damnedfurry
@damnedfurry@lemmy.world
- Comment on Transcribed text of Samantha Fulnecky's assignment, paper, and professor's comments 20 hours ago:
I will deduct 10 points if your paper is between 620 and 649 words
Before I read the rest of this sentence, I thought some goofy troll grading was going on, lol
- Comment on In 2015, the Fortingall Yew, one of the oldest trees in Europe, decided trans rights are tree rights and switched its sex to female 🏳️⚧️ eat shit transphobes 1 week ago:
🤓 Being trans has to do with gender identity, not sex. The whole foundation of transgenderism as a concept is that sex and gender identity are independent elements of a person. So as a corollary (I think, haven’t used that word in a while lol), no non-sapient creature can ever be trans, because you need consciousness to have a gender identity in the first place.
- Comment on I think there's an imposter amongus 1 week ago:
Suddenly remembered Mitch Hedberg saying on stage, after some of his newer material didn’t land as well, “My old shit’s better than my new shit~”
- Comment on It just keeps getting worse - Firefox to "evolve into a modern AI browser" 1 week ago:
When Firefox started recording key strokes
Source? That’s news to me, and when I tried finding a source myself, all I found were extensions etc. to add that to the browser.
- Comment on The Enshittification of Plex Is Kicking Off, Starting with Free Roku Users 3 weeks ago:
The pricing model hasn’t changed.
Doesn’t enshittification also entail the removal/reduction of previously-existing features/functionality?
- Comment on Elon Musk Had Grok Rewrite Wikipedia. It Calls Hitler “The Führer.” 3 weeks ago:
Is there another more ‘generic’ German term that would fit when talking about this period of time in retrospect? So you could have one line that says the German equivalent of ‘he was the leader in Germany during this time period, commonly referred to by the title Fuhrer’, and then no need to keep using “Fuhrer” anymore in the rest of the article.
- Comment on Women and men and consensual sex 4 weeks ago:
Combine that with some rape cases that get swept under the rug with phrases like, “boys will be boys,” “she was asking for it,” or even something as outright cruel as “it’s the only way she’d get laid anyways,” and yeah, where OP is coming from isn’t too hard to understand.
And yet, cases of male victims of female rapists get “swept under the rug” basically 100% of the time, but the outrage toward that is non-existent, even though the also-swept-under-the-rug fact is that women rape men just as often as men rape women:
And now the real surprise: when asked about experiences in the last 12 months, men reported being “made to penetrate”—either by physical force or due to intoxication—at virtually the same rates as women reported rape (both 1.1 percent in 2010, and 1.7 and 1.6 respectively in 2011).
In other words, if being made to penetrate someone was counted as rape—and why shouldn’t it be?—then the headlines could have focused on a truly sensational CDC finding: that women rape men as often as men rape women.
The whole reason a woman raping a man isn’t simply called “rape” in these statistics is because of successful explicitly anti-male lobbying by feminists like Mary Koss, and NOW, who don’t think it “counts” as rape when the man is the victim of a woman.
As one of these male victims of a female rapist, it’s always extremely frustrating to see women complaining to men about things like under-reporting, or men who get away with it, when it’s so much more of a problem with the sexes reversed that the average person believes that it is something that is literally impossible. A boy got molested by his female teacher, and she won child support from him! Could you in a million years imagine a male rapist achieving such a legal judgment from a girl he molested?
- Comment on Linux gamers on Steam finally cross over the 3% mark 1 month ago:
The vast majority of the increase, is what I said. In other words, I’m saying it wouldn’t be nearly at the 3% mark without those users, and with over a quarter of all Linux users coming from the Steam Deck userbase, that is, in fact, true.
- Comment on Linux gamers on Steam finally cross over the 3% mark 1 month ago:
Just boot the computer, choose which DE you want to install
Yeah, that’s not at all accessible to the average consumer; they don’t know what a “DE” even is, much less why they should choose any over any other.
Very, very few people want to deal with something other than a ‘just works’ situation.
- Comment on Linux gamers on Steam finally cross over the 3% mark 1 month ago:
I think it will continue to rise. People are updating their rigs all the time. Whenever they update their rig they’ll have to ask themselves whether they want to continue with Windows on their new rig, or try with something new.
The vast majority of this increase is from people playing on Steam Decks, which run on Linux, not from people switching to Linux on their PCs.
If it continues to rise, this is the reason. The general public is less and less into using a desktop at all as time goes on, much less running, and much less changing to, an extremely niche operating system on one.
- Comment on Oh no my harvest is too bountiful 1 month ago:
cis he/him
insert ‘I’m gonna pre’ compilation
- Comment on Investors are making up the highest share of homebuyers in 5 years 2 months ago:
Yes, and my rent covers literally all of them.
So, nothing’s keeping you from buying a house then, since what you already pay in rent covers all of the cost. Right?
I should not be forced to pay a premium for a feature I will never use.
Why haven’t you bought a house already, then? Could it be that it doesn’t just cost what you pay in rent each month?
- Comment on Investors are making up the highest share of homebuyers in 5 years 2 months ago:
No, I will not define basic fucking terms for you.
Then don’t be surprised when people read the terms and use the definition 99% of people use in 99% of situations, and not the fringe academic definition you’re thinking of, and misunderstand what you’re trying to say.
Grow up.
If you are too ignorant to understand the difference between personal and private property when it comes to systemic analysis of our systems of ownership, the. You’re too fucking ignorant to have an argument with.
You’re so mad you couldn’t even keep track of where you’re ending and starting sentences, lol.
Imagine being this furious over something that’s entirely your fault.
Also, fuck you, I’m autistic and I’ll communicate how I fucking please, shitheel.
So am I, so what? Stop making excuses—how you communicate is your responsibility, no one else’s. You have zero justification for throwing a tantrum like this, over the fact that the vast majority of people consider “private property” and “personal property” to have identical meaning, and not the obscure academia-specific definition you’re using.
P.S. I hope you realize one day that you will never change anyone’s mind on anything, speaking to people this way.
- Comment on Investors are making up the highest share of homebuyers in 5 years 2 months ago:
The concept of someone having enough money to rent but not enough to own is ghoulish in the first place.
Don’t think you’re being a little dramatic? There are many more costs involved in owning a house than the mortgage payment.
If my landlord can pay $<1,200 for this house’s mortgage and upkeep, and I can pay $1,200 a month for the right to sleep in it, then we should simply cut out the middle man and have me pay that $<1,200 a month for mortgage and upkeep directly.
You’re paying for not having the responsibility to pay for any maintenance/repairs upfront, and for having the ability to easily pack up and move on short notice. If the roof suddenly needs replacing, that’s $9500 on average that you have to pay right now.
Chances are, if you’re financially stable enough that you’d be able to handle things like that without it being a financial catastrophe for you, then you do have enough money to own.
- Comment on Investors are making up the highest share of homebuyers in 5 years 2 months ago:
Holy bad faith Batman.
Pointing out that what you’re saying doesn’t make sense isn’t bad faith.
For the love of God, go read fucking theory
How about ‘for the love of God, define your fucking terms’, if you’re using them in a way inconsistent with colloquial understanding?
No one in everyday life considers “personal property” and “private property” to not be the exact same thing. Stop playing semantic games and communicate normally, if you expect to ever sway anyone. It also helps not to insult people not privy to said semantic games.
If you live in the house, it becomes your personal property. Meaning you own it while you live and reside there. No one can just come into your personal space. Yet, when you no longer wish to live there and are moving away, the house transfers ownership back to the community until someone needs it.
So:
- How, exactly, is it being determined who gets to live there first/next?
- If none of the residents are actually purchasing the house, who’s footing the bill for them all? I’m seeing estimates that the total residential housing in the US carries a value in the area of $45 trillion, with a T. You think you’re getting anywhere near that with tax revenue? And that’s without even considering new construction and repairs to existing construction.
- Comment on Investors are making up the highest share of homebuyers in 5 years 2 months ago:
Housing, and other necessities, should be community property…Fuck the exploitative system of private property ownership.
So you’d want it to be the case that anyone can enter and live in the house you’re living in, and you have no say in the matter because you don’t own it?
Do you really see no massive problems with such a system?
- Comment on Investors are making up the highest share of homebuyers in 5 years 2 months ago:
It’s not that complicated. Without landlords, there is no renting. Without renting, owning is the only way to have a place to live.
So without renting, if you can’t own, you have no place to live.
- Comment on Investors are making up the highest share of homebuyers in 5 years 2 months ago:
It’s impossible to prevent anything of significant value that can be owned from becoming a “financial vehicle” to some extent. This is idealism with no practical application.
- Comment on Investors are making up the highest share of homebuyers in 5 years 2 months ago:
place limits on how many properties they can own as well, plus also close loopholes like using LLC / some kind of other shady company to buy more houses.
This is a cat and mouse game that the law, glacially paced as it is, can never win. The tax strategy suggested would be much more effective.
- Comment on Investors are making up the highest share of homebuyers in 5 years 2 months ago:
If repeating your meaningless slogan is the only response you can muster to someone actually trying to offer substantive explanation, you’re the one that lacks understanding, whether willfully or not.
Writing it in all caps only further emphasizes this.
- Comment on Investors are making up the highest share of homebuyers in 5 years 2 months ago:
So everyone who has enough money to rent, but not enough to own, should be homeless? That middle ground of renting has to exist, or we’re overall in a much worse state of affairs. And you can’t rent unless there is a homeowner to rent from.
Also, a lot of people deliberately choose renting over owning, because they value things like not having the financial burden of home repairs, or it being orders of magnitude easier to relocate, for whatever reason, and so on.
- Comment on Charlie Kirk says gun deaths "unfortunately" worth it to keep 2nd amendment 3 months ago:
Sure whatever man. It’s not that important.
You thought it was important enough to say in the first place (and also double down once after your error was already made crystal clear).
Is it really that hard to just genuinely accept being wrong about something without the asinine passive-aggression? Grow up.
- Comment on Charlie Kirk says gun deaths "unfortunately" worth it to keep 2nd amendment 3 months ago:
That is not advocating for people to be shot, and I have a feeling you know that and are just being obtuse.
An actual equivalent analogy to what you quoted would be saying that we shouldn’t ban a sport just because some people get hurt playing it. If someone said that, would you claim they’re advocating for players of that sport to get hurt?
Of course not. Use your brain.
- Comment on Charlie Kirk says gun deaths "unfortunately" worth it to keep 2nd amendment 3 months ago:
Not LAMF unless he was explicitly advocating for others to be shot.
Hence ‘voted for leopards eating faces party, didn’t expect them to eat my face’.
- Comment on Computer Science, a popular college major, has one of the highest unemployment rates 3 months ago:
I’ve got a worthless degree i deeply regret
Meanwhile, not far from this comment chain is someone claiming no one regrets getting their degree, lol.
- Comment on A real question about trans athletes and records 3 months ago:
were those numbers perhaps cherry-picked to make the situation look more dramatic than it actually is?
If anyone can go from 554th to 5th in any sport/event just by competing among the other sex, nothing else changing, then that obviously indicates something. You can’t handwave that away.
Her personal 100m freestyle time dropping less than a quarter of a second post-transition is honestly a bigger indicator that transition is not making a substantial difference, because that angle completely removes the ‘chance’ element in your opponents being different people.
- Comment on A real question about trans athletes and records 3 months ago:
The very fact that their ranking is lower than what it should be is an issue in and of itself, your disingenuous mockery notwithstanding.
- Comment on A real question about trans athletes and records 3 months ago:
The question is fair, but so very few people are affected, who cares?
The vast majority of people are never murdered, either. But I’m sure it matters to them and their loved ones.
It’s an extreme example for the analogy, but the point stands: it doesn’t follow that a bad thing being rare makes it less bad. This is not a valid argument against.
- Comment on A real question about trans athletes and records 3 months ago:
My understanding is that there is absolutely no evidence that trans women have an advantage.
Going from 554th place pre-transition to 5th place post-transition doesn’t line up with that claim.
- Comment on A real question about trans athletes and records 3 months ago:
The fact that the University of Pennsylvania swimmer [Lia Thomas] soared from a mid-500s ranking (554th in the 200 freestyle; all divisions) in men’s competition to one of the top-ranked swimmers in women’s competition tells the story
In the 100 freestyle, Thomas’ best time prior to her transition was 47.15. At the NCAA Championships, she posted a prelims time in the event of 47.37. That time reflects minimal mitigation of her male-puberty advantage.
During the last season Thomas competed as a member of the Penn men’s team, which was 2018-19, she ranked 554th in the 200 freestyle, 65th in the 500 freestyle and 32nd in the 1650 freestyle. As her career at Penn wrapped, she moved to fifth, first and eighth in those respective events on the women’s deck.
It may not be an issue to you, but it’s an issue to every woman whose ranking is lower as a result. I imagine it especially hurts if you’re pushed out of first place in that way.