solarvector @ solarvector @lemmy.ml

Posts

0

Comments

27

Joined

2 yr. ago

I suspect now it was never about "don't believe everything", it's just been "believe what I believe". Which I suppose follows Nietzsche's thought on the transition from religion to ideology.

Alternatively, don't spend any time out effort on that, except flagging/deleting spam, and take advantage of search functionality to immediately find anything you need later on.

Agreed on the calendar use though.

Generally agree, but I think right wing chuds were the second wave usage trying to co-opt the meaning to be opposite of woke.

Was wondering earlier, why not just President? Why add the "madam"?

I hate that just throwing out all your shit is more cost effective

... Also would be pretty true for long moves.

Automatically figuring the right range and angle to intercept moving things with with a rocket

Why is there an apostrophe after the "M"?

Is this a fedora tipping version of the US?

How does one become trusted? If they regularly review and provide feedback that you agree with it can really speed up the process, even if you're still double checking.

Any chance this is just an exposure of a built in backdoor?

That's a much better argument than what's presented in this meme. There's at least an argument to claim that the difference is about curtailing foreign interest through ownership. Ownership does heavily influence a platform. Unfortunately that hasn't prevented Murdock from owning more formal messaging platforms.

On a side note, how do you feel about a handful of corporations controlling and censoring the Internet?

Ok, I agree there's a reasonable argument in there.

On the one side of the scale is people enjoy it. Maybe that's enough. I feel similarly about drug policies (that is, people want to use it, consequences are on them, not something that should be forced on them by the state).

I also think it's legitimate to say if there's a problem, policy should reflect that problem. The idea that it's about protecting American money is probably fair too. But those aren't really arguments in support of tick-tock. Those are arguments that others should be included if there's legislation. I would love to see something passed that actually protected privacy universally. A hope for constitutional protection there was one of the casualties of the Roe v Wade overturn.

Last thing... a nation protecting it's interests is pretty legit in terms of legislative justification. One country protecting it's industry is very common and something both countries in question do all the time. Protecting from foreign interference is a pretty standard requisite for sovereignty. If you want to criticize US for not respecting others, I think you've got plenty of evidence. That's still different than saying a county shouldn't take steps to protect themselves.

That sounds interesting!

How does the vanilla pudding mix work? What is it replacing?

How is this itself not a fake argument?

The arguments in support of tick-tock are a bizarre amalgamation of just about every category of bad faith argument. I haven't seen one that suggests tick-tock it's actually a net benefit.

Keep in mind that the new lane assist or collision avoidance stuff can be turned off in virtually all new cars.

Manufacturers are making this more and more difficult to control by the user.

Piracy@lemmy.dbzer0

https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/16742571

Your recorded history may not be stored locally. Would be shocking if Google didn't have some way of de-anonymizing searches.

You might look into the apps they have already banned.

Proponent of knowledge and education. Isn't big on forced worship. Doesn't murder you for not paying enough attention. Guess it's all just a trick to capture your eternal soul.

Yes that is how averages work. The point is more that looking at averages can avoid or diminish responsibility, and in that case likely isn't the right metric.

If 80% of the problem is caused by 20% of the people, then average really isn't the best way to discuss the problem.

There are many methods that are ultimately a combination of psychological tricks, and finding food and meal times that you work well with.

The one thing they all have in common is calories in being less than calories out.

One of the easiest and most effective ways to get started is simply establishing a baseline. Don't try to change anything, just count everything. And yes that means everything. After that, look for things you know don't make you feel good. Maybe limit or drop soda, cut a snack in half, limit dessert, reduce alcohol, etc.

Radical diet changes aren't required, just consistent.

When you start to run into problems with something that feels like self control (snacking, meal size, alcohol, sugar, etc), then look into ways to work through that. Often it's just learning new habits (never eat from the bag, seconds are ok but start small and wait, etc). Those habits really depend on the individual and where you're currently at though.

Some people do great with keto, some with fasting 20 hours a day, some with only snacks instead of meals, or only meals and zero snacks. Just trying those at random without understanding where you're currently at first can lead to feeling failure and giving up unless you happen to get lucky with what you try first.

And, always be kind to yourself.