GreyEyedGhost @ GreyEyedGhost @lemmy.ca

Posts

1

Comments

1,776

Joined

2 yr. ago

To tack on this. She definitely needs therapy, classic trauma-based coping mechanisms, and the depression may be because of that or exacerbating that. I'd also say, due to natural biases, that we may not have as much negative info on him, but that's okay.

I think he's almost done and she's either almost done or done. Probably the best option is to get out sooner with a little less drama and take some lessons from this. The alternative is to keep trying to fix it until all feeling is gone, then break up with a nicely burned bridge in the background.

I never thought about it until you said it, but yeah.

I don't have a problem with those. Just use 3 or 4 times more length and you'll be fine. I'm not sure how that saves money, but it keeps the custodial staff busy replacing rolls...

How is this affected by him selling X to his AI company? I know banks don't like letting you off the hook, but I also know banks do things differently for rich people. I figured that was the reason he did it in the first place.

I have a Win11 laptop for work, and they changed the Start menu. Now it's recent apps and recommendations for your starting point, and you have to click an option to see installed apps. Every. Time. There is a setting with 3 options - more recently used apps, more recommendations, or an even split of both, but the option to go straight to installed apps is mysteriously missing...

I will never install Win11 directly onto my hardware. If I have to use it, it will go into a VM of one flavor or another.

This whole thing started because of the line, "It's not all men, but it's always a man." I've given a number of circumstances where it's definitively not a man, so is it always a man or not?

From Wikipedia: The leader of the Puppeteers is known as the Hindmost. Since Pierson's Puppeteers are foremost concerned with their own safety and the survival of their species, the most important Puppeteer is considered to be behind, or protected by, every other member of the species. It is a shortening from the more literal the one who leads from behind.

And I'd say his defense isn't the defense he thinks it is. So now what?

Let's say we could remove a fetus at conception and bring it to term, and it would be able to develop happily and healthily? Are abortions still okay? If so, being able to survive outside the host isn't changing your stance, just your reasons. If not, then where does the obligation end? Who's raising this child? Most abortions aren't removed because the mother feels like she has a parasite, so what are we doing about those reasons? And why do you think those reasons only start once the fetus is viable?

Oh look, a stranger on the internet thinks he knows me!

I've been posing here for close to 2 years. Feel free to find one comment where I've said someone should not have access to abortions under any circumstances. I think having an abortion is a terrible choice, and the vast majority of people who choose to do so are putting in more thought and emotion than they do in choosing what to wear that day, and contraceptives are a better option if it is an option, but the person having an abortion and their care provider know far more about their circumstances than I do, and they're in a far better position to make that choice than I am, and I'd rather they be able to have one in a proper facility than some sketchy place or means hidden from the authorities.

And just about none of us can survive alone. Even those who can were trained by others, all the way back to the start. If your threshold is needing someone else to help, where do you draw the line? Conception? 13 weeks? 27 weeks? Birth? Physical disability? Intellectual disability? Anencaphaly? Old age? When do people stop or start being people? What's your cutoff line? Why?

If you'd gone with, say, the person no longer being obligated to care for the fetus, I would have kept scrolling. Perhaps you were implying that with your magical cutoff, but that cutoff changes all the time. This article puts the survival rate at 26 weeks at 89%, and the term extreme preterm refers to those born at less than 28 weeks. So why not 26 weeks? Why not 28?

My conclusion on your stance, with as much support as you had for your conclusion about mine, is that you picked a point that you feel comfortable with, where the easy answer lies. "Oh, this is when it could survive outside the mother, so she has options other than abortion at that point, so that's where I'll stop allowing it. I certainly won't look at consciousness because then I might have to say it's okay to kill people for the sake of convenience." This smacks of the idea that hospitals will allow morphine administration to the point of relieving pain in terminal patients. Sure that might be higher than a fatal overdose in a healthy patient, but we didn't assist in their death, we just helped with the pain. For the record, I'm perfectly fine with that if the patient wants it, I just don't need to lie to myself and say the morphine isn't making them die sooner than they would without it.

Edit: I swear I saw you say 27 weeks. The point still stands.

You can try as much as you like to excuse women from responsibility for killing their partners, but the fact of the matter is, women can be just as ruthless as men, just usually in different ways.

Maternal infanticide is still a thing, and a "pediatric study of mothers in the general population found that 70% of mothers with colicky infants experienced explicit aggressive thoughts toward their infants, and over a quarter (26%) of them had infanticidal thoughts during colic episodes". So, 26% of these kind and loving creatures thought of killing their own child because they cried a lot.

There is a gender disparity, and a much greater difference in expression, but if you want to deal with the root causes of violence, you will have to look beyond gender.

And no, I don't have a pile of these saved up. I'm just willing to accept that people are people, regardless of gender or a myriad of other demographics, unless a clear link is shown between the demographic and the behavior being examined. The trend towards being shitty has far greater factors than gender.

This is one reason we need to get rid of FPTP. It makes it harder for the extremes to gain a foothold. It would also lead to enough "teams" having a say that working together would be necessary to get anything done, which would be a novel state in North America.

I've called myself a fiscal conservative, and I have a lengthy comment in my history about it. I'm not finding a link.

Most of the proposals by people who call themselves fiscal conservatives don't want to spend money now, and don't want to think of spending money later. This doesn't solve the current issues and does nothing to prevent those issues from recurring in the future. They also seem to think that policing and incarceration are free, and that poor people have no interest in eating or shelter, which means they obviously won't break the law to achieve those goals. They also ignore that a good education for everyone, not just their kids, is one of the best predictors for a financially successful future (and that financially successful people are less of a financial burden to society), and that hungry kids don't learn as well. In spite of that, they don't want to pay for public education. They also don't want to pay for school lunch programs in spite of all the studies showing that wherever they are implemented they provide a net economic benefit of at least 6 to 1.

The only conclusion I can come to is that most people who call themselves fiscal conservatives don't want to spend money, not even wisely, and fail to recognize that the costs will still be there - you just get to choose whether you want to spend it on education and social services or policing and prisons.

I heard there was one about him being an advisor to Trudeau, so why would you trust him to make anything different happen?

Well, he was also in charge of the Bank of Canada for most of the time that Stephen Harper was the PM, and I have a suspicion the governor of the Bank of Canada did some advising to the PM during those years, so you'd think they would be okay with him, right?

So how are burrowing animals doing? I've seen pretty pictures of deer and trees, how are the rabbits and foxes? What are their lifespans compared to those in other regions?

Just because the animals don't look like cutscenes from The 100 doesn't mean their life is idyllic, or even better than elsewhere. And all those animals are eating food grown in irradiated ground. Now, whether that's better or worse than microplastics and fossil fuel waste and leakage is another interesting question.

Earth is the host.

We all need something external to survive. I'm pro-choice, but this is a broken argument. It does segue nicely into a discussion about socialism and communism, though.

It also caused a bunch of Russian soldiers to get sick because they dug holes in the ground. It isn't a nuclear paradise, and I'm not interested in Chernobyl-grown food, but it isn't a complete wasteland, either.

Atomic transmutation is never easy, and the only thing that really scales is a nuclear reactor. And not just any nuclear reactor will do - breeder reactors are the only ones that make it in any quantity. If you want to make this using a cyclotron or with centrifuges, a lot of the diagnoses and treatments we take for granted today will be almost completely inaccessible and only available to the very wealthy.

I generally agree, given that geothermal and solar keep getting cheaper, and now cost less than nuclear or are at least competitive, but nuclear plants do more than just provide energy. Where do you think medical isotopes come from?

So the boycott was pointless, as indicated. I also saw people saying they were going to boycott InBev, and they clearly had an impact for some period of time, along with the Bud Light boycotters, yet here we are. Also, you mentioned InBev, not Bud Light.

InBev stock is up 1.6% over the last year. If you'd bought stocks this January, you would have made about 30% profit.