Sentrovasi

I think it’s an anti-riddle, or a joke, more than anything else.

If this God exists outside time, it would make sense since we may be unable to perceive these perturbations in time - it will just always have been that way.

I think the older generation got used to the stereotype that if people were posting with emojis, they would naturally be making more immature posts (being younger). There are a lot more people from the older generation on the Fediverse.

For an example of this generational gap: you mention that “On Reddit people use emojis a lot” - that genuinely is not the experience on Reddit I had: when I still used Reddit frequently, emojis were treated with the same level of disdain (which both explains and is explained by the condescension around the Emoji Movie).

So you’re signalling that you’re from a certain generation and looking to appeal to people who are similarly from that generation of people who like to use emojis to express themselves. That’s going to attract some people and also going to rub others the wrong way. And that’s fine! Keep using your emojis. You just might want to remember that a lot of the people who hated new Reddit and a lot of the people who left Reddit for Lemmy the first time are/were going to be old-timers (by internet standards), so you might find fewer like-minded people here.

As a last note, your saying you “miss emojis” makes me feel extra old (and I don’t think I’m old at all!): it suggests that the time of emojis has not only eclipsed the internet culture I’m familiar with but has died out also. That’s two eras. It’s fortunate that at this current point in time, it seems like digital cultural eras can pass in weeks.

To be fair if the goal is understanding why, then even things like goods not being substitutable are useful for understanding. The OP wanted to know why, not know how to predict them accurately. The original suggestion to learn economics would teach them that.

They were quoting responses the OP has made to other replies in this post.

Fucks Pez!

They said they spent another hour after launching, though - not sure you can launch without having interacted with the Nomai statue.

I think comparing vaping to drinking water is disingenuous - it is not needed and has active harms. Just because one thing is less harmful than another doesn’t mean we can’t regulate both heavily.

I went on to read that it also has six colours as opposed to the seven on a “real” rainbow as well. I’m getting more educated every day.

I get his point though - just wearing one of them really has no LGBT affiliation: it just looks like a monochromatic watch. Maybe it’s that subversion that Malaysia is afraid of.

There’s a reason people evolved altruistic reactions and tendencies, and that’s because on some level, altruism and trust in a community is good. How could anyone trust anyone else in a society where backstabbing is essentially the norm? Building giant projects like power plants could not exist without humongous inefficiencies if everyone were to constantly be trying to insure themselves from everyone else’s manipulation and making sure that they have a slice of the power pie and are not beholden to anyone else. If a society of Good people are all able to trust each other beyond any doubt (because Good people are inherently trustable), they can actually do insanely long-term plans knowing that those following them will continue to meet their obligations. Resources will be split more evenly ensuring maximisation and therefore a larger force.

Your example is also incredibly simplistic because nobody wins in a nuclear scenario, and that’s why Good would be opposed to it. It doesn’t mean they’re against other means of stopping the issue that don’t contravene international laws (which, by the way, would be 100% made by Good people because Evil people would have no reason to be a party to any of these treaties).

If nuclear war happens, everyone loses.

With conventional war, it’s a wash, but I’d give it to Good, with one side having harsher tactics (but also a chance of internal conflicts and opportunistic coups) while the other side has more resources but may only fight defensive wars.

With no war, Good wins - seems like a win for Good to me overall. The only problem is in real life it’s much harder to separate the Good from the Evil, and most people (myself included, probably) are somewhere in between.

I don’t think OP is guilty of this, but a lot of people think that current AI-generated content is going to sound like something that doesn’t know how to be human or what humour is. That’s a fundamental misunderstanding, I believe, that thinks that the LLMs that are popular now have any kind of actual sentience, and simply lack experience or understanding.

Fundamentally, they’ll instead sound like exactly the most average or boring (but informed) person, except maybe a bit more repetitive, because they’re trained on data and not coming up with independent thoughts. Someone who writes in a unique way and has a unique sense of humour is far less likely to be an AI than the average (yet somehow more accepted) everypost.

Math determined that dropping the bombs saved more lives than invasion through conventional means.

I’d be hesitant to trust the math too far, especially since it’s based on many assumptions as to how the war would have played out despite one side being severely outgunned.

Call me an anti-military cynic, but I’m sure a bit of it was also the idea that they now had a nuke, and wanted to see what kind of damage it could do. Perhaps the numbers there were better than if it had been dropped on any other viable target (especially a European one): that math, at least, I can believe.

That’s not what a whataboutism is, at least in common parlance. What the OP of this particular thread was saying, though, was. The idea is that people should aim to be better than lower common denominators.

Your version of “what about” as being about inclusion is strangely almost the exact opposite.

That’s not what second-hand smoking is. Smoking around others will cause them to suffer the negative effects of the smoke as well. This is especially bad around children.

Also, the argument that “it hurts no one but themselves” is a really weird one. Does you not wish the best for your loved one? If you saw your daughter or husband or wife hurting themselves, would it be “controlling” for you to try to get them to stop doing it?

So you think she could be right? You just don’t want to do it? That reasoning doesn’t make sense. If you think she’s right you should be stopping right now.

There are no health benefits to smoking or vaping as opposed to just not smoking. I don’t know how directly this needs to be told to you, but I think right now you’re too deep into addiction/denial to see it.

If you love your girlfriend, sometimes it’s okay to trust them on something, especially if everyone else is also telling you the same thing, even if it’s not what you want to hear.