atrielienz @ atrielienz @lemmy.world

Posts

4

Comments

1,660

Joined

2 yr. ago

It's the same way on the original Legion Go from Lenovo.

Said the person who did no research and has no idea what they're talking about. Steam OS has been pushing game devs and publishers to be more compatible with Linux, not less. Additionally, the only online games that really have problems with steam OS are ones that require kernel level anti-cheat, and we all should be pushing for the downfall of that. It isn't necessary.

Well, while I love Bazzite, I wonder if steam os will run the built in controller on my rog ally x as a signal piece of hardware rather than 5 controllers in a trench coat. That and the fingerprint reader possibly getting a driver. But other than that I haven't had any problems with Bazzite that I can think of off the top of my head.

I wonder if this will fix some of the built in controller issues (where the ROG Ally/x built in controls are considered 5-6 different controllers).

How did you learn? I'm asking because that's not something I'm seeing discussed here.

I don't even think most of the commenters here have given it any thought.

It's kind of important to the topic because at least part of the problem is that education is lacking both in NT and ND people as far as how we both developed healthy boundaries to mitigate "being an asshole".

If nobody tells you your behavior is not acceptable in a way you can comprehend then it's a communication issue and and education issue. If it's that then we should discuss that.

Neurodivergence comes part and parcel with mental illness for some people. Depression is a mental illness that a lot of ND people suffer from. It has a direct effect on how we communicate especially when compounded by other ND traits like hyper focus or anxiety (the latter of which is also considred a mental disorder).

It's reasonable for someone who is ND to be experiencing mental illness that may compound behaviors that society as a whole doesn't condone.

I think a lot of people here found it a bit caustic. But I don't necessarily disagree with the point I think you might have been trying to make.

There's a line that's pretty easy to draw involving intent and behavior. However the actuality is the world isn't made for us and this is as much an accessibility issue as it is anything else.

This is pretty clearly demonstrated in the show House. There's at least one episode where House is in a wheel chair and he illustrates how he can use that wheel chair to get away with a lot of intentional behavior masked as accidental or otherwise unintentional. At one point I believe he even makes it clear it was intention and able bodied people give him a pass because "you wouldn't hit a guy in a wheel chair".

When people think each incident is unintentional they are more likely to be willing to compromise their irritation or boundaries. When they feel the incidents are intentional they feel righteously angry and are less likely to fall back on social norms. However they still generally default (for people with physical disabilities) to compromising their boundaries in order to be socially accepted or not look like the bad guy. This is part of the problem with the whole thing.

This is part of the problem with this discussion. The main assumption here is that each party is operating on the social norms laid down by NT people and nobody in the thread seems to be readily able to agree on what specific behaviors make you an "asshole" because it's subjective and ND do not generally have the same reference baseline for what is acceptable.

This is not making excuses. It's laying out facts.

There's a lot of anecdotes here in this comment thread. There's a lot of personal experience that is valid but does not necessarily equal the experiences of even a marginally reasonable subset of the population to make an analysis of what constitutes an "asshole", or what behaviors specifically are NT or ND.

But it seems we can mostly agree that deliberately using the condition of being neurodivergent as a shield for behavior we know is not acceptable is wrong.

The scale by which we measure that isn't decided by ND people though. It's decided by a society of mostly NT people. And because society by and large doesn't even necessarily acknowledge those differences and make boundaries based on facts and education rather than feelings we end up with this hodgepodge of badly enforced boundaries, unhealthy masking that does real damage, and under/overreaction.

But people still deserve empathy. That empathy doesn't mean you should abandon or alter your boundaries to accept unacceptable behavior.

Then people didn't even check and I honestly just assumed it was residual hate or an assumption of defense so while this clarifies things it doesn't really make it any better.

If the community is going to assume everyone knows what's going on, then that's on them.

When they can exit a roundabout competently.

But blockchain at its core is just a distributed database. One that has no central authority, can not be tampered with, cannot be altered, nor taken down if parametrized accordingly.<<

I want you to think about the fact that there is no central authority. That means if it is attacked, nobody can lock it down and rebuff the attack. You're talking about running a piece of infrastructure using a distributed database. It's one thing to allow people who have been vetted (so no, not everyone) to feed energy from an renewable source into the grid. It's completely different to run the entire infrastructure off this idea.

You'd have to build a second grid for the purposes of what amounts to a solar bank coop. Because there's no way the government would let you hook up to theirs free and clear.

What you're talking about would need to be regulated. It would need to be beholden to a centralized agency or government entity (local or federal). It would need some form of monetary compensation which means it's going to be taxed in some way etc.

That's why you can't just hook up a connection to the grid and build a solar panel. That's why you have to have a pre-existing paid connection to the grid. To protect the infrastructure you're connecting to.

To do otherwise would provide a vector for attack to the existing power grid and the government already has enough problems with that.

Among other accusations, MegaLag said that if a YouTuber or other creator promotes a product through an affiliate link, if the viewer has installed Honey, the extension will surreptitiously substitute its own link when the viewer makes a purchase — even if Honey didn’t provide any discounts. That means Honey, not the creator, receives the affiliate revenue for the transaction.<<

I suppose it's possible that that's not how they identify and it's not about gender at all. If someone tells me they like to be called Sara or Brad, I don't try to figure out the how and the why. I'm probably not the best person to ask this question to because I don't think I know the answer.

Some people aren't necessarily trans but don't feel they fit gendered pronouns. I generally try to abide by their wishes because it doesn't matter to me why, just that I be respectful to people the way I'd want them to be respectful to me. But people sure do use pronouns like that and it's not just trans people either. I don't care what people identify as. That's not any of my business. But it costs me nothing to respect their choice.

I feel like I'm missing something here.

I didn't understand. Thank you for the explanation.

A business is not obligated to tear out every stairway to make a ramp because some of its users require a wheel chair. In the same vein, not every social interaction where a person who is neurodivergent (diagnosed or not) hurts the feelings of another person is necessarily them being an asshole. Another commenter said something about how intent matters. They're right. It does.

However it matters for both parties. It's situational and it's important to remember that a lot of social interactions involve misunderstandings because there is a lack of communication from both sides and a set of different expectations on both sides.

I don't necessarily think it's fair to view every social interaction through the light of who is the injured party. We don't do that to people with physical conditions. You wouldn't accuse a person in a wheel chair of being an asshole for having an expectation of accessibility. But that's because society as a whole has come to an understanding (by force) that accessibility for these physical conditions is important.

I don't think society has come to that realization about ND people, nor do I think that the average person looks at ND behaviors and adapts to them in a meaningful way.

So when people have an expectation based on Neurotypical behavior and a ND person doesn't meet that expectation, do they recalibrate at all to temper the expectations?

One of the commenters here gave an example about working with a ND person and the response the rest of their co-workers had to another person calling them out for it in a fit of anger. The thing is, it should not have gotten to that point. And it's not just because others should have been setting good boundaries in a healthy way about that behavior. It's also because they should have been tempering their expectations and not overcompensating for that ND person in an unhealthy way.

Part of the problems we're seeing between NT's and ND's have a lot to do with communication and an inability to compromise or at the very least try to find resolution in healthy ways.

This looks like a MasterCard. I can't unsee it.

People who go to prison are more likely to re-offend by an exorbitant rate in America. This is because the system is set up to make them fail. Do you want to be the change in the world you want to see or do you want to set people up to fail by making the entire topic completely one-sided and vilifying everyone involved.

Do you want a solutions based conversation or an emotionally supportive one. Because my point isn't about the recidivism rates of cheaters but about the fact that labels hurt any and all conversations involving them by smothering the flow of conversation. Meaning someone who is in a situation that might lead to cheating will not seek or is not likely to get advice that would mitigate such behavior.

The problem is they are doing so in a way that is directly at odds with getting people to adopt Linux. A previous commenter on this thread already explained that this video picks "hard mode" installation with very little support after mentioning other distros that are much better suited, gives basically no sensical reason why, and basically concludes that they aren't happy with the result. How does that help with adoption?