I’m not claiming to have evidence backing me up, but I fear the idea that addiction is under your control may be higher among the educated populace may not be affected by being more highly educated because they’re bought into meritocracy and the idea of improving oneself. ‘Just do this’ platitudes etc. from the crowd that believes everything works like a controlled lab experiment they did in AP Bio
I’ve used both since 2001. Windows default search is worse, dragging and dropping to your chosen install location seems to make just as much sense as choosing it in a pop up window, grid and sort by are both right click dialog options. I thought the argument against Mac software was a lack of options so now I’m going to ask why Windows doesn’t let you organize folders by vibes
It is a perfectly coherent argument that Boeing is more harmful than Lowes despite both being $120 billion megacorporations. You have a point, but there are real functional differences between the actions a person or a corporation or a country takes. Make another pro-nihilist argument, I will listen, discount the validity of viewing the world through any other lens and I will not give a shit
I do not think it is a coherent argument to lean on history to discount the effects of brand new surveillance and killing tools. Drones are supposed to be able to limit casualties with precise strikes but the disconnect between the operator and the victims is so great that it makes the act of killing easier, evidenced by so many botched attacks during Bush and Obama administrations. Which way does the pendulum swing? We don’t have historians and declassified documents and longitudinal studies to rely on for an answer. Maybe our children’s children can fill us in, but in the meantime I actually feel very confident claiming that expensive advanced weaponry widens the gap in power between oppressor and oppressed. The fact that practically nobody from the US died while the Misdle East cowered is evidence of this; I think Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge actually reinforce this claim as well. Clashes and bloodshed and genocide are ancient—but I think the systemic rounding up and genocide of millions in just 4 years is quite difficult to accomplish without fairly modern weaponry. There are only a handful of genocides that even compare on a numbers scale and only one I can think of is pre military industrial complex. I don’t see how today’s superiority through guided missile, drone, etc. systems differ from yesteryear’s superiority via small arms in that regard.
I’m sure it would be interesting to talk to you in some other set of circumstances—I think you have twice now made a salient point about how seemingly innocent industries end up fueling these genocides, just now and elsewhere regarding steel manufacturing—but under these circumstances it’s like pulling teeth. You are arguing that advanced weaponry does not increase bloodshed, which I disagree with, and you are avoiding any discussion of responsibility, which I think is a pretty natural impulse within all of us but it really fucking matters. I hope at least that you enjoyed interpreting everyone’s critiques in the worst possible light.
Yeah, that’s a pretty pointless response on the Uyghur front and I don’t think we’re making progress on the “how easily is the genocide carried out” front so let’s just drop everything else and hone in here:
China’s comprehensive surveillance system is what makes tracking the movements of Uyghurs possible. It is what has made detaining and killing them so easy. So the people that made that system possible are responsible. Please explain how actually it’s nobody’s fault because things just happen.
It is pretty radical to argue that a small contingent of Zionist Israelis would be successfully eradicating the people of Palestine if both sides just had sticks, so the U.S. should just keep manufacturing and selling MK-84 bombs. Or we can talk about how absurd a claim it is that the arms industry is looking out for the little guy—you know, the group that can pay for less of their product? Thank god for arms manufacturers—that’s probably what Uyghurs think when they’re stopped at checkpoints by military police
So do you work for a defense contractor or do you just have great respect for the act of killing in general
Just like in the US
The letters denoting widths exist, but they’re not used. Very few US shoe brands offer different widths on the same size shoe. Some offer two. A handful three, and now you’re talking about workwear, not trainers or anything else. Generally, US shoe widths are decided by whether it’s a mens or womens model.
Thank you for the clarification.
In what sense is he correct? It’s not because he’s not black, you’ve just cited the workaround—and it’s not like he’s a guy who takes a principled stand against nepotism. The idea of the state taking partial ownership of a company that is operating in their country also doesn’t give me too much pause, free trade is extractive—and I’m simply not sure that Elon Musk deserves that money more than someone in the South African government, lol
A lot of core concepts in Christianity are incompatible with being white in America. It’s a religion for the oppressed being practiced by the oppressors. They’re the Pharisees. It takes a lot of mental gymnastics to figure out how to see themselves as the lepers and the Jews.
Well yeah, the people who want a small reliable phone are unlikely to replace them every year for no discernible reason. Cue more articles and comments about how there’s no sale data to support the idea that people want small phones! The odds are stacked against us.
Diatribe alert. If you just wanna know, here: 75% to 86% of plastic waste in the Great Pacific Garbage Patch came from fishing industry, article, study.
It’s not bad, and I didn’t claim it to be bad. It’s not relevant in the same way Dr Thunder and Pibb Xtra aren’t leading to a soft drink crisis in the USA—they’re a small part of a much bigger problem.
To carry on with this dumbass analogy, it would be misleading to argue for a ban on off-brand sodas while continuing to mass produce Sprite, Pepsi, and Diet Coke, and it lets big businesses off the hook for their destruction. Same with letting industries shovel untold plastic waste into the oceans behind our backs while making more visible efforts to ban much smaller amounts back on land.
Also, we’re not just worried about plastic because it ends up on beaches. That is, again, missing the bigger picture. It’s also missing why those items in particular end up on beaches, which is because of local littering. A cup on a beach is actually great for the environment compared to a piece of nylon disintegrating in the ocean. It just looks ugly. Our primary focus can’t be on ugly right now.
If you ban plastic straws from European beaches and say job well done, the planet will never notice. We need to start with the big issues, we don’t have time to pat them on the back and keep subsidizing the destruction of our planet. Agricultural fertilizer is next followed by plastic bags, iirc, or maybe bottles.
This is a list of end-consumer items put together by a government body beholden to fishing and other industries. And it’s not even about pollution levels, it’s specifically about beach pollution. Plastic lids on cartons of heavy cream are “also a problem” if we focus only on reducing plastic waste in the kitchen, but implying it’s even relevant compared to industrial plastic waste is disingenuous
Thankfully the people in charge of deciding whether your actions are performative or not have great judgment
No American alive today had a say in the electoral college, yet it gave Bush Jr. and Donald Trump presidential powers despite the masses being against them. Americans weren’t in charge of the completely farcical 2000 election, Jeb Bush was. This time around, sure. The people have chosen this. Only after decades of witnessing how little representation they truly have.
It’s illegal for USPS employees to go on strike :^)
• save the planet
• save the animals
• stick it to the people who thought of all that first
Tangential nitpick—the phrase “evolutionary pressure response” evokes the idea that there is an intelligent or benevolent purpose behind the process. When a beneficial trait randomly occurs and gets passed on, that is a release from evolutionary pressure, not a response to it.