• 1 Post
  • 26 Comments
Joined 6 months ago
cake
Cake day: December 28th, 2023

help-circle





  • I believe they’ve completely lost the plot. They invoked the word “Wikipedia” as a cited source, they were unable to follow any point being made, but their comment in a different thread from a couple hours ago actually helped me start to understand what’s going on:

    They started calling everyone a misogynist for no obvious reason. They were unable to communicate their thoughts in a meaningful way or interpret information presented to them.

    Further, 17 hours ago, on a post that was clearly pro-piracy and not AI related at all, they commented, “AntiAI bros raging at this.” There’s zero relationship to the post.

    I’m seeing a trend where they have their own opinions (censorship is always bad, misogyny is bad, AI is good) and then decide to share those opinions with tangential or no connection to that which they’re replying. They’re also fond of personal attacks and several common argument fallacies. Their comment history reads like a tribute to /r/im13andthisisdeep.

    I hope it’s merely age and maturity-related and not something more permanent.


  • I think it’s ok for the owners of a privately owned platform to make decisions for that platform. If they want to exclusively show nudity, GTA6, or drying paint, I’m all for their autonomy.

    Your autonomy allows you to utilize their platform or not based on their choices. If the absence of a focus on the groin, butt, and breasts on a green screen offends your values, I would suggest not visiting Twitch.

    To bring it back your original comment, enjoying a platform’s decision to desexualize content while also being opposed to a government ban on violent video games is perfectly reasonable. The two scenarios are entirely different in scope and and context.



  • Banning violent video games is government censorship and is a 1st amendment issue.

    Banning certain behaviors on their own platform is entirely the perogative of the platform owners.

    The two are not alike whatsoever.

    Your argument is akin to saying that not allowing strangers to fill your home and smoke crack is “censorship” and is “just so dumb.”

    Disagreeing with the rule or the underlying reasoning is anyone’s right, but disagreeing with a private owner’s right to decide who and what is allowed on their property is insincere at best as you would never agree to your own rights being infringed.


  • If their model was simply, “were going to pay you to stream,” then it would instantly be another egirl cam site which is not inherently right or wrong.

    They don’t want that. It’s their platform, their server space, and their rules. Similar to who you allow in your home and what you allow them to do, they decide who and what if allowed on their platform.

    The “why” doesn’t even matter. Maybe it’s run by a far right Christian. Maybe they don’t want the liability. Maybe they have a vision for what their platform is and isn’t. It doesn’t matter. It’s their property and they decide what’s allowed.









  • mako@lemmy.todaytoLemmy Shitpost@lemmy.world🤢...
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    I don’t know what “brutal science” is but I do know that the scientific process was used in many peer-reviewed studies to understand what lives in our shit. That holds a lot more weight for me than what an anonymous poster feels might be right in regards to the same subject matter.

    Furthermore, the greater concept here is that we as a species have access to actual information by powers of magnitude more then ever before in human history and yet a significant percentage of the population believe that vaccines cause autism because a washed up Playboy bunny repeated what she read from a discredited “doctor” and it caught on like wildfire.

    People in general too often believe what they hear or read without legitimate evidence. Disinformation exists at best because people unconsciously believe their opinions are just as valid as peer-reviewed research, and at worst to weaponize information for personal gain. Whatever the intent it’s a plague on humanity and I won’t apologize for calling it out when seen. If that’s too “brutal” for you I hope you can get to a place where reading cited information in response to opinion doesn’t disrupt your sensitivities.


  • mako@lemmy.todaytoLemmy Shitpost@lemmy.world🤢...
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    46
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    I mean logically the kind of shit that grows on your dishes isn’t much better for you than the literal shit that a toilet brush would scrub out of your toilet bowl.

    First, what the fuck is growing on your dishes that you believe is “logically” equivalent to eating human shit? Second, this isn’t a logic problem or a place for opinion. All the work was already done for you, just waiting for you to look it up instead of giving your opinion on bacteria.

    Human shit also doesn’t only contain bacteria. There’s an estimated 100 million - 1 billion virus per gram of wet shit inside of us. Fungi are estimated at up to a million microorganisms per gram of wet shit and there’s still around 100 billion bacteria per gram of wet shit. Let’s not forget parasites like cryptosporidium which your body purges in shit.

    Meanwhile either giving your dishes a cursory rinse or not allowing them to sit covered in food for days on end would minimize bacterial or fungal growth on your dishes.

    This is a reminder for everyone: your opinion on facts that you can’t be bothered to type in a search box are less than worthless. They’re disinformation and in some cases, like telling people that eating shit is no more harmful that licking a plate, can cause harm.

    Just say no to opinions on what facts may or may not be. Cite your sources.


  • mako@lemmy.todaytoMemes@lemmy.mlTarget Acquired
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    There is demand for first class seating from nearly 100% of fliers. They’re just not willing to pay what AA is charging. This isn’t a supply and demand decision. Econ 101 says that means AA should reduce the price, but capitalism in practice says the constant desire for more profit and the monopoly that most industries have been allowed to grow and maintain means never lower the price and find a new way to fuck the plebs who don’t even own a single yacht.