thebestaquaman

@thebestaquaman@lemmy.world

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Its like a little prayer⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago⁩:

  You know architect was an god you thought now

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Since militaries are authoritarian, even in democratic countries; What would a military of a stateless/anarchist society look like?⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago⁩:

  Isn’t the idea of having an authority at all contrary to the anarchist ideology? Sounds to me like they were more “representative democratic brigades” than anarchistic brigades, since they elected officials that had full control until the next election.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago⁩:

  That’s an interesting take, to me it’s always been either porn or not porn, and the idea of “porn but censored so I fill in the gaps myself” hasn’t ever had any appeal. I don’t know if this is related to what I’ve been more exposed to (probably is), but anytime I come across porn that shows everything except a tiny pixelated part (as in, only pixelating part of the junk) kind of funny.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨The consequences (of my actions) have been extreme⁩ ⁨⁨6⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago⁩:

  To be fair, I didn’t expect you to respond at all, and really just wanted to point out that calling a stranger you know nothing about a “dweeb” in response to something they wrote is a prime example of “just being a cunt to someone”. You didn’t need to respond, but you chose to do so by being a cunt.

  Regardless, I think you missed some of the sarcasm in what I was writing (which, in hindsight, isn’t very clear). My point isn’t that shitposting is some form of high art. It’s that it’s a form of humor that amounts to more than saying provocative stuff or being a cunt. At it’s best, a shitpost can even contain some social commentary in the same way as caricatures can. Of course, as with all other humor, there are plenty of bad shitposts out there too, which are often just trolls trying to stir up shit.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨The consequences (of my actions) have been extreme⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:
  • fig 2 just being a cunt to someone
• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨The consequences (of my actions) have been extreme⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  I’ll defend shitposting here, because I think you’re simplifying it a bit too much.

  Shitposting is so much more than “saying dumb stuff for shits n’ giggles”. First of all, as with anything else, there are good and bad shitposts. A good shitpost usually contains a solid undertone of irony or sarcasm. An important part of the humour is not just in “being dumb” it’s about using a statement that is dumb in a very specific way in combination with a specific context in order to create something funny.

  Furthermore, a good shitpost uses exaggeration in a good way. The reader should preferably be “lured into” the post, not realising it’s a shitpost, before the notch is turned to 11 revealing that it was a shitpost. This adds an extra layer of humor and social commentary: The fact that the post at first seems believable forces you to recon with what kind of things you would actually believe someone could write. It also makes the target of the humor clear.

  Shitposting may not be high art, but calling it “just being a cunt to someone” is missing the mark. “Just being a cunt to someone” is exactly that, and it’s not shitposting.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨The consequences (of my actions) have been extreme⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  This is a terrible take. Obviously, I can say something offensive to a friend that they would find funny exactly because they know I don’t mean it seriously.

  Saying that is some kind of “reflection of my true self” is honestly just dumb. I’m saying the offensive thing because I find it offensive myself, and because I would never say it to someone I don’t trust to understand that.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Fucking hell⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  You also use halv tres (50) and halv firs (70) don’t you?

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Fucking hell⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Little fun-fact: We still have a trace of this left in Norwegian, where the most common way to say “1.5” is not “en og en halv” (“one and a half”) but “halvannen” which roughly translates to “half second”.

  We abandoned the “half third”, “half fourth” etc. very long ago (if we ever used them), but “halvannen” just rolls nicely off the tongue.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨at the plasma donation place, one of the screening questions is "have you had a condition with scab formation?" - like, a superficial cut, or a mosquito bite?⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  This makes sense to me, I was thinking of the situation where I’m from, where you don’t get much more than a pat on the back and the good feels of helping out when you donate blood.

  It’s honestly kind of insane to me that there is a system in place to get desperate people to literally sell their blood for money… No one should ever be made that desperate :(

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨at the plasma donation place, one of the screening questions is "have you had a condition with scab formation?" - like, a superficial cut, or a mosquito bite?⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Ok, so systems for donating blood are different in different places, I get that. Where I’m from, the only benefit you get from donating blood is a thumbs up, pat on the back, and a popsicle or a coffee cup or some other small gift.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨at the plasma donation place, one of the screening questions is "have you had a condition with scab formation?" - like, a superficial cut, or a mosquito bite?⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Some people just say to lie for every question.

  People say this? I’ve never heard anyone donating blood say this, and I personally would say that all precautions taken by the professionals that collect blood donations should be taken very seriously. It’s not, at the end of the day, up to me to be the judge of what is or isn’t a condition serious enough that my blood shouldn’t be accepted. I’ll give the professionals as much information as possible, and then let them judge whether or not it is safe to give my blood to someone else.

  I would never even dream of lying in order to donate blood, when that could end up actively harming someone, and I honestly cannot see the argument in favour of doing that. The whole point of donating blood is helping people.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Reasonable assumption⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Sir, this is a shitpost community.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨What do you think of anarchism?⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago⁩:

  Saying “enforcement never prevents any crime” is just naive. Say what you want about the american justice system, but even over there, they’ve incarcerated repeat offenders of assault, robbery, etc. where the incarceration itself most definitely prevents them from harming more people.

  If you’re talking about actual prevention, just look to the programs enforced in several European countries that have provably been very effective in taking people who have been living off crime and turning them into productive citizens of society.

  Yes, it’s been shown several times that fear of punishment is extremely ineffective at preventing crime. That doesn’t mean law enforcement doesn’t prevent crime. Putting a person that abuses their family in jail most definitely prevents them from continuing to abuse their family.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨What do you think of anarchism?⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago⁩:

  You say they’re arguing against strawmen, but do nothing to refute the arguments or show why they’re strawmen. Let’s say you have what you want: Rules but no rulers, direct democracy, and government but no state (please explain the latter in more detail).

  The local hospital needs to decide how much money (read: resources) to spend on constructing a new wing, and who should do the job. A power line has to be built to replace the one that just fell down, and your direct democracy decided last week that you want to do something to incentivise the farmers to produce healthier and more sustainable food, rather than easy to produce and unhealthy food, but you haven’t ironed out the details yet. The next option you have to affect these decisions is later today, when you’ll have some kind of meeting or vote to decide on the matters. How you will find a time and place that allows everyone to have their say is an obvious issue, but I’ll leave it to you to explain how to overcome it.

  These decisions need to be made, and when everyone doesn’t agree, there needs to be a mechanism to get stuff done regardless. I haven’t even gotten started on how to deal with internal groups or outside forces that want to exploit the system or the society as a whole.

  Please explain how this is solved without some kind of hierarchical system where some people make decisions and enforce those decisions on behalf of the group as a whole. These are the roles we typically assign to “rulers” or “the state” (i.e. the bureaucracy).

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago⁩:

  In this specific context it is quite relevant that they’re an atheist, and therefore presumably relatively sceptical of religion in general. That’s a bias colouring their response that they’re disclaiming that they have.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨The wonders of how the human body works⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  There do of course exist (far too many) people out there that objectify women, but that’s not what this post is about (at least the way I’m reading it). I can definitely relate to the situation where some random woman will do some mundane everyday thing, like put on a purse or let down her hair, and my body just decides to react to that.

  It has nothing to do with objectifying women, and of course I don’t make a point out of it, but just push it out of my head and move on with my day. The point of the post is that it’s funny and relatable how the body can just decide to send a puff of hormones around your system as a response to the most mundane things, even though you know that it’s wildly inappropriate. I’m sure you’ve experienced the same thing at some point?

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨[deleted]⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  Sir, this is a shitposting community.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨If you save, we will charge you more⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  The transformer is dimensioned based on the max capacity of the houses in the neighbourhood, which are standardised.

  100 houses with 200 A main fuse each? Supplied by a 20 000 A transformer (plus safety margin obviously).

  If cryptoboy wants a non-standard main fuse size that requires an upgrade of the transformer, he has to pay for that.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨If you save, we will charge you more⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  This is definitely a simplification, which is why I pointed out the possibility of distributing costs among the consumers based on how much of the total consumption each consumer is responsible for.

  I think the major point still stands though: In order to take advantage of production at scale, you need to build some minimal size production facility. For stuff like hydropower, that minimum can be quite high, depending on available geography.

  If marginal cost is zero, it makes most sense to charge some form of flat rate to have access to power, rather than a consumption-based price, because it’s not necessarily feasible to downscale the facility, even if there’s low demand (in that sense, hydro or nuclear would be better examples than solar).

  The details of how this more or less flat rate should be distributed among consumers is a discussion in itself (should those living further away pay more since they require more power lines? etc.)

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨If you save, we will charge you more⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  You’re making the argument yourself here:

  A 1000 A transformer costs more than a 10 A transformer

  Yes. And that is true regardless of how heavily it is used, which means you should pay a flat rate for maintenance of the infrastructure you use, and another rate for the power you draw.

  Residential buildings use standardised infrastructure, which then leads to the same standard fee for everyone. Industry that needs heavier equipment pays a different fee, because they require different infrastructure.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨If you save, we will charge you more⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  No, they’re arguing that the price of power should be split:

  • A fee for grid maintenance (equal for all)
  • A fee per unit of consumed power (scales linearly with consumption)

  This makes sense, because regardless of you much power someone uses, the costs associated with maintaining the infrastructure that allows them to draw any power at all remain the same. This also happens to be the model used in Norway, so it’s not an untested concept.

  Another option, relevant when the cost of building the power plant is large and the cost of energy production is negligible, is that everyone connected to the grid pays a near-flat fee in total, which is distributed among consumers depending on how much power they use. I’ve never heard of that option being used before.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨If you save, we will charge you more⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  I’m all for eating the rich, but I’m still going to point out why exactly this can make sense.

  Let’s say you have an energy company that owns a solar farm, you’re not looking to turn a profit, just provide clean energy to the world: You produce electricity at effectively zero cost.

  However, your solar farm needs to be paid down within its lifetime of ≈30 years, which is independent of energy consumption. So you decide to charge a rate that ensures 1/30th of your production costs are paid back each year, so that you can replace the solar farm after 30 years.

  This effectively means you are charging a constant rate for access to energy supply, independent of consumption. This again means that the rate per kWh goes up if average consumption goes down.

  Individual customers can still save money by reducing consumption relative to the other customers, but nobody saves money if everyone reduces consumption. This makes complete sense when your “marginal cost” (i.e. the cost of producing energy) is negligible compared to the initial investment of building the power plant, and also applies more or less to nuclear, hydropower, and wind power as well.

  Given that this is not an ideal organisation though, I wouldn’t put it past them to increase the rate such that it more than offsets the decrease in consumption, thereby increasing their profit. In that case: Fuck them.

  I just think we should be aware that our current understanding of energy prices as linked to day-to-day consumption (because the primary expense for a thermal power plant is the cost of fuel), will become outdated as we move to clean energy sources. At some point, we should be paying a near-flat rate for “access to power”, rather than a rate for each unit of power consumed.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨USA Air Force issues new guide regarding acceptable phrases to be used when on duty⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  For added effect, read the right-hand side in the voice of a British aristocrat.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨These dames wanting inclusivity⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  To me this feels like you could say “Guys, <insert sentence directed at a group>”, as a general term to catch the attention of/refer to a mixed genre group as a whole. Anyone getting upset that you’re using “Guys” in that context to refer to both men and women is just looking for an excuse

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨These dames wanting inclusivity⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  When did “people with vaginas” unironically become a way to refer to anyone, especially as an alternative to “female”?

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Posture is important⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  My wrists though… if I’m using a laptop without peripherals, it’s because I currently don’t have access to peripherals, and need to use the keyboard and trackpad on my laptop…

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Anon has marital problems⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  This might be a language think, but as I understand “abuse” implies some degree of intent, repetitiveness, or suppression of the victims response, no?

  If someone is punched, you would typically call that assault, while if they are punched on several occasions while being prevented from seeking help, you would call it abuse.

  Likewise, if someone is yelled at or scolded or manipulated on one occasion, you usually would say that they were “yelled at, scolded, or manipulated”, while if it occurs systematically over time you would refer to it as abuse.

  Please correct me if I’m wrong here

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Anon has marital problems⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  I disagree, I don’t think these two are comparable.

  Physical violence cannot be undone. Saying that you want to leave someone, and then breaking down upon noticing your mistake is something that can be talked through. If someone beats you, and says it was an accident, you’ll still be bruised and feel unsafe around them, even if you understand them and have empathy for them. On the other hand, if you understand and have empathy for a partner that said they would leave you because they honestly though you would be happier without them, you can help them get better and move on.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Anon has marital problems⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  I mentioned it in another comment, but I’ll repeat it here: This doesn’t necessarily have to be emotional abuse. It can well be a result of the wife being in a bad place, having little self-worth, and convincing herself that anon would be better off without her. Perhaps anon’s response caused her to re-think and reconsider, hence the subsequent breakdown.