Jimmycrackcrack @ Jimmycrackcrack @lemmy.ml

Posts

34

Comments

864

Joined

2 yr. ago

I really don't think giving the head of state the power to pardon is a very good idea. I used to be totally baffled how it was a thing at all but the rationale has since been explained to me. While I sorta get it, the theoretical benefit is far outweighed by the inevitable grimy reality. Like others, probably mostly because of my own biases, I find it hard to summon a great deal of outrage about this understandable if blatantly hypocritical move after so much prior abuse of the lower had already occurred, but frankly if the option weren't even there then nobody would even need to talk about this. If the justice system of the nation is supposedly well designed and theoretically trustworthy then there isn't the need to have the ability for it to be arbitrarily overrulled in a manner that operates very much like the monarchical tyrants the United States was supposedly foundationally opposed to.

I guess the implication is that given it's a kit build, anyone else building to such schematics would get a droid with the same derpy friendly nature since that's presumably what it's designed to be like.

I wonder what the reasoning was behind it being the 2nd place prize. Is that inherently more believable?

I'm curious about the "better tech than us" claim. Can you give some more detail and context to this?

It's a secret rouse so you won't suspect the stuff that they don't tell you and get together every few months to co-ordinate keeping under wraps.

Better that than confused people watching videos of Joe Rogan or Trump or something, maybe there's a natural deterrant against disinformation in the name by just getting people to watch cows all day long. Then again I'm sure people would start taking cow dewormer eventually.

Or cowvid for that matter

Yeh if it was just another colour this keyboard made entirely with duck shaped key caps that plays a 'quack' sound effect everytime a key is pressed would be fine.

My parents have a well worn story of the time they were students and very poor and they saw a homeless guy outside the kebab shop and asked if he'd like a kebab to which he agreed. They brought it out to him and he examined it and threw it on the ground and yelled at them about something they now don't remember exactly but they think was something to do with not wanting chilli sauce. Guessing that guy wasn't in the best state of mind at the time, bit of a bummer for them though because they scraped together the last of their cash to pay for that and it would have been better if they could at least have eaten it themselves.

I really can't see a downside. If they seem to be obviously homeless or they're actively asking for help, they probably need it. Though it's extremely unlikely that your meager contribution will be the change that suddenly allows them to magically overcome poverty and become middle class home owners with well paying jobs, that doesn't really make them need it any less. Whatever they use the money on, it's going to be what they need in the immediate term, be it drugs or food or anything really and unlike others this is the only way they can really get that money so they do need people to occasionally part with it. You'd only give it to them because you had it spare anyway and it's not going to make them more homeless than they already were. If the concern is that it's not addressing the root personal problems that put them individually on the street or the root social problems that put many on the streets, that's completely true but if you're serious about doing that you're going to need more than the couple of bucks in your pocket anyway. That's going to be concerted massive political will and financial effort and several people's lifetimes worth of work all at the same time, besides you can always involve yourself in some way in such efforts and hand over spare change. The only times I can really think of where it makes sense not to give directly are: you can't afford to do it, the physical circumstances of handing it over are dangerous/impractical, you don't care about homeless people or other people in general or you subscribe to some nasty Malthusian ideas and think yourself somehow benevolent for condemning people to destitution as some kind of "cruel to be kind" doctrine in which case you're unlikely to have given this a lot of thought anyway and don't really face much of a dilemma.

I thought hipster was essentially supposed to be someone vapid and style obsessed at any given time. Dandies would have been hipsters by my understanding. It's a focus on appearance and also whatever is a current trend of the times so they might also include interests or hobbies as well, the point is the term is used pejoratively because the interests or the style adopted by these people is considered surface level and inauthentic because it is primarily based upon the recency of widespread adoption of whatever it is.

Shit was crazy, random conservative shock jocks and mainstream conservative politicians all over the world were losing their minds over this kid it was hilarious. It was so funny watching them just fucking PR faceplant over and over again when all they ever needed to do was just shut the fuck up about it and wait for her to disappear from the news cycle in time as she herself said she fully expected would happen. I'm pretty sure her continuing relevance is at least in part because of the Streisand effect generated from a whole international cabal of right-wing old men desperately trying to destroy this child and fucking losing hahaha.

Good old klapaucius:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:! I wish there was some use to me still remembering that word today.

WTF!?

Or to market paid privacy focussed products towards you lol.

"You can always choose not use the street, no one forced you to sign up for an outside account"

Yeh, it's not like virginity, the organisations chasing this data don't live entirely off of new additions to their databases, the data is valuable to them when it's a constant flow so if you are interested in guarding that data and stopping it from being shared too widely then there's never a point at which it's entirely too late. It is worth noting that it's near impossible to maintain the type of privacy you might have expected maybe in the 90s, early 2000s but, if you succeeded in reducing how much data you give away even to some limited extent then you are successfully starving those that seek that data of something valuable. Information about you that's years old is probably not worth very much. It all feeds in to the machinery of this surveillance economy so I'm sure it's useful to some extent, but that machinery seems to be endlessly thirsty so it obviously needs a continuous supply.

NES is a good one, it was juuust about part of my time in that a couple of people I rarely saw had one and I loved playing it with them when I did seem them, but really that's because I didn't at the time have a games machine or a computer so anything would have been good. I've played a few of the games and they were alright, pretty good. I got an original NES console with several games as an adult and was super excited because it's so classic and retro and I found that much as I love owning it, I really couldn't stand playing it for more than a few minutes. The games are just, kinda boring and they feel very, incomplete. They suffy some of the same problems as the Atari games I played just to see what the time period was like, those Atari ones in particular feel very unfinished, like someone thought it'd be interesting to try making a game, had one attempt, made something like a sort of prototype and then got bored and just shoved it on the market and moved on to a different hobby. The NES games weren't as bad as that, but there was a similar feel of lack of consideration for the actual player. To me, it the NES kind of represents when games were starting to get good, which I think would annoy a lot of people that were gamers for a long time before that, because it's always annoying when younger people make these proclamations totally ignorant of the time they're speaking about, but in my head at least that's what the NES generation represents. It's the starting point of what was to come, with some flashes of brilliance and a lot of meh and even the really good bits aren't as good as their later more refined iterations.

Yeh, this is a weird question. Kid has to know he's going to be accepted by his own Dad and still be able to make up their own mind on things. Hopefully when they've more fully developed they might sway a different way but acceptance from their Dad shouldn't really be conditional upon it.

But when he took the red pill he was relegated to eating a bowl of snot as his only food and living in a hellscape and had to fight a never-ending war whilst still having to regularly go back in to the matrix he was supposedly escaping. I mean I guess, great, for humanity but it doesn't make picking Linux sound like a great time if you're going to use that analogy.