I’m an anarchist and an anti-capitalist, and usually appeal to the choices that have the best outcomes.

The government and every corporation having a direct personal dossier with my information in it is very specifically against my beliefs.

I think that social media should be designed like the fediverse. Organized around communities and those communities should be obligated to moderate themselves. Meta literally does not moderate any of its platforms. They know that Facebook and Instagram are full of misinformation, pedophiles, scam artists, and they do not care. The websites are designed to harvest money and data. They are not actually designed to create sustainable healthy social communities. There should be laws mandating routine auditing of the entire moderation ecosystem at social media platforms. If child safety is our concern then it should be the law that social media platforms have to actually deal with threats to child safety and make their platforms usable for children.

I don’t understand why there exists seemingly a widespread interest in protecting Facebook and TikTok? Why? I dont think the fediverse is bad for you. I wouldn’t come here if I believed that. The idea of social media itself being harmful is just a liberal misdirection right? Its all just to distract from the fact that Mark Zuckerberg has more power than most nations and is functionally beholden to no laws. He is entirely ambivalent to these laws because they make really no difference to his bottom line. Kids will still use his platforms. And the platforms themselves are entkrely unaffected. Perhaps even emboldened. Its an “adults only space” after all, which basically let’s them fuck off on all moderation of any kind. After all, all their users are adults now right. So why would they need to moderate? They’re already starting to do this. And kids are still going to access the sites anyway. So they just get access to a worse platform with even less protections for its users and designed even more aggressively to harvest their money and data.

I just see literally not a single positive in a law like this. I don’t get why the answer is to functionally inconvenience every single person and overnight destroy any semblance of human privacy. For nothing. For a net 0 gain. It’s all to protect the policies and actions of meta and TikTok and Snapchat and so on.

deleted by creator

I mean there’s legitimate criticisms to be made of Che Guevara. He was absolutely a morally complex person who undeniably made errors that cost people their lives. He did believe in revolutionary violence, and I disagree with some of the actions he took under that notion, such as executing traitors who sold information to anti-revolutionary forces. He admitted openly to doing that and how he came to view his actions at that time later in life is open to some interpretation.

He also spent significant years of his life building and organizing bakeries, hospitals and schools to improve the lived conditions of the extremely impoverished in Cuba. He lived among them and I believe that he genuinely believed in their liberation.

To reduce him to a murderer is just to dismiss every other action he took, and the context within which he did endorse revolutionary violence. As for the accusation of rape I have literally never heard any such accusation before, and am unable to find anything online corroborating that.

What are you talking about? I have never heard any kind of rape accusation against Che. Calling him a murderer is also fucking wild. He liberated millions of people and was himself murdered by the CIA for trying to foment revolution in Bolivia.

Wouldn’t this just wind up being a de facto ban on the platform we’re using right now? How could Lemmy implement an age verification system? If social media platforms that dont comply with age verification are banned, then by default there goes most of the fediverse.

Why would you not just want social media to be better regulated by the law? You can’t seriously believe that your children are going to have no access to social media, even with an age ban, unless you intend to lock them in a room and home school them till they’re 18.

Lol

Arguments are based on reason. This is an argument for instance. You have produced an example that you feel conflicts with my earlier statement.

Are you able to provide a rationale or argument to your dog that they should get into the crate? Are you capable of reasoning with her logically? How can you communicate those things with her? Could she for instance have this argument that we are having right now? Can she understand the argument I am presently making and provide a rational counter argument? If not, why cant she do that?

Youre essentially arguing for a broad semantic definition of argument. Both of the participants in the exchange you just provided are focused on one individual. The exchange from your dogs perspective never crosses outside of your dogs subjective sensory experience. Your dog dislikes going into the crate. She is incapable of understanding why it is necessary for her to go in the crate. To claim that she has a humanlike awareness of that situation is to anthropomorphize her. From her perspective I doubt there are any explanations that could be presented to her to convince her that going in the crate is a good idea. She could be motivated by fear or by reward or by her own subjective emotional experience (maybe sometimes she just doesnt mind it that much) or even out of a desire to follow your directions as her master. But you couldn’t sit her down and provide a rational argument to her about why she should get in the crate. That’s not something her brain is capable of doing. Humans alone have neurology conducive to that. There is variation in the animal kingdom, but nothing that even approaches abstract referrential language.

Cool. This isnt a response to anything I said, and you have offered nothing to prove your claim that dogs can speak English lmao.

You are the exact kind of person for whom the ape torture experiments were made to begin with. Someone entirely uninterested in what can be observed and proven. Someone with a delusional anthropomorphic view of what animals are. Blind to your own biases and convinced by the subjective emotional experiences you have projected onto your pets.

No, I’m sorry but “believe me its totally true, everyone knows dogs can speak english” is not a legitimate argument nor a response to what I’ve been saying.

Your first statement is entirely unrelated to the discussion at hand, so I dont even really know why you said it.

I’m saying I’ve never even heard of it. I would love to see a qualitative analysis of ‘arguments’ with dogs. I have never seen any evidence whatsoever that anything even approaching actual language comprehension is happening. Understanding some words and sentences is not the same thing as language comprehension. Do they understand the meaning of the terms? Can they infer new things if terms have been rearranged? Do they understand the structure of language? No. They definitely cannot. They are capable of pattern matching human vocalizations though, especially as they relate to themselves and things in their immediate environment. Thats not the same thing as language. I’m very sorry if you do not understand the nuance between those 2 things, or if you genuinely believe any of your pets could speak English. Theres nothing I or anyone else can say to convince you otherwise if youve already decided that your subjective emotional experience with your animals leads you to believe they have English language speaking skills.

Sorry you lost me with the archeology memes, ill take your word for it lol.

I said exhibited, that already implies that I dont know for certain. I am saying that there has never been any evidence provided to me that my pets, or anyone else’s pets, have ever communicated using structured abstract language to communicate. I think believing that animals have a secret ability to communicate in non-symbolic ways is basically a conspiracy theory. There is nuance to what we would define as symbolic and what we would define as structured abstract language, but overall I think this holds true even with very generous definitions for those terms.

Communication through posturing, facial expressions, basic vocalizations, pheromones, can all be used to communicate some ideas that are complex in some ways. You can communicate to someone who knows you very well just be showing them a subtle facial expression that they know you well enough to pick up on. We are especially good at communicating emotions this way. I dont think that anyone would argue those modes of communication are as robust as, say, English. How would we have this conversation through purely posturing, facial expressions, vocalizations and pheromones? Can we convey these abstract ideas through those things that are unstructured and based on what is essentially our ability to pattern much external stimuli? Can you present my arguments to your dog? Can you show that your dog can be made to understand the arguments I am making about language?

Ive had many pets. None of them have ever exhibited the ability of abstraction. Thats not an insult to their ability to understand my emotions or whats happening around them, their brains are just literally not designed to engage in the kinds of communication humans are capable of. They could not have the conversation you and I are having right now, they are neurologically not capable of it. Humans are uniquely capable of this.

The entire study of great apes and sign language has been based on flawed methodology and subjective and biased interpretation of very small data sets.

Its interesting that apes can recollect abstract symbols. It’s even kind of interesting that they can to some extent recollect hand gestures. But it is nothing more than symbolic association at its absolute best. Calling it language is a fundamental misrepresentation of what is taking place. Apes already possess several kinds of ‘language’ comparable to symbolic association, stuff like emotive language and body language and expressive language. There is no substantive evidence that they are capable of understanding and using an abstract language.

What has largely happened in so called ‘studies’ on ‘sign language’ in great apes, has been a lot of animal abuse and fundraising for animal abuse predicated on vague notions of how inspiring the idea of talking apes is. They can’t talk. They are nonetheless very interesting creatures and we should be fascinated by them even without them having the ability to speak human language.

The really frustrating part is that they shouldn’t have to speak with us for us to feel compassion towards them. The really disgusting part is that wild animals were being abducted from the wild and raised in deplorable conditions while essentially being tormented by disgraced researchers trying to prove that they could talk. They’re very well suited to their natural environment (which we are destroying) and are not meant to live lives in concrete cages on the other side of the world being prodded and clicker trained to make vague hand motions. It’s just animal cruelty under the guise of scientific research.

Genuinely curious as I had absolutely no clue hexagon even existed, what is the use case for them? And for the combo slotted/Phillips?

I think you might have it somewhat backwards at the very end there. I also felt tired early on, more drowsy and sleeping longer and stuff. I think for me a big part of it was Spiro.

But the noticeable sleepiness went away after a few months for me. Like idk if I just on the whole adjusted to feeling that way, or my brain chemistry acclimated to the new hormones. But either way I think it does go away for some people eventually, and I think its very pronounced early on.

I appreciate what youre trying to say, but please do not glaze West Germany or western liberal democracy lmao.

If I’m understanding correctly he was a general. He was powerful enough to merely be court martialed. I doubt the same mercy extended very often to individual soldiers who refused orders.

Okay so you can place a child in a home without their consent where they are abused for an aspect of themselves they cannot change. So just. Torturing queer children for fun. This is illegal. This is categorically against the human rights conventions of the UN that the US has signed. This is a crime against humanity. Conversion therapy basically flat out doubles the rate of death by suicide. Youve taken these children from their families and now sticking them into households where they will be hated and abused in every possible way. Trying to force a child to change their sexuality or gender is sexual abuse. The rate of death by suicide for victims of childhood sexual abuse is significantly higher.

This is torture. Thats torture. Thats intent to destroy. This is literally a law designed with the express intent of creating genocidal actions against queer people.

I put my foot down with all my family. I will loudly cut them off, ignore them if they address me with my deadname, awkwardly interrupt them and insist they change terms. I mean I just generally was as persistent and as annoying as possible. Made it very clear that they were gonna change or I was gone. In the end they got the message and adapted. It took a while though. Anyone who refused to adapt I cut out. I have 0 time or patience for someone who doesnt respect me. I have cut off friends and family who have been a part of my life since I was a young child because they wouldnt respect me. I’m not going to lower myself that way.

You deserve better than that. They dont deserve your respect if they will not respect you.

Very sadly international transphobia has made headway here