TipsyMcGee

@TipsyMcGee@lemmy.dbzer0.com

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨A conundrum⁩ ⁨⁨11⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago⁩:

  Would have been standard fare in Sweden until recently, but that’s obviously an outlier

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨A conundrum⁩ ⁨⁨11⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago⁩:

  Surely, this depends a lot on what market you’re in. If you’re in a very expensive area and need to take a big loan with a high fixed rate, I can see that being the case but renting the equivalent place would probably be extremely expensive too.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Trump posted this in Truth.⁩ ⁨⁨15⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago⁩:

  What happens in 2028 exactly?

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨It's been downhill since 2020⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago⁩:

  Everything that’s happened in the since around 1900 is an extreme outlier in the history of humanity. Nothing’s been normal.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Say hello to Bary⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago⁩:

  If we’re strict, being right is always being right. If we’re not strict, wouldn’t that imply that being wrong “for the right reasons” is being right?

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Say hello to Bary⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago⁩:

  Since definitions are not facts, the word factoid itself being a factoid is a factoid

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Practice makes perfect⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago⁩:

  I didn’t even realize I was doing therapy, you inbred fucking idiot

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨The duality of man⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago⁩:

  In the first panel both are, somewhat vapidly, disagreeing based on their respective perspectives on objective reality (vapid because they both fail to see that it very clearly is a curled up sperm!)

  In the second panel, one has broken with reality and the other is unwavering in their obsession with an out of scope issue. Meanwhile, the third: the artist or the viewer that shares neither perspective, is alienated because the plainly visible sperm doesn’t even matter anymore.

  It’s not about whether they agree about anything. It’s about sperm.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Shitpost⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago⁩:

  It’s 11.11 here, is that supposed to mean something?

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Are you not entertained?⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  It’s possible to not give a fuck about Taylor Swift, but still care about her and her fellow billionaires outright destroying the world while glitzy magazines treat them as main characters in a soap opera, just going about their glamorous exploits and intrigue. It is fucking stupid to celebrate Taylor Swift’s anything, for as long as she remains a prime example of everything that is going wrong in the world: massive hoarding of wealth in a winner takes all economy obsessed with intangible assets (notably bands and song rights), excessive personal consumption and burning of fossil fuels, hyper commercialized culture mostly void of artistic expression.

  I don’t mind people that like her songs, but I’m fairly certain Swifties should be designated a death cult.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Why aren't you creating more workers??⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  The UK is just ahead of the curve

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Why aren't you creating more workers??⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  The proliferation of unathorized opinions is threatening democracy! Doubleplus ungood.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Argentina wants to monitor social media with AI to ‘predict future crimes’⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Every country is moving towards this and there is no fucking stopping it, it seems.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Big Balls Clapped⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  I’m not from the US, but I’m pretty sure that’s just for shooting up schools and raiding non-existent pedo dungeons underneath pizza parlors.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Phosphorus⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Before, he’d have to explain that “well, formally, I’m not a doctor”.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Finally a washing machine that understands me⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Moot, these are just sub-variants of the Swedish language.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Chat Control is back & we've got two months to stop the EU CSAM scanning plans.⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  You are right that there are no perfect democracies, but the EU really isn’t even close. Rather the EU should foremost be considered a technocracy with some formal democratic underwriting.

  In most cases, that’s totally fine and not a problem in terms of democracy. Most policies, especially in the matters the EU was originally formed to make decisions on, there isn’t a huge interest for citizens to get involved – national interests (governments) and organized interest/lobby groups usually offer enough avenues for input on things like technical agricultural export standards. However, as the Union expands into things like organizing mass surveillance under flimsy pretexts, and whatnot, private citizens aren’t adequately represented – a stronger popular mandate is required for the decisionmaking to truly be considered democratic.

  Formally, I, as a citizen of an EU member state, can influence the decisions of the EU in two ways: By voting for my country’s parliament every fourth year and by voting in the general elections for European Parliament every fifth. So let’s examine how far that goes.

  Where I live, the main opposition party and the largest government party generally agree on most controversial issues pertaining to privacy or individual rights, e.g. Chat Control. Together these parties control a majority of the seats of parliament. Those parties gain the bulk of their support on domestic issues, such as tax policy, crime prevention, etcetera. Thus, question like Chat Control are essentially dead on arrival in terms of parliamentary politics. Now, my country is also not a perfect democracy, but comparatively it would (justly) rank quite high and parties can be responsive to popular opinion and outcries. So let’s say a citizen group managed to put Chat Control on the agenda, to the point where parties feel vulnerable on the issue. What then? Then that amounts to one vote out of 27 in the European Council, which is only meaningful when that is enough for a veto.

  But the ubiquitous vetoes are what truly undermines the EU’s standing as a democracy, in my opinion. Notably, vetoes are pretty much the best you can get from your EP vote as well, in terms of the parliament’s decision making powers. In reality, the only thing citizens of the EU can rally behind is stopping proposals by, chiefly, the supreme technocratic body, the Commission. There is no cross-border party mechanism with pan-European campaigning on the council level. Voters do not influence majorities. And on the EP level the party mechanism, built on “political groups”, is opaque and not truly cross-border. Cohesive citizen involvement is foreign to the EU decision making process.

  That is not to say that the EU is a nefarious body, or that the democratic deficiencies are intended to alienate EU citizens from the decision process. It’s just that it is glaring, especially in the context of Chat Control, that public opinion isn’t in the driver’s seat.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨How would you know if you ate a bad prune?⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  Always keep a spare monkey on hand

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Thinkpad for the win⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  I dunno man, I’ve made it a point of pride to be rough with my Macbook over the years. They hold up well to repeated beatings and last a long time. I’d rate my 2017 Macbook Pro as hardier than the Thinkpad X1 Carbon I had as a company computer for my last job. And the MacBook might have been cheaper new too.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨X (Twitter) is down in worldwide outage.⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:

  That place is just flabbergasting nowadays. Click almost anywhere and you’re greeted with colorful descriptions of jews and any other kind of bat shit overt comicbook bad guy levelf of absurd racism. Anywhere. What is it’s utillity even?