Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)RE
Posts
13
Comments
329
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • And I think the more you sort of say to people, “You’re one of them,” I think the more you leave them little room, and you’re pushing them towards those extremists.

    I think we would benefit from keeping this in mind more. There’s some rampant labeling online, sometimes just based on a profile photo, that practically traps some people into shitty views. As much as it’s fun to OK boomer or Karen people, that shit is probably very alienating in a way that isn’t leaving a clear path back into the fold of moral approval.

  • IMO whether abortion turns out to be a negative or a positive right depends on the laws in the country in question. In the US the legal status of abortion is currently up to the states. In the couple states where abortion is explicitly a legal right you have a positive right to an abortion. That is, the state will ensure you have access to one.

    In most states it’s a negative right—the state guarantees that if you pursue an abortion you’ll be protected from people who might want to hurt you for doing it. Sort of like being protected from religious persecution is a negative right in many places.

    So, to me whether abortion is a positive or negative right (or not a right at all) depends on the legal jurisdiction.

  • Anyone who violates the new ordinance is barred from hosting public events or selling goods and services at public events for two years. Anyone who violates the ordinance “in the presence of minors” is barred for five years.

    Sounds like it’s not a local border situation, probably more to do with city permits. Insane in 2023. Reminds me of the vagrancy laws.

  • I agree it’s a bizarre take—they’re a judge, not a settlement lawyer! You’d think a judge’s training would be to consider the general implications of the problem being brought to them given that that’s kinda their job.

  • Judge to Epic: So if google extended the same deal to you would you be down?
    Epic: No, it’s anticompetitive
    Judge: But if you’re getting the same deal deal as spotify it’s fair…
    Epic: No, it’s anticompetitive

  • The kind that’s just heated apple juice is gross but if you throw unfiltered apple juice into a crock pot, toss in half an orange spiked with cloves, and a cinnamon stick or two it becomes delicious pretty quickly. You can always add a shot of rum if you need it to be alcoholic. The citrus really makes it. Pineapple juice is a great addition too.

  • Democracy works really well when everyone in the voting group respects and values each-others’ opinions. I think this is probably only achievable in quite small groups.

    Once it gets too big when a decision that you don’t like comes down the pipeline it doesn’t much matter to you whether a dictator proclaimed it or a bunch of faceless strangers voted for it.

    If you live in a population that is large and non-homogeneous and are part of a minority 1 person 1 vote doesn’t feel great.

  • Depends on how it’s used of course. Using it to help brainstorm phrasing is very useful. Asking it to write a paper and then editing and turning it in is no different than regular plagiarism imo. Bans will apply to the latter case and the former case should be undetectable.