For the person that down-voted me, it is estimated that Mao was responsible for several times as many deaths as Hitler. Estimates range from 40 million all the way to 100 million people.
You don't have to be a Nazi to point out that ~100 million people dead because of Mao is worse than ~20 million dead because of Hitler.
Unless you value Chinese lives less than the victims of Hitler, it shouldn't be an issue to see Mao as having been more evil, even though both were very evil.
To be fair, Mao should be in the center.
Learn to solve problems using programming. Go learn Python. Stick with the basics and have fun. If you start worrying about losing older versions of your code, learn Git. Grow from there.
Kubernetes? Microservices? Cloud platform? These are all distractions and a waste of your time.
This is actually funny.
They can just pin Reddit users against reality. That will do the trick.
It's fair to consider them as slurs. If my memory serves me correctly, they are almost always used with a negative connotation or in a context describing "cis-people" as doing something bad. Elon is merely stating the obvious.
may be using more than one supplier
uh oh!
Remember that Reddit also started off small, then grew, then got bought, then turned into shit (*). However, I think that Lemmy has a greater chance of surviving as long as people keep everything truly decentralized. We shouldn't all flock to "lemmy.world" or any other one Lemmy instance. Because if we do, that specific Lemmy instance will also be sold (along with the userbase) and turned into a corporate money-making machine.
(*) Some would argue that Reddit has always been shit, but that's besides the point...
Abuse of trust by hackers, scammers, thieves and other scum on the internet that try to min-max criminality.
Omg! Take my like!
racist cars
Lmao. What the actual fuck?
If you don't get in line Musk, I'll feed you to the peasant rats!
The peasant rats:
Blocking Data Scraping
They need to keep all that data for themselves so that they can sell it.
Doesn't this cowardice apply to modern day leadership in general though?
Oh look, a cute friend!
This demon got his head shopped off and impaled (if I recall correctly) outside of Istanbul.
In 1476, while marching to yet another battle with the Ottomans, Vlad and a small vanguard of soldiers were ambushed, and Vlad was killed and beheaded — by most reports, his head was delivered to Mehmed II in Constantinople as a trophy to be displayed above the city's gates.
He got what was coming to him.
Same dilemma
I have no idea what is going on. Is the article biased and not telling us something we should know about the reasoning behind these bills? Are these politicians taking payment from "big-meat"?
To gain power of an entire country like China, Mao had to be very intelligent. Him not being informed of the consequences of his policies is highly unlikely. The consequence of claiming that he was ignorant is that it enables you to absolve him of some of his guilt. You are downplaying how bad he really was. This is not fair. Mao ruled China for 33 years and has caused more destruction in his own country than most rulers (if not all) in recorded history.
Interesting quotes:
At the request of the English National Health Service, the senior pediatrician Hilary Cass has completed the most thorough consideration yet of this field, and her report calmly and carefully demolishes many common activist tropes. Puberty blockers do have side effects, Cass found. The evidence base for widely used treatments is “shaky.” Their safety and effectiveness are not settled science.
...
We also don’t have strong evidence that social transitioning, such as changing names or pronouns, affects adolescents’ mental-health outcomes (either positively or negatively). We don’t have strong evidence that puberty blockers are merely a pause button, or that their benefits outweigh their downsides, or that they are lifesaving care in the sense that they prevent suicides.
...
We don’t know why the number of children turning up at gender clinics rose so dramatically during the 2010s, or why the demographics of those children changed from a majority of biological males to a majority of biological females.
...
Medicalized gender treatments for minors became wrapped up with a push for wider social acceptance for transgender people, something that was presented as the “next frontier in civil rights,” as Time magazine once described it. Any questions about such care were therefore read as stemming from transphobic hostility, full stop.
nice marketing though
I don't want to say "I told you so", but I told you so.
Someone who thought taking out an $81k loan for a car was a good idea.
Admittedly, it is anecdotal. But I'm clearly not alone in holding this sentiment. If enough people from varying backgrounds make these observations then it's fair to eventually consider these as slurs. I'm arguing that we have reached this point.
…Never seen someone just straight up admit that they were bullshitting. Props to you. >Just to be clear - you do realise that the thing that “happens every time” is people >claiming not to be married to the idea of society being led by an individual, then >going on to argue that this is the only way?
There are no problems with power structures per say, not only that, (yes) they are necessary. As long as those given power do not abuse it, there are no problems. I also never claimed to believe that society should be at the hands of one individual and their whims and desires. These two things do not contradict one another.
Secondly, the only one here bullshitting is you, and I will tell you why.
Citation needed.
So you are telling me, that as an employee, you can do whatever you want at work or even not show up at all, because you have no authorities above you? Or even better, maybe you think that when you are fulfilling your duties at work, you do so purely because you are interested in doing so. Not because you have to earn your salary, which you then must use to pay for your home and put food on the table in order to live. Come on.
Happens every time.
Yes, we can say that it happens almost every time. You are arguing against a very obvious fact of life. A father is a leader to his family. A teacher has authority in the classroom. An employer has authority in the workspace. When you want to efficiently combat criminals, you need commanders (detectives), like in the police. In general, you are going to have disputes between people regarding choice A or choice B. Leadership can resolve such disputes efficiently. Generally speaking, we cannot function without leadership structures.
I am not limited to conceptions that require a leader.
How about several leaders? Because you are not going to escape leadership completely. If you are a functioning member of society, you will have a leadership role over someone, and you yourself will have leaders. It does not mean that you worship them or that you are worshiped, nor does it mean that they have to be tyrants who take other people's rights, or that you take other people's rights.
I'm telling you this because you seem to have a very skewed idea of what leadership is supposed to be. You seem to think that it is nothing more than imposition of one's own will over others.
You know Pakistan & India also recognizes a third gender? The Hijra. I guess the medical community has a long history of this grift all the way into antiquity such as Ancient Egypt (they wrote and described their notion of a third gender) or even somewhat recently the Mughal Empire (15th century). But yes it’s totally a grift.
Your lack of knowledge isn’t mine to fix though. You’ve set your opinion to be something malicious because you want it to be, but even a quick glance at a wiki page would tell you the much longer history.
I did not know about this term, so let's take a look.
Wikipedia says: "In the Indian subcontinent, hijra is the generic term for trans women and may include eunuchs and intersex people [...] Hijras are officially recognised as a third gender throughout countries in the Indian subcontinent"
It goes on to say: "Some hijras may form relationships with men and even marry,[32] although their marriage is not usually recognized by law or religion"
So the institution of marriage did not entertain the idea of "hijras", that seems pretty significant to me! It begs the question which other norms, customs, practices and laws pertaining to sexes were not taking this idea into consideration. Again, you can make up a sex ad-hoc for specific purposes (fetishes, guarding harems, etc.) but you will not find it being truly recognized as another sex.
If we forward to today, you see the same thing. Medical doctors, architects, clothing designers, etc. all mostly operate according the concept of two sexes. Because that's what's practical, and that's what's most in line with reality.
You're not understanding what I'm trying to say. This ideology attacks the very idea that the conceptualization of things is bound to reality, ad-hoc, to justify fetishes, making money or other limited personal gains. Outside of these limited gains, these people must deal with reality, so they reintroduce concepts as if nothing happened. That's why it's ad-hoc. It's hypocritical, anti-truth and illogical. Your example, just like other attempts to dismantle the idea of a sex binary (male and female) is fundamentally flawed. A "spork" has the function of being compact and easy to carry & distribute. Being an intersex person has no benefit, it's a disability. It's like being born blind or deaf. It's unfortunate, and should not be fetishized or compared to being a transexual. It's also highly uncommon to be intersex, so uncommon that redoing how society functions is simply too impractical. Introducing sporks has no such burden on society, and can be easily referred to in terms of a spoon and a fork, because it combines the function of both (albeit lackingly).
It doesn't end there. They claim that there is a spectrum, not 3 sexes. So they further muddy the waters, and any attempt to categorize things can be waved away in a similar fashion to satisfy some people's personal whims and desires. Not practical, not acceptable.
Whatever grievances we have with clothing designers or fashion, the point still stands that we will never move away from naturally putting things into boxes, especially when it comes to sex. We naturally see two sexes, and doing so turns out to be what is most in line with reality.
This is not the argument you think it is. It would have been fine for my grandfather to call black people with a different name in his day, but >one day it wasn’t. You can argue this made him less free, but I’d disagree.
You were being inflammatory, knowingly, and that’s why you got banned. You walked into a house and decided to shit on the floor and were then surprised you were shown the door.
I said "there are only two sexes". I got my post removed, and got banned.
In general, you should have enough tolerance to host discussions and debates for people you disagree with. Especially when you claim to be a viable Reddit alternative. You can't ask the wider population to join your platform when you are this extreme and on the fringe. As I said, Lemmy is in the same camp as Raddle.me, not Old Reddit.
It’s also not true there are only 2 biological sexes in humans (irregardless of the social arguments that exist in current day discourse). >Intersex exists and is recognized way before the current social aspect was relevant. There are also 6 chromosomal sexes recognised in biology.
There is a benefit to not start muddying the waters when it comes to sexes.
The benefit is the conceptualization of reality, which allows us to put things that are similar into the same box (let’s call it X). Then we can say things that are in X tend to have a, b, c, … features. We can then talk more about the objects in X in a social or academic setting, and draw logical conclusions based on their features and other premises. This helps us decide which treatments to give, how to behave, how to build homes, which products to develop, which services to give and much more.
When you refuse to acknowledge that the objects in the box can be similarly referred to, and instead enforce a system where object 1 belongs in box “A”, and 2 in “B”, and 3 in “C”, etc. you challenge people’s ability to conceptualize reality efficiently. This makes medicine harder, it makes socialization harder, and other things we do as human beings that differ based on sex much harder.
It’s simply not realistic to enforce this on wider society because
I therefore believe that the whole idea of non-binary is pushed primarily as a grift by the medical industry to sell “treatments” for gender dysphoria, and as a type of fetish. It’s not something most people are interested in validating, because it’s wrong, harmful and not based on reality.
I’d argue, as a day 1 Reddit user that Reddit was way more woke than any competitor at the time. It wasn’t as woke (lol what a word) as it is today, but if you think whatever it was competing with wasn’t less woke than Reddit, I have a bridge to sell you.
It depends on the subreddit. Several subreddits that you surely would not agree with did just fine for years.
Reddit didn’t even have subreddits in the beginning, meaning that for everyone to play nice a baseline of respect had to be present.
I will repeat myself... I said "there are only two sexes". I got my post removed, and got banned.
You put things into categories all the time, we all do. Take plates for example. If someone told you that you are not allowed to call two plates with different colors "plates", then you would likely have considered it a bit wired. Wouldn't you?
Also, tone down the arrogance.
I don't think like that. I'm just saying that if a revolution is executed by bad people, they will just move the power to another tyrant. Revolts and revolutions have their place, but that does not mean that they always work. Look at Communist China or Russia. Look at the Arab Spring. Look at Libya, Gadafi was a really bad guy, a rapist even. But what happened after people revolted? Just more corruption, crime and foreign powers taking advantage of the situation.
This is why when people with a certain political leaning in the West say that they want to eat the rich, without having any further plan or clue what that would entail, look like dangerous retards. Excuse my French. Most people are pissed that they are litarelly being robbed every day by their governments, some have even been attacked physically or imprisoned unjustly. These are all legitimate grievences I do not inted to downplay at all. However, when people destroy order, leave everyone vulnerable to internal and external threats, will that make the situation better or worse? Are you willing to take that risk? What is the probability that your country will survive and prosper after such an event? Think hard about that!
If most people suck, and they would do the same as the elites had they been in power, then focusing on the current elites makes no sense. Because the current elites will just be replaced with people like them.
Lastly, in general, people will automatically rearrange themselves into power structures, even after a theoretical reset. That's human nature. Of course there are degrees to this, but power structures will be there nontheless. You and many others don't seem to have a clue if a revolution will lead to less totalitarianism, or more totalitarianism, you just assume that it would lead to a better state. Sorry to say, that's a bit naive.
There is always going to be an elite. If sociery is bad, no revolution in the world will make things better. You're just going to replace one tyrant with another.
Stop voting for political parties that send taxpayer money to Israel.
People, set a few red lines and make these a criteria for who you vote for.
You will never be an anime girl.
When you see yourself as an anime girl.
A man who is unable to set very fundamental boundaries in a relationship is not a real man. If you enter a relationship with the intention of having a monogamous marriage, then get cucked, then accept it, it means you have no spine. Any "boundaries" that you loosely claim to have, really don't exist. How are you supposed to be a father? Children need a man as a father, not a spineless cuck.
I can respect a man more who just has casual sex/one-night-stands. Because there is a possibility that he can set boundaries once he actually enters a relationship, whereas with you, it's a certainty that you cannot.
Yes, I'm shameless like that.
Children need a man as a father, not a spineless cuck.
It is harsh language, I will admit. But the guy needed some tough love.
Cisgender is a slur
It is a slur, since it is constantly being used in a negative context. It is how I, and others feel from experience.
Where did the big bad woke touch you?
Nowhere, thank God.
It’s no secret that Lemmy is shaping up to be a viable alternative to Reddit.
I will tell you why this is not true.
Any platform that becomes successful enough to grow and cater to a larger audience eventually gets sold to large corpos. This is inevitable, because the owner usually doesn't have the principles to say "no" to $100m+. This is a bad thing, why? Because you joined the platform due to its reliability and its culture. These things are no longer guaranteed to stay when the owner is replaced. So the previous owner essentially did a bait-and-switch by selling you (the user-base) to a corporation.
On one hand this leads to a more stable platform that can withstand legal trouble and has a steady inflow of money to maintain service. On the other hand, you get cencorship, woke ESG-score-friendly ideology and UX anti-patterns (like when Reddit constantly pushes their app to track you and show you ads). The ending of such a platform is hatred from most common people and aggressive monetization by the owners to compensate for a lower rate of growth. These owners, usually shareholders of publicly traded companies, do not care about maintaining quality as much as they care about generating wealth. This means that they will resort to several anti-user tactics to keep growing their wealth, like for example milking the platform dry with ads & micro-transactions.
Lemmy.world and other large instances are just like Condé Nast Reddit. Same censorship, same garbage. If you think that Lemmy is more free, then let me remind you that Reddit pre-2014 was more free than Lemmy.world. Yes, once upon a time Reddit was much more free and open than the so called "Lemmyverse". Why I say this is because of Lemmy's rules and policies. As an anecdote, I literally got banned from a community for saying that there are only two sexes (no foul language, nothing). For me, who was a Redditor during the pre-2014 era, this was unheard of. Lemmy is less like Old Reddit, and more like Raddle.me (Communist Old Reddit-clone). Lemmy is the LGBT/woke Old Reddit clone. It's not as fringe as Raddle.me, but it is still fringe, and it will therefore not be able to have the same reach as Old Reddit once had. The fact that Reddit is woke now is a bait-and-switch, as I explained earlier. Reddit would have never been successful had it been woke from Day 1. I predict that Lemmy will never grow as large as Reddit because of this reason.
To mods: Leave this post be. If not, you can have your echo-chamber, and I'm fucking out of here.
And they cheap out on the steel?