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/)MH
Posts
0
Comments
659
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • No mention of those responsible for the policy.

    John T. Standley was CEO when it started, and then Heyward Donigan for a couple years.

    John Standley is the one responsible for screwing over all those people, and Heyward for continuing the abuse. Of course it wasn't just them but it's where the buck stops.

  • There are at least two international organizations whose purpose is to deal with immigration and/or it's root causes here in the Americas. The United States does do work to address immigration and it's root causes.

    https://mirps-platform.org https://rcmvs.org

    However, one party benefits from the chaos and fear that comes from a "border crisis." Trump was recently in the news for trying to sway republicans to kill a border policy, because it would look good for Biden. (Just an example of how we don't all necessarily want immigration to be 'fixed'.) Unless we can remove conservatives from power, there will always be immigration issues.

  • You're supposed to cultivate your critics, get to know them, and use them as barometers. Different critics have different perspectives, goals, and styles.

    I think we can all agree that random critiques on the internet don't typically speak to you personally.

  • Palworld

    Jump
  • Wouldn't the artists be jealous of the programmers? You never see artists stick up for programmers being replaced by game engines. Programmers had no problem giving independence to artists. But artists have a huge problem giving back to programmers. I should be able to make a Stardew Valley with no artistic skill just like Stardew Valley was made with no programming skill. We're leveling the playing field, and look whose whining.

  • dad

    Jump
  • I don't think in terms of optics. I don't care if it seems degrading or feels degrading. My philosophical and moral axioms are more about results, cause and effect, reality, etc.

    Go to a homeless shelter. Or try dealing with children. There's a time and place for uplifting people, but you also have to pay attention to what's real. Think about the mental state of the person in that point in time. Learn to prioritize. Forcing a stubborn person to take pills is better than childishly clinging to ideas about personal autonomy.

    I guess if you have very little life experience, don't understand people, and haven't developed a comprehensive, holistic perspective of humanity, then I could see how this would be a dilemma for someone.

  • In F1 they're usually great. More grounded observations / opinions, from either former drivers or at least people who have been around the paddock for decades. They feel more "objective" regarding what they talk about and what they'll allow themselves to hypothesize about.

    I don't watch much NBA and NFL but the analysts / opinion guys seem goofy and way too loose with opinions. I think they're all entertainment so the more outlandish their statements the better the engagement.

    In chess the players and analysts are all way above my level, but as far as I can tell, they do a good job at breaking down the position and giving you an idea of what super grandmasters are thinking. But this is more commentator and less analyst.

  • Repeat after me: I will have the self-awareness to realize that I made the conscious decision to go to a website and incur server costs. I am not entitled to free content. If I don't agree with how a website recoups costs, I won't use that website.

    It's not malware vectors. It's not fake downloads. It's short interstitials that let you watch things 'for free.' Youtube is not a human right. It's not water. You can do other things.

  • dad

    Jump
  • Not taking pills, or taking them improperly, can be fatal. OP doesn't care because they have a personal belief. They said that they would die on that hill, which is a poor choice of words because other people might literally die for their belief.

  • Interesting idea. We could effectively practice eugenics in a way that won't make people so mad. They'll have to contend with ideas like free will and personal responsibility before they can go after our program.

    Let's make a list of all the "asocials" we want removed from the gene pool and we can get started.

  • The person said that things are so bad now you can't process it anymore. They're implying the world is getting worse and that it's overwhelming.

    The reply is trying to help the person see that they're responsible for the lopsided intake of negativity, not the world.