Lumisal
@Lumisal@lemmy.world
- Comment on Golden Rule is flawed 14 hours ago:
It’s more of a:
“If person A acts badly, Person B to ∞ act badly to person A”.
But I can see the programming failure of the suggested rule as written, as it can be implied that only person B should act upon person A, rather than everyone.
- Comment on Golden Rule is flawed 14 hours ago:
Sure, the moment I start doing that feel free to take me out. That’s, kinda the whole point. The important part is you remember that it applies to you as well.
Basically MAD except it’s others keeping others accountable.
- Comment on Golden Rule is flawed 14 hours ago:
Counterpoint: Getting rid of the people making others blind makes more of the world see.
- Comment on Golden Rule is flawed 15 hours ago:
I don’t think it’s circular, I think it’ll burn itself out eventually.
- Comment on Golden Rule is flawed 15 hours ago:
Now my experience is purely anecdotal, but the bullies stopped bullying once I fought back, and even more so once I got others to also join me in physically fighting back.
- Comment on Golden Rule is flawed 15 hours ago:
“an eye for an eye” is more reactive compared to this. In this case, it’s not about waiting for the person to harm you, but acting preemptively if they have a history of harming others.
I guess a modern example would be Putin. Let’s say he randomly walks into a bar unprotected for some reason in Comoros, but the Islanders know who he is and what he’s done as well.
In this case, Putin has done absolutely nothing to the people of Comoros, and his actions have had no effect on the island either. Yet, by this rule, he should be treated the same way he has treated Ukraine by the Islanders regardless.
As someone else has pointed out though, if you don’t know the person at all, then the default golden rule is fine enough.
- Comment on Golden Rule is flawed 15 hours ago:
I thought it was “might makes right”. Can’t keep the gold otherwise.
- Comment on Golden Rule is flawed 15 hours ago:
I think the oligarch wants to be treated with riches and subservience.
And if a teen is bullying someone, I don’t see the issue in them being bullied back so they can learn “hey, this bullying stuff isn’t great, maybe I should stop”.
- Comment on Golden Rule is flawed 15 hours ago:
At least you got it
- Comment on Golden Rule is flawed 15 hours ago:
Yeah, that’s a better version too.
- Comment on Golden Rule is flawed 15 hours ago:
I don’t think that’s a good idea if that other person is, say, a pedophile.
- Comment on Golden Rule is flawed 15 hours ago:
Well it was a shower thought not a philosophy one.
But with more thought on it, I’d still say the default rule by itself is broken, so perhaps it should be:
Treat others the way you want to be treated, unless you know how they treat others - then treat them as they do unto others.
- Submitted 23 hours ago to showerthoughts@lemmy.world | 34 comments
- Comment on Cable placement a little weird, but the ergonomics are excellent. 1 day ago:
So far a 45° mouse has been the best for me
- Comment on Americans have 400 days to save their democracy 2 days ago:
Well not sure how much babies and toddlers can do, so that shrinks the amount of people involved at least
- Comment on Whether you use AI, think it's a "fun stupid thing for memes", or even ignore it, you should know it's already polluting worse than global air travel. 4 days ago:
That says national not global
- Comment on Proton Mail Suspended Journalist Accounts at Request of Cybersecurity Agency 1 week ago:
The reality is the only option you’ll have (for those asking for alternatives) is self hosting, if you’re worried about things like this. Eventually one of them may get compromised or emshitified.
Tuta, for example, is in Germany. All it takes is one election where the AfD wins and now Tuta is compromised. Either you’ll be hopping around continuously, or you settle for the best possible option, or you self host.
- Comment on Why the video of Charlie Kirk being shot was kept on social media platforms 1 week ago:
Kirk also helped organized and bussed people to the Capitol. It’s not just opinions.
But also, yes, if your opinion is certain people should cease to exist simply because they’re not white, I will think that person themselves should cease to exist in turn.
- Comment on Why the video of Charlie Kirk being shot was kept on social media platforms 1 week ago:
Do you have a link to one of those videos? I have someone I might be able to make go against Trump via a different conspiracy with that, since that’s their main issue with Trump now
- Comment on US officials plan to punish foreigners ‘making light of’ Charlie Kirk death 1 week ago:
Yeah, it’s for hunting moose and Nazis (most are WW2 era)
- Comment on Too soon? 1 week ago:
Ok, tankie
- Comment on US officials plan to punish foreigners ‘making light of’ Charlie Kirk death 1 week ago:
You sure it’s a Mauser and not a Springfield?
- Comment on Too soon? 1 week ago:
Oh look, deflection and avoiding to answer.
I figured, you’re just another fascist troll pretending to be leftist. Either that or inadvertently carrying water for the far right.
- Comment on Shhh 1 week ago:
*Mario
- Comment on Too soon? 1 week ago:
Still on that “appeal to law” fallacy huh?
Since apparently you can’t be arsed to look it up, here’s a direct link: en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_the_law
- Comment on Too soon? 1 week ago:
The Biden/Harris admin acknowledged climate change, and appointed the first Native American to the position of Secretary of the Interior, who then approved the Willow Project (which climate scientists declared a world ending “carbon bomb”), and approved such a record number of fossil fuel extractions that the courts struck them down for not considering the climate impact.
Yes, he approved that. He also did all of this. In particular, I’d like to point out this part in the wiki:
“Some environmental organizations, including Sierra Club, Sunrise Movement, Earthjustice, and more, claim that President Biden took 322 actions to protect the environment—more than any other president in history.”
Although I disagree that those actions are as equivalent as important as say the National Parks program for example. Either way, go ahead and show that the Trump admin has even mentioned the intention of doing anything similar. I’ll wait. (You do realize this rhetoric only helps the fascists too, right? Just as much as pretending the DNC Dems are left wing).
The Biden admin’s CDC prematurely ended Covid guidelines, and let the ceo of Delta set their post-infection isolation guidelines. Biden’s FDA were approving drugs that they knew didn’t work, because they wanted to appease their pharma lobbyists.
To pretend that the Biden administration’s actions were ANYTHING near as bad as Trump’s is just a bad faith argument. It honestly just makes you seem like you’re purposefully making the literal anti-science fascists seem not bad by pretending the two were even close, for fuck’s sake. At least the dude knew basic fucking biology.
- Comment on Too soon? 1 week ago:
Kamala and get administration wouldn’t have put an antivaxxer in charge of the FDC or climate deniers in charge of the EPA etc.
Nor would they have had straight up thugs running around like the current ICE.
The Dems (or more specifically, the DNC) have definitely enabled on purpose the Republicans. But they at least mostly followed the law and kept order.
I understand the frustration of people not understanding that the DNC Democrats are very right wing as well, and even actually collaborate with Republicans / fascists. But they’re more culturally liberal oligarchs than straight up authoritarian fascists. People would still be harmed by their policies, but groups like Transexuals wouldn’t have to fear they’ll get killed by the government.
Equating the two completely is bad faith. They’re very close - cut a neoliberal and a fascist bleeds - but they’re not the same. Under Kamala, the might have been a 10% chance at a more peaceful resolution via elections (maybe 25% if Trump died, 50% if he actually went to jail) because leftists like Mamandi could have kept running and winning some power.
But under Trump, there’s no more chance of that at all, PLUS it accelerates all the bad thing.
- Comment on Too soon? 1 week ago:
Stating not breaking laws is equivalent to doing no harm / doing nothing wrong is the logical fallacy, specifically “appeal to law”.
Saying a genocide has to happen in order for someone’s evil to be justified however, is insane. By your logic, attempted murder shouldn’t be a crime either, because no one got liked.
- Comment on Too soon? 1 week ago:
Just because you’re not a fighter doesn’t mean you’re right.
Did your dad stop because you didn’t fight back?
I’m sorry, but you sound more like my older brother than anything. Guess which one of us didn’t get beat as a teen at some point?
A bully doesn’t stop just because you’re peaceful. A psychopath doesn’t go easier on people because there’s less resistance. Even you tried violence - you think incarceration isn’t a form of violence? If you say no, you’d be saying when you got locked up in a room, that was a peaceful action then. But we both know that’s not the case, is it? Even you tried putting the fucker in a jail - just not with your own violence but with the backing of the state.
Trump nearly getting shot didn’t win him the election. Running Kamala as his opponent did, and I had told my family as much back then (this is assuming there were no electoral shenanigans).
And whether Charlie Kirk lived or died, there already has been violence against others. That’s what ICE is. That’s what the gay voice actor for King of the Hill getting killed was. That’s what Kyle Rittenhouse did.
The government is run by people like your dad. Was your dad someone who would change if nothing was done against him? What if now, you made it so he could avoid legal consequences too? What if he knew the police, the courts, etc would never touch him?
That’s what you’re dealing with.
I don’t blame you for being a coward, and thinking being peaceful will maybe make things better. Not everyone has that fire in them. My brother didn’t, and my mother didn’t for the longest time either. Some people do, some don’t. That’s not your fault. You don’t have to support those willing to fight back.
But you sure as hell don’t get to say it’s wrong for them to do so either. They fight so people like you, hopefully, one day, don’t go through the shit you did. They kill if they have to because there’s no alternative left. Had they done so much, much sooner, things wouldn’t have been as bad as they are. But the bullies have convinced the majority that docility will make things better - because having no opposition is what they want.
- Comment on Too soon? 1 week ago:
I meant past tense.
Future tense it’s too late. I meant as in under Kamala instead of Trump.
Things would still be terrible, but they’d undeniably be less terrible. There still being suffering doesn’t change that there would be less of it.
Not to mention it would slow down climate change a bit more compared to the current regime, which instead going full throttle on the gas pedal. And that’s something that affects all humans.