DomeGuy
@DomeGuy@lemmy.world
- Comment on Is it "weird" for kids to co-sleep with parents through their teenage years? 4 days ago:
You literally said you have a mental health issue (seperation anxiety) and asked if an unusual household habit might be a contributing cause.
Going to a therapist is definitely worth considering.
- Comment on How do left-leaning—or not even left-leaning, but pro-choice, pro-life people who don’t care about fornication—who are also Catholics and Christians justify their religion? 5 days ago:
The bible doesn’t say being gay is a sin. At worst, there’s an old testament law against bisexuality (that may just be about not cheating on your wife with a man), and a new testament story about God making some homophobic Romans gay to punish them.
More importantly than the ambiguity of either the old testament laws or the post-gospel epistles however are the actual techings attributed to Jesus. Each of the four gospels tells the story slightly differently, but two stories are applicable here.
The first is the story of the Mary who was neither Jesus’s mother nor bestie, but just a random Jewish girl who was caught cheating with a married man and was about to be gang-murdered by an angry mob chucking stones at her until she died. Obvious sexual sin, and apparently the customary punishment. But God essentially says “I tell you what, SURE she’s a sinner, how about y’all get someone who isn’t to start this execution right.”
( Which, when coupled with a few later passages about leaving judgement for God, honestly let’s any Christian ignore anyone else’s sin entirely.)
The second story is a bit more on point, and is contained in all four gospels as essentially the thesis of the new religion. Jesus was asked what the most important part of the law was, and he essentially said “love” twice. To love God with all that you are, and love everyone else as you love yourself. And then went on to imply that one could derive all of celestial law from just those two. Which means any Christian can and should ignore any hateful old testament law if they honestly feel it is wrong.
(Which can sound like a cop out until you get back to the “we are all sinners” point. It doesn’t matter if homosexuality or premarital sex are sins, because being a hateful jerk or judgemental ass are also sins and the only way anyone gets to avoid hell is if God decides to not give us the horrible fate we deserve.)
The Christianity I practice is a religion based around the idea that God created everything, loves us all, and really just wants us to not be dicks to each other.
There isn’t enough room in a life concerned with the “new” commandment to love everyone as we love ourselves to be a dick about anyone else’s sex life. As long as you’re honest with your lovers and do your best to not spread STDs, whether or not your seventy-five member atheistic informal polycule is sinful or not is between you and God.
- Comment on How do left-leaning—or not even left-leaning, but pro-choice, pro-life people who don’t care about fornication—who are also Catholics and Christians justify their religion? 5 days ago:
Accusing a Christian of cherry picking their political positions from the bible is like accusing a cook of cherry picking the recipe from an online story about a great date and adopting a dog.
- Comment on [deleted] 5 days ago:
Not all EVs are drive-by-wire, and not all ICVs aren’t.
- Comment on The 10 Commandments apparently mentions absolutely nothing about protecting children from abuse. 1 week ago:
A comparison of religion to legal systems is both only a sensible comparison to the three Abrahamic religions and incredibly useful for those three. (Other religions such as Buddhism are more starkly personal).
Essentially no Christian, Muslim, or Jew in any century takes the common scripture and reads it like an RPG manual for the game of life. Either they’re laypersons who rely upon the guidance of experts, or they’re the experts and they approach it with the advantage and bias of the years of study it took to become experts. And if those experts are wrong, there is always some authority to correct and rebuke their interpretation.
Ignoring the Protestant schism for a moment, this is exactly how the USA’s legal system works. The body of written law and judicial interpretation are extremely complex and nobody relies only on the plain text of the law when they want to figure out how it affects them. Even the crazy sovereign citizens mostly rely on someone else’s interpretation.
(And “sane” isn’t really a helpful label here. It encourages atheists to think about Christians as if the latter are entirely unpredictable and unreasonable, when it’s much more useful to think of us as mostly rational people who have a philosophical difference with you. More akin to the leftist/progressive/liberal/socialist discussion you can see on Lemmy than a MAGA/non-MAGA encounter.)
- Comment on The 10 Commandments apparently mentions absolutely nothing about protecting children from abuse. 1 week ago:
Do you want to have a real discussion about morality and religious teaching, or are you just in search of an gotcha quote because you feel the need to reinforce your theocratic nihilism by arguing with a theist on the internet?
- Comment on The 10 Commandments apparently mentions absolutely nothing about protecting children from abuse. 1 week ago:
I don’t feel bound by any part of the system of violent punishments that Jesus rebuked. Especially not one line which wasn’t even from either listing of the Jewish law in the Torah.
OTOH, there is something to be said for actually teaching children to behave. Using a rod to spank children is a failure of patenting, but so is letting your kid run around the restaurant making a mess because you can’t bear to rebuke them.
(And, again: Proverbs is a pre-Christian work that was incorporated by the gentike Christians when they formalized a canon for the Roman empire.)
- Comment on The 10 Commandments apparently mentions absolutely nothing about protecting children from abuse. 1 week ago:
“Jesus must be a myth because the English J was only invented in the 1500s” may well be the dumbest argument against the historical Jesus that anyone has ever made.
You are of course entirely free to doubt his divinity or the existence of God, but asseting that both the religion founded by his teachings and the 1s century rabbi were invented after Columbus’s voyage is just bad history.
- Comment on The 10 Commandments apparently mentions absolutely nothing about protecting children from abuse. 1 week ago:
The ten commandments are a old testament thing, textually written by Moses as he attempted to copy the ones God had written and that Moses shattered after the golden calf.
Christianity extended the Jewish scripture with the gospels, which include a story where God Himself Slumming As A Human was asked what the most important part of the law was, and Jesus said “love” twice.
If “love everyone as you love yourself” doesn’t lead you to not abusing children, I don’t think any book of good behavior is going to stop you.
- Comment on How do Superheroes or villians get their suits on is there like a magical zipper or something? Or how do they do it? 1 week ago:
Comic book artists are not (all) fashion designers, so the artistic leeway that also lets them render imperfect images of humanoids in fight sequences also applies to the practicality of their costumes.
Presumably said costumes are donned piecemeal, similar to how the actual costumes of cosplayets and superhero actors are donned. Spiderman and deadpool look like they’re wearing full body sewn-on gimp suits, but are “really” just wearing some overlapping layers that the artist (usually) doesn’t depict.
(Except of course for things like the venom symbiote, mystique’s shapechanging, or those weird pseudo-nudists like hulk, silver surfer, and thosd green lantern freaks…)
- Comment on The Productivity Paradox: Why Technology Makes the Economy More Efficient But Most People No Richer 2 weeks ago:
Wage theft as only “not paid what was owed according to current law” is already the biggest form of theft and the least prosecuted.
Please don’t help perpetuate capitalist exploitation by blurring it with the “value theft” inherent to capitalism
- Comment on I don't have money to pay premium to not see ads. What in the world makes you think that I have money to buy what you are advertising me? 2 weeks ago:
A bit late to the party, but… well…
If a streaming service has an ad-free tier, the ads shown aren’t really there to sell the things they advertise. Oh, sure, the buyer of the ad wants your money, but they didn’t pay a bunch to show you that ad and the revenue from the ad buy just has be “slightly higher than spam” to be worthwhile.
"Ad-Supported’ tiers exist to differentiate the higher cost points. Which is why the ads frequently aren’t aligned with natural break points in the video. And why in some cases it’s the same two or three ads shown for every artificial and clumsy break.
The ads you are seeing exist primarily as an advertisement for the ad-free tier.
- Comment on Steam :: About the New York Attorney General lawsuit against Valve 2 weeks ago:
The NY AG doesn’t generally bring criminal suits. And “was a rapist in FL and a private island” may not be enough to give anyone standing to empanel a grand jury and indict.
If you live in NY and then take a vacation in Texas during which you open carry a AR15 and then “self defense” somebody at the Alamo who called you a Yankee, there wouldn’t be much NY could do if the local DA accepted your defense.
- Comment on Bluesky CEO Jay Graber Is Stepping Down 2 weeks ago:
That’s why bsky’s pseudo-federation isn’t as big a deal as some ActivityPub boosters claim.
As I understand it, if lemmy.world shuts down or starts demanding cash my only resource would be the same as if Facebook decides I’m too critical of billionaires – start all over elsewhere with a new account. Sure, I could get close to the same experience with a different node, but I’d be a brand new account with no history. I might as well go someplace else entirely.
Bsky’s “portable user” idea fixes that. There are accounts my bsky account follows who switched to blacksky, and if they hadn’t said they’d changed I wouldn’t have noticed. The essential identity of their account shifted almost seamlessly, and they “federate” with everyone else, aside that their appview shows accounts that bsky’s ordinary moderation hides.
I don’t have any illusions about how altruistic the cryptobro VC’s are. But the entirely of their value proposition is that “leaving bsky” should be about as painless as porting your number from Verizon to AT&T.
- Comment on Bluesky CEO Jay Graber Is Stepping Down 2 weeks ago:
The claimed reason for that is to highlight “referrer” links for the sites people go to from bsky.
My understanding is that if you click like www.themarysue.com the website operators would see a “feddit.org” or “lemmy.world” referer if you’re using a web browser and don’t have a defeating option enabled, but not if your browser is locked down or you use an app. The immediate redirects, however, do consistently show in the web site’s access logs.
It’s possible bsky could fuck around with this in the future, but doing so risks just sending users to a pseudo-fork like blacksky.
- Comment on Valve Sued By The Performing Rights Society Over Music Rights in Games Valve Doesn’t Make or Own 2 weeks ago:
You’re right about the effect (lawsuits and the threat of the same are more common in America than Canada or the UK) but not at all about the cause.
The USA has had a decades-long choice to have our industry regulated primarily not through government bureaucracy but instead judicial liability. en.wikipedia.org/…/Regulation_through_litigation
- Comment on Three questions about California AB1043 C. 675 3 weeks ago:
So, if I understand right, basically they assume its correct unless given significant evidence otherwise?
That’s how it reads to me this morning. Assuming by “given” you meant “they have at all”.
So like, if this flag is enabled and I visit a website and don’t directly provide personal information, then they have to assume I am a child under CCPA and thus can’t share my data. Right?
Based on the CA AG’s page at www.oag.ca.gov/privacy/ccpa , I don’t see how “the browser reports the user as a child” gives a substantial additional burden on website developers. Presumably, the most they’d have to do to comply is use the flag to change “do you agree for yourself” to “PARENT OR GUARDIAN: Do you agree for the user of this account…”
I’m missing the part where an adult setting their age category incorrectly for themselves would do more than get a stronger porn block and a bunch of “go get your parent” pop-ups instead of “click here if you’re over 18.”
Presumably, if Microsoft and Google and Apple don’t get the Digital Age Assurance Act blocked in court, we could see a broad adoption of it as a way to skip paying for third-party age validation for sites like Reddit, BlueSky, and Lemmy, and all of the porn sites on the internet would just ask for the flag in lieu of their current “do we have a cookie where this user clicked that they’re at least 18” code.
- Comment on Three questions about California AB1043 C. 675 3 weeks ago:
Not a lawyer, answers based on legiscan.com/CA/text/AB1043/2025
- Under section 1798.501. (b) 4A, wouldn’t this make collection of almost any system information illegal?
No. Because the terms are defined in 1798.500. They can ask your system directly whatever they want; they just can’t ask Microsofg, Apple, or Google for correlating specifics.
- Since 1798.501. (b) 2A seems to require that developers that receive this age flag treat assume it is true, this would at least apply to CCPA, and California Civil Code, right?
Yes, but only insomuch as laws that protect minors impose additional constraints on those who have “actual knowledge” that a user is actually a child.
It doesn’t mean they need to trust the OS flag if they have suoerior knowledge as to someone’s actual age. If I ask a child to contact Imgur to delete my account they’d block out my porn stash but otherwise treat the request as any other “delete an adult’s account” request.
- Would 1798.501. (b) 2A also apply to COPPA? I know this is state versus federal law, but…
Statr law can expand upon federal law but not contradict. And it smells like AB1043 is more “add a more explicit signal of user age” than anything affecting data retention relating to children.
What part do you think is contradictory?
- Comment on Labor market impacts of AI: A new measure and early evidence 3 weeks ago:
“Actual coverage is less than what’s theoretically possible” is a hell of a way of saying "these things aren’t good enough (yet) to actually replace real people ".
- Comment on How to I prove to someone that the U.S. moon landing wasn't staged? 3 weeks ago:
a) Explain why the US hasn’t gone back in so long, and why with modern technology it seems so difficult?
Going to the moon is expensive and has essentially no direct revenue. There are no resources to be had on the moon that provide worthwhile efficiency over what we already have on earth, and most of the basic science was done by the Apollo missions.
How do you verify moon rocks without having actually been on the moon? How did scientists figure out what a moon rock looks like?
Getting moon rocks, which have a unique microscopic texture due to no water erosion, was one of those “basic science” bits I mentioned before. They don’t really prove the moon landing except that “they’re from the moon” is the simplest answer for why these rocks have that unique texture.
Why aren’t the old Apollo designs being reused for a moon landing? (by either the Americans or the Chinese)
Because thre 1960s were fifty years ago.
The industrial base to build an Apollo rocket isn’t there anymore than the industrial base to build a 1965 Buick skylark or an Atati 2600. You could throw money and rebuild all those factories, but it’d dramatically balloon the cost even before you start to recon with correcting the inevitable mismatch between the original spec and what your rebuilt factory can make.
(And even if we did just rebuild Apollo, we’d wind up with a rocket that didn’t have the advantage of 50 years of advancement.)
- Comment on We already passed 1984's prediction of the future: "If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face--forever" 3 weeks ago:
1984 is an anti-tyranny dystopia that has more bad readings than any other work I can think of.
The essential problem isn’t new-speak, the five minute hate, constant war, one-party rule, rat-based psychotorture, or even ubiquitous surveillance. Rather, it’s the abandonment of truth. It’s not nearly so bad if Big Brother is Watching, except that Big Brother lies.
(And Orwell wasn’t even inventing the danger out of whole cloth: both the German Nazi and Russian Communist tyrannies had well trod the path of internal propaganda and historical revisionism)
((AND you don’t have to squint all that hard to argure that 1984’s Britian was most plausibly a pariah state that didn’t actually have any power beyond its aquatic border…))
Like nearly all science fiction, 1984 wasn’t so much written about its future as it was written about the past.
- Comment on What do you think of Paramount merging with Warner Bros. Discovery to create a new media company? 4 weeks ago:
This is a billionaire buying the good name of trusted companies so he can have a propaganda house that isn’t obviously such.
- Comment on Did I discover a fake conspiracy theory? 4 weeks ago:
Like the woman who sued macdonalds for getting third degree burns because their coffee was too hot.
Please never mention this story without pointing out at least one of the following;
- The coffee was hot enough to cause crippling burns to her genitals.
- McDonald’s intentionally had their coffee too hot to drink to keep customers from hanging out
- the woman only asked for medical expenses and did not sue until her complaint was ignored.
- the eye-popping headline number was calculated as something like one day of the company’s coffee profit.
There literally isn’t an instance of a US company being sued by a customer more deserving of empathy and horror.
- Comment on Can I get some support rn please 4 weeks ago:
Oof, girl. (?)
While I’m not a doctor, I’d expect that 60 hours of fasting would have as great an effect on your brain as several alcoholic drinks. Of course you’d be struggling with impulse control afterwards!
It’s a huge accomplishment to just say “wow, I did something I don’t like having done and don’t want to do it.” I’d still have an older brother if fully grown adults were universally capable of saying “I should stop this” and then doing just that.
From your last several posts I’d guess that you’re trying a ketogrnic diet / intermittent fasting for weight loss reasons. If so, remember that the length of a fast or time-on-diet doesn’t matter nearly as much as your weekly caloric net. Maybe plan for how you want your fast to end, so you’re not figuring out something with a glucose-starved brain?
Whatever the case, you seem brave and strong and are definitely worth this. A setback isn’t a failure, just a discovery of some way that doesn’t quite work. :)
- Comment on LibreOffice blasts 'fake open source' OnlyOffice for working with Microsoft to lock users in 5 weeks ago:
You’re the first account I’ve seen endorse OpenOffice, and I’ve been casually looking for a better alternative to word since the copilot bullshit last year.
Do you have a good example of something they added since LibreOffice forked off that’s worth considering if choosing an alternative?
- Comment on Extreme wealth inequality is baked in to the system 5 weeks ago:
Any work that wouldn’t be done if we had a UBI should either be automated away or sufficiently well-paid that it would find workers even without the threat of poverty.
We don’t need to ritually kill a homeless person just so someone will pick up our trash any more than we need to do so for someone to tended to our elders dying of cancer.
- Comment on Before AI, the better technology was the less valuable eye witness became. In the future, the better AI technology gets the more valuable eye witness will be. 5 weeks ago:
*Tell me you’ve never encountered a real courtroom without telling me never encountered a real courtroom… *
Our legal systems have long required things like “chain of custody” and “corroborating evidence” for essentially any claim. Because in essentially any instance where the opposing sides dispute a question of fact they need to convince a mildly annoyed rando that things happened a certain way while the other team is arguing that it’s all a hoax.
They generally skip all that in courtroom dramas and even broadcasted courtrooms, because the very first phase of any trial is discovery where both sides show some or all of their cards to try and convince the other team to fold.
AI slop is hardly the first time someone invented a new tool for faking evidence. Heck, we had a whole industry based on faking video evidence before the first surveilance camera was ever installed.
(There’s a huge possibility for slander and fraud that the general public should wise up to, but starting with an assumption that evidence is fake unless proven otherwise is kinda how things go.)
(And, yes, the big hole here is that “best avaliable” evidence is often nonsense. ACAB and all that. My point is just that fake evidence isn’t a dangerous new invention courts have never seen before.)
- Comment on Is it possible that none of this is real? 5 weeks ago:
Sex is way too enjoyable for this to be a poorly coded simulation.
I think you just saw someone who needs either a break or some better mental health care.
- Comment on If a time traveller posts a video from future, it would probably be tagged as AI generated video 5 weeks ago:
Causality is just determinists starting with “time travel is impossible” and finding a fancy name for it.
I don’t want to say they’re wrong, just that asserting casualty in a discussion about time travel being impossible is kinda like asserting Godwin’s Law in a discussion about whether or not Trump’s a nazi.
- Comment on YSK that if you hesitate between Ketchup and Mustard, you should pick Mustard. It's healthier. 1 month ago:
When the USA was civilized we required every food sold to the public to list its nutritional information.
calories-info.com/mustard-vs-ketchup/
100g of ketchup or mustard both have about 100 calories, with ketchup getting more of those calories from carbohydrates and much less from fat.
Even if you make your own ketchup or buy a no-sugar added brand, it still has a fair amount of carbohydrates. And a substantial amount of salt.
tools.myfooddata.com/nutrition-facts/2594364/…/1
Both are worth including if you’re calorie counting. (And don’t necessarily trust the per-serving size label, since if they set that low enough they can round down and claim a 100% fat cooking spray is 0 calories. We only used to be civilized.)