A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~
Humans are the only animals that have to cook their meat to consume it. We're also the only animal that consumes another animals lactate.
The oil industry is the greatest evil humanity has ever created. Conversely the bicycle is probably the greatest.
If it's not open source it's pretty likely it's taking advantage of you.
The only people that don't want you to learn history are the ones that stand to gain from you not knowing it.
Goto statements do nothing wrong. They were just popular in a time when people were coming to grips with desk jobs, automation, and programming for the masses.
Kanye West aka Ye is not a genius. He is a narcissist. He doesn't write most of his music because he has a team of employees that do that for him but he takes all of the credit. He deserves to be dropped because of his comments and statements.
The US shouldn't be allowed to intervene in any other country unless an absolute majority of countries request so in an international forum (and in a publically broadcast meeting), and never if US companies are going to benefit of the destruction of said country or in its reconstruction. Furthermore, the US State Department undue influence in foreign countries' policy should be illegal and an imprisonable offense involving all the chain of command from the lesser underling until the President.
People in the US believing that it's just OK to start unwanted conversations with strangers is creepy and invasive.
This might be unpopular opinion in the US, but the rest of the world agrees with that.
Social values didn't originate out of thin air. Abrahmic Religions actually introduced them. There is a God.
I hate the Foo fighters, I wish Kurt Cobain was still alive so he never had to hear the Foo fighters.
Live in a LCOL red state. Secretly pleased with all of the folks migrating in from blue states and hoping they can help to flip us to blue.
@rikudou @asklemmy Jews deserved absolutely everything that happened to them, and deserve everything that will happen to them in the future
for legal reasons, @theorytoe hacked my account and posted this
USA: Personal cars should be banned, and commercial vehicles should be tightly restricted.
I don't care about data privacy. I care about consent and freedom of choice, so I care if someone else cares about privacy for whatever reason and cannot get it, but me personally, I care very little if at all. I personally do not feel a sense of "creepiness" or whatever from knowing that companies or the state know stuff about me. So I don't see much value in my personal privacy. On the other hand, we're barring ourselves from great technical advancements. I'm saying this because it feels like Germany is 10y behind other countries in digitization solely because regulators think I'm too stupid to give me the agency to opt in to sell my soul to our digital overlords.
Hamas is a a fascist regime. As long as they remain in power, peace is not possible. Can't negotiate with them because they're fascist. Negotiating with fascists has been tried in the past, it didn't go well.
As a fascist state, Gaza should be placed under sanctions similar to the ones we've placed on Russia. Except we don't have to because Israel and Egypt are blockading Gaza. Which is exactly what they should be doing.
Palestinians put fascists into power, it's their responsibility to remove them from power. Until that happens, Gaza should be treated similarly to any fascist state that fires rockets at a neighbouring democracy.
Whatever criticism is made of Israel (there are many) should be made within the context of there being a fascist state on their border that routinely targets their civilians and calls for ethnic cleansing. Trying to pretend that this isn't the most important aspect of the whole Israel and Palestine situation is just dishonesty and propaganda.
If you don't want Hamas to exist then Israelis need to leave the country that doesn't belong to them.
Right, so you're for ethnic cleansing then? That is removing people from a territory under threat of violence based solely on their ethnicity. That's what you think is a solution?
So yeah, I'm not going to be agreeing with what you have to say.
AI is to computer science what black magic is to science.
Seriously, what do you get after you've spent days and days to train a model? An inscrutable blob that may as well be proprietary software written for an alien CPU; studying it is damn near impossible, understanding how it works would require several lifespans, and yet it works, and we trust these models and use them to get solutions to problems that would normally be impossible to handle by computers using "real" computer science. And one day, this trust will bite us in the ass, not in the form of an "AI rebellion" but with every system that uses AI becoming unreliable because of situations outside its training.
I am against a law allowing LGBTQ couples to adopt children in my country (Poland). I am not in any way against it as a general idea, but Polish society is full of full-on bigots and these kids would be subject to so much bullying, it's really against their best interest.
The argument a lot of people raise "if we start doing it then people will get used to it" doesn't work for me, because why should these children be victims of war that is not even theirs to fight? The whole thing makes me sick.
I've been downvoted for this opinion by both sides on Reddit.
I live in a country with a relatively similar political climate as Poland (highly religious, post-communist, wannabe central Europe). And I used to use the same argument when I was surrounded by more conservative people. The argument is IMO frequently invoked not by people who are truly worried about children (which I'll write about below), but by conservatives who need a civilised, "agnostic" argument for their homophobic stances. But ofc it's better to assume good intentions, at least if you don't know anything about the person using the argument (as e.g. here).
The biggest problem with the argument is that it's purely reactive and, under the hood, disingenuous. Children bully each other horribly already for a million stupid reasons - their shoe brand, their phone brand, their behaviour, etc. or just so, for no detectable reason at all. They also bully their teachers and professors. What is done against all this? Absolutely nothing, as far as I see (and I've seen and heard plenty while I was growing up). It is never brought up as a problem in public discourse, nobody seems to care too much. Bullying somehow becomes a big problem and relevant for the lawmaking only when gay parents are a possibility.
In general, from what I've seen, bullies will find just about any reason to target a kid. Adding one more to the roster seems borderline trivial. E.g. a lot of existing bullying is class-based - my younger sister was mildly ostracised in the primary school for a while because she wore the clothes my mother sewed for her, without a brand or anything, suggesting we don't have the money to buy "proper" clothes. Should we, then, try to separate poor kids from the rich kids, so the poor don't get bullied? Or just forbid poor kids from going to school?
Thus, instead of doing anything against the actual problem โ that is, bullying as such โ the laws of the state, the fundamental right of a child to a family, etc. should all buckle down before some child bullying? A child should be denied growing up with a potentially good and loving family with LGBT parents, and instead be adopted by a potentially inferior heterosexual family (assuming the adoption centres have some sort of system to judge the adopters in advance), or stay without a family at all indefinitely, because someone could/will bully them based on their most intimate and safe space, that is their family? Just as it would be monstrous to forbid poor kids from going to school to "protect" them from bullying, it is monstrous to propose "to protect some kids from bullying, we'll deny them from having a family". The whole argument is actually (or should be) an argument for aggressively rethinking and reworking your educational system , parenting and culture in general.
because why should these children be victims of war that is not even theirs to fight
Under the current system they're also victims and involved in this same war - a part of their potential adopters is denied by default, and they stay without a family for longer. Are they not victims here? (Not to get into the issue of measuring potential benefits of having a family against the potential negatives of bullying, it's purely arbitrary and depends on the given culture too.)
On the other hand, I do think the whole discussion has been derailed by overly focusing on this as an LGBT issue rather than an issue of children without families. So there's some merit at least in the general approach of the argument you present (the children are those whose well-being is most important here), but it leads to the wrong conclusion, usually because it's invoked by people who really just want to get to that conclusion one way or another, rather than helping the kids.
Do you have a better solution? Progress always requires people to fight for the things they believe in and want to change, we don't go anywhere unless people actually do something.
I believe legalizing marriage, normalizing LGBTQ couples' status first to prove the general society that they're not actually some sick perverted sickos before we allow children adoption, should be the first step. Also waiting for the old people to die out, to put it bluntly.
Keep in mind Poland is still a hugely conservative society, in full grasp of the Catholic church. It's changing, you can clearly see the trend, but on the other hand our current government is still actively painting LGBTQ+ as some sort of harmful ideology or what not. We have a long way to come.
Remember to sort by controversial. Top comments are always going to be the popular opinions.
Meritocracy in the US is almost entirely a myth, outside of a few sports.
Free will as it's popularly understood doesn't actually exist.
Most shoes are bad for us and cause injuries over the course of our lives .
The free will myth is especially damaging, as it steers people away from pragmatic solutions and towards blame and punitive policies.
Fully agree. Unfortunately we are a very small minority.