Abyssian, abyssian@lemmy.world

You hate the dead bird and want to ruin it’s life even more than it already being a dead bird? That’s kind of harsh. I’m a dick and even I’ve never looked ad a dead thing and angrily wanted it to be more dead.

In this system it seems like a “rogue officer” would be someone with personal integrity.

Thank God, I’ve been worried about a massive attack coming from Singapore for decades now. I’m so glad their nation decided to support Palestine instead of invading us.

“CXMT is projected to produce about 350,000 DRAM wafers per month by the end of 2026, assuming all current projects are completed on schedule.”

This is a small blurb on a random tech site, it’s just giving a simple ‘if all goes well’ projection.

I’m sure they’re not setting the entire undertaking up so that if one thing ends up slightly delayed everyone’s heads will explode. It seems likely that they also have projections that take varying delays with varying parts and numbers of parts of the project into account, but that someone writing a small blurb on a tech site isn’t really privy to the entirety of their forecasting.

I don’t think they need you to rush in and save them from their folly.

I’m betting they never announce it. No one rioted after the last AI “proof of life” image or in the time since then knowing the deadline they were lying to everyone to make it through was coming up.

There will be another AI “photo” of Mitch with the news that he’s been in rehab so long because it’s just not going well and he’s not going to be able to continue in his position, and resigning immediately. Since the deadline is now dead.

We’ll all know it’s complete lies, but do nothing because we’ve been trained our entire lives to consider the rich and powerful “innocent until proven guilty.” We won’t be able to concretely prove the clear lies are lies, so we will do nothing but bitch about it.

Maybe we’ll get another AI photo or two over the next few months. Mitch will “slip from the limelight” and stop being a news article and big topic. Then one day far from this deadline we’ll hear it’s been announced he has passed. People will snap photos showing his widow flying back from China for the funeral and gossip about it being odd she was there this entire time. Maybe she won’t show up at all and we’ll gossip about that. None of us will do anything.

We can’t do anything about the folk in charge unless we have concrete proof they’re guilty. That’s what we’re taught is moral and right and how this all works. Sure, they can throw us in jail for looking at a reflecting pool, but us common people like Olympic gold medalists aren’t important or special like our dear leaders, so that’s different.

They’d probably quote that and portray it as you saying 99.99% of people are in the “top” now.

Greeks going 20 years with no fresh young boys? Sounds like fiction to me.

This might just be crazy talk… but perhaps normal humans should be considered something like “not guilty until proven guilty”? It doesn’t make any sense at all to destroy someone’s good name and trash their career because they’re accused of a thing.

We do it for the rich and powerful. We don’t have a certified notarized video of Trump beating and raping little kids, so the massive amount of evidence that says he almost certainly did hasn’t caused him to lose what was once seen as the most prestigious job in the world. We don’t have a live stream of McConnell’s rotting corpse so he’s still “alive” for a few more hours until they break the news.

And…. fuck walmart. You’re going to set up all those self checkouts instead of paying cashiers then when a customer buying $200 of groceries is found with an item that didn’t scan call the fucking cops on them instead of just having them pay for it? For someone who clearly has no history of that happening, the very first time it happens? How is that sane or reasonable?

Since the charges were dropped I hope her next step is suing the shit out of walmart. They falsely accused her of a crime due to their own equipment malfunctioning and caused all of this.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_equivalence

That.

I’m not saying one act is equivalent to another act. Actually equating two different things to be the same is required for something to be a false equivalence.

“Apples are basically just oranges” or “using marijuana is like using heroin” are examples of a false equivalence. Note the important part being that two different things are being considered the same when they are not.

My quote was: “It feels so wrong to both her and anyone I would move on to and such a betrayal of my own personal values that it’s unthinkable to me on the level of cannibalism.”

Those are not words saying that dating or remarrying after the death of a spouse is basically the same as cannibalism. If they were than your repeated chant of false equivalence would be true, because I would be falsely equating two very different things as being the same.

The words in that sentence very clearly say that it feels so wrong to me and is such a betrayal of my personal values that it is unthinkable to me on the level of cannibalism.

That’s comparing the level of unthinkable that one act holds for me to the level of unthinkable another act holds for me.

I did not compare who different things. I said that (my feelings and how unthinkable it feels to me to consider doing) one thing is as strong as (my feelings and how unthinkable it feels to me to consider doing) another thing.

(My feelings and how unthinkable it feels to me to consider doing) being the thing we’re saying is the same in both situations.

Insisting that’s a false equivalence is as sensible as claiming someone saying they get equally hungry and excited to see a pizza as they do to see a burger.

If you still don’t understand please seek higher learning. Go ask. Have someone read the entirety of it for themselves. They may say I’m annoyed and seem like I’m talking slowly to an infant, which is true and how I feel at this point speaking with you, and so possibly that I might be kind of an ass, but they will also say I’m right.

That will do the trick. There’s got to be some level of court orders for ice to stop or start doing a thing where they can no longer manage to ignore them.

I tend of assume someone being off thousands of orders of magnitude about something is using hyperbole. You didn’t even mention the possibility. Seeing one example of an incorrect ratio and leaping clear to being torn between deciding if the person who said it is a complete idiot or some insidious evil force manipulating folks is enough to qualify you to wear a cape.

Man… I remember a few decades back when global warming seemed like some big scary possible thing. After living through living and events and news and happenings since then the cleansing, purifying flames are starting to sound more peaceful and serene than scary.

Damn, that pictures almost old enough to stop being a prime target for the IDF and Donald Trump.

We can consume the wealthy and abdicate them of the responsibility of carrying on and also demand change. Especially if we consume them while they’re still alive, as a mob, and do it with dull forks.

The survivors will be far more willing to listen.

You don’t seem to understand. I was reaching for an example to explain the visceral disgust I feel at merely considering myself doing that. Yes, cannibalism is an extreme example. I had to choose an extreme example, because that’s what honestly reflect how that thought makes me feel. Had I said “It seems kinda icky” it would be been downplaying it and lying to you.

Why do you care so much that other humans in the world feel that strongly against things you support? Aren’t your morals/values/personal beliefs the things you care most about following? Would it make sense to you to have someone who believes it’s good to do a thing that you genuinely have an uncontrollable disgust reflex at even considering doing get upset at you for that? It’s just your natural response to a thing. It would be like someone getting upset that you get super happy when you see a cat or terrified if you wake up with spiders crawling on your face.

I’m not being moralizing and judgemental. I’m honestly communicating about my own feelings on a big part of that core self, the things that genuinely matter to you in life. You don’t have to agree with me or adhere to those things. They’re not your things. Other humans living by what means the most to them personally isn’t an insult towards you.

I’m completely aware that different people have different beliefs. I’ve already said that I can only live true to mine as best as I can and couldn’t force others to adhere to them. I never once said anyone else had to or should live by my personal values and morals.

Long copy/paste since it’s the same point. Not everyone will like or agree with everyone or the things they hold most dear. Me openly communicating about my own feelings on issues isn’t attacking anyone else.

“The problem you’re having isn’t with any normativity, it’s with tribalism. There’s an awful part of being human that makes us want to be part of a social group and shun the outsider. To decide that those who aren’t with or like us in our beliefs and norms are evil and bad and to be hated. And even worse, when we feel socially and morally justified in hating someone it feels good to vent that anger and hate at them.

It’s two combined evolutionary relics from millions of years of what eventually became humanity. First, through almost all of that time the outsider was dangerous. Food was often scarce, survival was always questionable, and medical care didn’t exist. A group of people you didn’t know could easily become a fight for resources, and even a single clearly friendly unarmed stranger could bring disease and wipe your entire group out.

The second is the social pressure of fitting in. Through almost all of that time being kicked out of your group was likely a death sentence. We can’t seem to shake that inner terror we’re rarely even conscious of about not fitting in. It pushes us to agree with the people we want to be close to or be liked by and to try to emulate the group we’re with.

Combined, those things are awful. People anywhere will always notice someone who seems dramatically different from the area norm, but someone can stand out in a rural region when the only distinction is a slightly different accent. The drive to shun the outsider and to drive to fit in with your known group work together to make it likely that whatever the difference is, the group is likely to treat that different person or group terribly.

Once someone begins it and no one steps up to stop it, it starts to feel acceptable and even right to do it. Pressure to fit in becomes pressure to join in, and the smaller and tighter knit the group is the more difficult it is to deny that and deviate from what now seems to be the norm of our group.

If you hear someone else from your nation make a racist comment to an immigrant it’s not too difficult to step in and say something against it. If they respond back with some angry tirade about how you’re siding with “them” there are good odds you’ll leave it at that and move on, but perhaps you’d become adamant and insist it stop.

On the other end of the spectrum, if you’re spending a day with your closest friends and one of them makes a racist comment to an immigrant it’s much harder to deal with, and even more so if it’s said privately between the group or other members of the group looked entertained or uncaring when it happened. It’s so hard to even bring it up that people typically decide to let it go or debate whether to say anything internally. That pressure makes it really easy to join in with those acts, even when they’re things you really believed were wrong.

The world has over 8 billion people spread among something like 17,000 distinct ethnic groups and cultures, all with varying histories, religions, moralities, and social norms. Aspects of normal behavior to one group is very often considered immoral to another, and at times there are complete contradictions to the point where doing something is immoral and illegal in one place but not doing that same thing is immoral and illegal in another.

When someone sees your beliefs or acts as immoral it’s easy to define that as them being hateful of you. If it’s a group of people it’s easy for them to become hateful of you. And because of that, you’re likely to hate them in return. And you both spew hate at one another, and you both feel good doing it, because you can both tell yourselves that you’re justified and the other person is in the wrong.

You’ll never beat normativity. Macrosociology and cultural evolution show that moral norms such as monogamy or polyamory fail to unify across a population once it grows into the millions of people. And our actual social strata doesn’t extend nearly that far in reality. The highest number of people typically considered able to maintain a cohesive cultural group before they naturally begin to differentiate is only 150. Since people constantly grow and change the norms of any group and culture are always in flux, they’re always going to be there and always changing.

The best solution is simply doing our best to understand that people who have completely different beliefs and morals than us aren’t evil. That it’s great to do our best to live up to our own morals and values, but that it’s not right for us to try to force them onto others. It sounds easy, but in also means not judging others based on our own morals… so it’s extremely difficult.

There are people in the world who consider dog meat part of a normal winter meal. It’s very hard for me to not consider them evil, horrible people. Dogs are furry bundles of pure love who want nothing other than to be near their person and enjoy life together. They don’t see them that way. Seeing that as a cultural difference and not them being evil is tough.

That’s just pets. It’s way harder when it’s something deeply personal to our own life and self. Your example is clearly one of those. It’s likely the biggest and most common. Not just the mononormativity and platonic amatonormativity aspects, but the entirety of who it is and is not considered moral to have sex with and under what conditions. It seems very likely that it’s one of the things the moral differences that so much of humanity feels so strongly about even though there are many different accepted norms around the world is a third evolutionary relic. Survival of the group/society/culture/species is the primary evolutionary imperative, so it makes sense that the acts associated with human reproduction are the ones that so many people have a hard time accepting norms on that are completely unlike their own.

All we can do is try to live up to our own personal beliefs and morals, and struggle to not see those whose norms and morals don’t align with ours as evil. Maybe one day we’ll all be able to succeed in that. But we can at least understand it and keep it in mind so that we can keep ourselves from acting hateful towards those people and hopefully become more willing to try to stop our closest friends from acting hateful as well.”

No. You’re preaching a philosophical ideology as if it were a factual reality everyone agreed upon.

I’m not saying they’re not idiots, but very few people if any can be said to understand most medical realities other than the most simple completely. There are plenty of people in the world that don’t understand germ theory who don’t say that they don’t believe it.

They’re not using the word believe as in having a religious belief. Their using it in the very common, normal usage in which saying “I don’t believe X” is synonymous with saying “I don’t believe in the accuracy of X.”

Taylor Swift’s jets alone cancel out any benefit all of your steps might have for a few million or hundreds of millions of people.

It’s wonderful to want to try to do something about this, but the only real way we have to do something about it is to stop the people and corporations who are the actual biggest contributors to the issue.

I’m thinking less along the lines of voting and more along the lines of stabbing.