• 5 Posts
  • 64 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 26th, 2023

help-circle





  • OK so Biden had a bad debate, was visibly incoherent for a while beforeheand, and they took him out of the race.

    Now Trump has had a bad debate and has been visibly incoherent for years. Is the GOP going to take him out of the race for a stronger candidate?

    I don’t want to make a false equivalency, these are different parties and different candidates; Trump supporters are more loyal than usual, and he would take them with him as he’s not likely to accept his exclusion, so the GOP taking Trump out of the race is riskier than Dems taking Biden out of the race.

    But, seen from the left, conservatives are the ones with a reputation for ruthless pragmatism when it comes to electoral politics. They’re the ones who sacrifice their values by voting for candidates that do advance their goals.

    A lot of leftists, out of idealism, wouldn’t vote for Clinton in 2016 or Biden in 2020; meanwhile evangelicals made the pragmatic decision to vote for Trump, the least christian man in the whole GOP, because he furthers their anti-abortion agenda. I argue that conservatives are absolutely correct in this, voting for a candidate that you don’t like just to advance your goals is the correct approach to representative democracy. My evidence for this is that evangelical voters were rewarded for their vote when of Roe v Wade was overruled thanks to judges from the Trump administration.

    So i think, if the GOP replaces Trump but keeps an equally extremist agenda, there’s a world where electoral pragmatism causes those voters to transfer over, leading to better odds of a GOP victory. And a conservative presidency other than Trump would push their agenda more efficiently than the first Trump presidency did or than a second Trump presidency would.

    Uh… So DON’T do that. That should not happen. It would be the right thing for the GOP to do, which means it’s the wrong thing and i hope it doesn’t happen.


  • I was reading this like “this guy should be a furry, it’s what fixed me”

    And then you reveal that you’re a furry. Bro, that’s more than a saving grace, that’s absolutely the solution.

    Now in most contexts, just being a furry already makes you a subgroup, so you get so socialize off that alone; but when you’re in a furry space, it can get awkward integrating into a new group because the commonality you have is not as relevant. In those contexts, it’s easier to socialize in a sub-subgroup within furry. Like we have this group of 5-viewer streamers that all hang out with eachother on and offline. Being able to draw will make you popular just in general. And then there’s the dancers, hackers, programmers, gamedevs, suiters, activists, kinda subgroups within furry that make it effortless to integrate socially.

    The above is true online and off. As far as IRL things go, your local convention will be once a year and that’s probably not enough, if you’re in the US there should be a local scene that will make it a lot more regular. Online and offline feed into eachother.

    That’s all i can think of, if you’re a furry you have a chance to not be lonely for long


  • The best explanation i’ve seen is this:

    Places that put children under the authority of adults (schools, camps, etc) are appealing for child predators; but where most will kick them out when/if found, the Catholic Church makes it easier for them to stay in.

    This is because of a religious belief that God judges men for their sins, eventually rehabilitates them, and the job of mere mortals is to forgive and forget.

    I really like this explanation because it doesn’t flatter my atheist sentiment and provides a very neat and rational cause-and-effect relation, it’s a thing that’s specific about the Church compared to other institutions.

    Priests also take a vow of chastity, in people’s minds they’re supposed to be above sexual desire; and they have an extra aura of authority compared to the average teacher or summer camp instructor. Both of these things makes it harder for children and parents to question them.

    And once they do question them, the Church gets a similar behavior to other institutions where they’ll try to protect their reputation by burying the case. I’m not sure which positions are supposed to be held for life, i assume most of them, and so that makes firing someone (or whatever the right word is in this context) a bigger deal.

    Thems my attempted explanations




  • You’re coming at this from the design and community aspect. I don’t think Lemmy makes significant improvements over Reddit on those fronts, it’s designed the same, has the same benefits and drawbacks. As of right now the small size of the community makes it lacking in diversity and impractical for niche interests (aside from tech-related ones).

    My case for Lemmy being better is a business case: Reddit was a for-profit company backed by venture capital, and is now publicly traded. They are extremely susceptible to enshittification, and are in fact already deep in that process.

    Meanwhile, Lemmy is an open source software that enables users to host their own social media. It’s not even a business at all, i’m not even sure if the developer (LemmyNet) is a business or a person or some other legal entity.

    Fediverse social medias (Lemmy, Mastodon) are structurally resilient to the enshittification that we’re seeing from corporate social medias, and i like that a lot.


  • Yeah, it takes some mental effort to change your habits, people are more likely to just install a new extension.

    BUT, those extensions are probably next, dropping uBlock is part of a long-standing war by Google against ad blocking of all kinds. So at some point Chrome users won’t be able to escape ads, and then i do wonder if they’ll switch.

    I feel like normal people who are too lazy to care would probably just use the default browser that came with their device. It will be Chrome if it’s an Android, but it will be everything but Chrome if it’s any other OS, it will be Edge or Safari.

    Now i haven’t installed Chrome in a minute, but how many devices is it the default for? My understanding is that a lot of Chrome users specifically looked for it and installed it to use instead of the default, especially Windows users. And for that public, i do think it matters, i do think they would consider switching.




  • So let me get this straight: they cut down the forest, plant palm trees, harvest it for i guess a few years, and then… plant the forest back? How does that make sense just on any level?

    I mean at least i happen to know it doesn’t make sense on an ecological level as a new groth forest is massively different from an old growth forest, so the new forest is no replacement for the old one.

    Also i’m not sure if you understand what an argument from ignorance is? It’s not an ignorant argument, it’s a specific type of logical fallacy. The observation that no extractive industry has proven sustainable is a predictor that they’re unlikely to prove sustainable in the future.