accuse the person of actually advocating for such a thing.
- Comment on Is there a community dedicated for serious discussion? 2 weeks ago:
It’s not criticism of my takes that hurts me, but the mean-spirited responses when they target me personally rather than my ideas — especially considering the effort I personally put into being fair and decent, even toward those I disagree with but then seem to get next to none of it in return.
You’re right about me getting hurt, though. I’m a real person with real feelings, and I’m not immune to cruelty. Dealing with rude, indecent people here does make me feel pretty bad on a regular basis.
- Comment on Is there a community dedicated for serious discussion? 2 weeks ago:
It’s not really politics I’m looking to discuss. At least not exclusively.
- Comment on Has the use of a comma instead of the word "and" in English news headlines always been a thing? 2 weeks ago:
As a non-native english speaker this headline format bothers me to no end. I guess the intention is to make it shorter but I simply just find it confusing.
- Comment on Is there a community dedicated for serious discussion? 2 weeks ago:
I not only block political communities here, but I also filter out every post containing terms related to current political events or specific political figures. While I might touch on topics that are political by nature - like the Israel-Palestine conflict - I rarely engage directly with politics in a broad sense.
For example, yesterday I tried making a post about the concept of “sigma males,” where I even preemptively acknowledged my doubts about its scientific validity and criticized how it tends to frame even negative traits in a positive light. Yet all the responses I received were ridicule, personal attacks, and accusations. Apparently, I overlooked the fact that the term “sigma male” acts like a lightning rod for a certain kind of person - people who completely disregard the actual question and just start spewing hatred and negativity.
I’d really just like a place where I can indulge in my cold and analytical, autistic topics of interest with other like-minded people. I don’t even mind disagreement - on the contrary, I enjoy it, as long as it’s done in good faith.
- Comment on Is there a community dedicated for serious discussion? 2 weeks ago:
What exactly is your problem here? Do you not have even a drop of self-awareness to realize that you’re now acting exactly like the kind of person that made me want to find a community free of people like you in the first place? You’re being a textbook example of someone who just can’t stay on topic and insists on making it about the person asking the question rather than addressing the question itself.
My comment history is open for anyone to see what kinds of topics I like to explore. I’m not going to start listing them here, because that’s not relevant to my question.
- Comment on Is there a community dedicated for serious discussion? 2 weeks ago:
You want a completely theoretical discussion where people cannot point out to you that you aren’t flawless either.
This is just yet another completely baseless accusation which both isn’t true nor in any way related to the topic at hand. I don’t understand your insistence on making this about me. Like I said: I’m not interested discussing people.
r/samharris, r/zombiesurvivaltactics and r/suomi are the subs I miss from reddit. I’m not aware of not having addressed any other questions you’ve posed to me.
- Comment on Is there a community dedicated for serious discussion? 2 weeks ago:
And there it is. I wonder what really triggered your post?
This is exactly why I’d like to find - or create - the kind of community I described above. These kinds of accusations, even when implicit, don’t bring any value to a conversation. I’m looking for a place to discuss ideas - not people or tribes.
- Comment on Is there a community dedicated for serious discussion? 2 weeks ago:
it really is a much nicer place to be than reddit
I can see how that would be the case for a certain type of person - perhaps even the majority - but interestingly, my personal experience has been almost the opposite. The people here tend to lean in the same political or ideological direction, and they’ve become extremely sensitive to any ideas that seem to go against their worldview. They’ve dealt with so many bad actors in the past that the moment someone starts making the kind of noises that trigger their alarms, it becomes almost impossible to engage with them meaningfully. You quickly end up having to defend yourself against preconceptions formed simply because you’re willing to touch on a sensitive topic.
I think the contrast within the userbase here is actually sharper than on Reddit. There’s a large number of incredibly decent, mature, and thoughtful people - likely due to the higher average age - but there’s also a surprisingly large group of extremely vicious activist types who will dogpile on you the moment you say anything even halfway critical of their cause, or not critical enough of what they oppose.
- Comment on Is there a community dedicated for serious discussion? 2 weeks ago:
Based on my experience trying to have deep and sometimes difficult conversations here, I’ve come to believe that if such a community did exist and gained even a bit of popularity, it would likely result in a large number of the currently active users here getting themselves banned from it. In the end, it might just be a small group of users left - the ones actually interested in playing fair. I don’t necessarily see that as a bad thing, though. You really don’t need that many people to have insightful discussions. Often, even one person is enough, as long as they’re approaching it in good faith.
Moderation would definitely be an issue, though. Dealing with the worst offenders is easy - it’s the gray areas that are challenging. The space wouldn’t just need to be heavily moderated; that same standard would also need to apply to the moderators themselves.
- Submitted 2 weeks ago to [deleted] | 32 comments
- Comment on What techniques do bad faith users use online to overwhelm other users in online discussion and arguments? 2 weeks ago:
It’s actually somewhat effective in my experience. Another thing I’ve recently started doing is calling out mean comments. Nobody wants to think of themselves as a mean person but it’s quite difficult accusation to argue against when the evidence is right there in front of their face.
- Comment on [deleted] 2 weeks ago:
The discussion wasn’t about them being insistent on grandkids - it was about you being insistent on inheritance. If you think they’re being unreasonable, then it’s worth recognizing that your own insistence might be just as unreasonable.
- Comment on [deleted] 2 weeks ago:
You’re not obligated to have children - just like your dad isn’t obligated to leave you an inheritance.
- Comment on What techniques do bad faith users use online to overwhelm other users in online discussion and arguments? 2 weeks ago:
False dichotomy - Assuming that because someone doesn’t agree with one viewpoint, they must fully support the opposite. Framing the issue as if there are only two mutually exclusive positions, when in fact there may be many shades in between.
Strawmanning - Misrepresenting someone’s argument - usually by exaggerating, distorting, or taking it out of context - so it’s easier to attack or refute.
Ad hominem -Attacking the character, motives, or other traits of the person making the argument rather than addressing the substance of the argument itself.
Reductionism - The tendency to reduce every complex issue to a single cause - like blaming everything on capitalism, fascism, patriarchy, etc. - while ignoring other contributing factors.
Moving the goalposts - Changing the criteria of an argument or shifting its focus once the original point has been addressed or challenged - usually to avoid conceding. Hasty generalizations - Treating entire groups as if they’re uniform, attributing a trait or behavior of some individuals to all members of that group.
Oversimplification - Ignoring the nuance and complexity inherent in most issues, reducing them to overly simple terms or black-and-white thinking. - Comment on [deleted] 2 weeks ago:
They’ll not going to be around forever so they want to know you’ll be able to look after yourself.
- Comment on Is it weird to sometimes wonder wether everything you know is wrong? 2 weeks ago:
There’s one single thing in the entire universe that I’m absolutely certain of - something nothing could ever change my mind about: the fact that it feels like something to be. That there’s qualia, subjective experience. I could be a simulation, a brain in a vat, or something else entirely - but it’s undeniable that it is like something to be whatever “me” is. Everything else is up for debate.
Now, sure - there are things it would take a lot to convince me otherwise about, but I’m also not married to my ideas. I don’t attach my identity to them. I’ve been wrong before, and I’m almost certainly wrong about plenty of things even now. I don’t reject ideas just because I don’t like them. There are uncomfortable truths in this world, and not believing them doesn’t make them untrue. Even politically, it would be statistically absurd to think one side is right about everything and the other side is wrong about everything. It’s a mix. The challenge is figuring out where you are mistaken.
As for the examples you mentioned - homosexuality and transsexuality are human-made labels, ways to describe patterns we see. But like all labels, they’re rough generalizations. The differences between individuals even within these groups are vast - so much so that it starts to put the usefulness of the label itself into question. Personally, I’m just me. Tomorrow I’ll be a slightly different version of me. I don’t even fully identify with who I was yesterday - let alone some rigid label that society wants to stick on me.
- Comment on [deleted] 2 weeks ago:
It’s quite hard for someone who haven’t done it before. It’ll take months if not years of daily driving for you to get good enough that you don’t need to constantly think about it. There’s differences between vehicles too, especially with how the clutch feels. I’ve been driving manual for over 15 years and if I jump into a unfamiliar car it’ll take me a while to get the handle of it as well.