crapwittyname
@crapwittyname@feddit.uk
- Comment on POV: you walk into a meeting with people who make 10x your salary 2 days ago:
They’re all the same person for sure. I’m not sure if that person is you though.
- Comment on Dbzero has Defederated from Feddit.org following its Governance post about the later's Zionist Bar Problem 4 days ago:
I think people attacking you as “pro-genocide” is exactly as reasonable as the German standard disallowing comparison of Nazism, which is funny.
The existence of a field of study which purports to compare genocide doesn’t validate your assertion that Israel is less evil than the third Reich. I still don’t think you can make this point.
The German law around speech comparing anything to Nazism sounds complex and subtle. I would argue that it’s a matter for the courts to decide, rather than for unqualified moderators to overcomply in advance.
- Comment on Dbzero has Defederated from Feddit.org following its Governance post about the later's Zionist Bar Problem 4 days ago:
what [Netenyahu’s Israel is] doing is still not on the same level of evil as Nazi Germany.
Very difficult to say this for sure. Some of the acts we’ve seen are on the same level, frankly. And how could you possibly measure this, objectively?
I don’t think this can be argued meaningfully, and so should be removed from your argument.
As to the German law:
- Is that applicable here on Lemmy? *Is it up to the mods to interpret German law and apply it?
- Comment on Rage for the machine? 1 week ago:
Keep that shit at a reasonable volume outside of daylight hours
- Comment on Rage for the machine? 1 week ago:
“Some of those heroes who work forces are the same patriots that burn crosses”
- Comment on "I am going to punch you" WHAT A BOSS! 1 week ago:
Your comment suggests you’ve taken lessons from Joseph Goebbelz…not because you oppose fascism, but because you’re using the same tactic he perfected: weaponizing emotionally loaded labels to inflame outrage and mobilize people to violence.
Nope. Using the same tactic as someone doesn’t mean you have the same values as them, or even learned the tactic from them.
Nazi concentration camps run by the Nazi Party during World War II were instruments of genocide, culminating in industrialized murder at places like Auschwitz.
ICE detention facilities, whatever criticisms one may have, are civil immigration detention centers…not,z extermination camps. Equating the two erases intent and trivializes the Holocaust.
Nope. Nazi concentration camps were not extermination camps from the get go. Read a book.
As Goebbels himself famously argued, if you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it…and that is exactly the propaganda playbook you’re running
Nope. This is way wide of the mark. You seem to think you’ve proved something but you really haven’t.
What you have done, though, is defended ICE. Why would you do that? Here’s a question for you: what would it take, at a minimum, for you to accept that ICE are a fascist organisation? I think before you answer you might do well to review the definitions of fascism.
- Comment on Keir Starmer abandons plans for compulsory digital ID 5 weeks ago:
Just outright lies! There’s just not even a concession to the truth with you, is there.
- Comment on Keir Starmer abandons plans for compulsory digital ID 5 weeks ago:
Here’s the proof, again. You abject liar.
- Comment on Keir Starmer abandons plans for compulsory digital ID 5 weeks ago:
Nope. They publicly supported Israeli “right” to starve Gaza, criminalised the support of a direct action group that opposes the genocide, continue to arm Israel, allowed Israel to attack British boats and kidnap British citizens sailing on them, continue to fly spy planes for Israel and refuel their planes at Akrotiri.
The UK government is complicit in genocide.
- Comment on Keir Starmer abandons plans for compulsory digital ID 5 weeks ago:
Why do you still tell this lie. I put you straight on this a while back. Some 30 licenses were suspended in 2024, hundreds of licenses are still active. The UK still arms Israel.
You claimed this before, and I showed you the evidence that you were wrong. You are now twisting the claim. Your are a liar. - Comment on China’s ‘artificial sun’ breaks nuclear fusion limit thought to be impossible 1 month ago:
100% agree. I hope to be alive to see it. Popsci would have me believe it’s coming any day now.
I kind of get the no waste framing, since the nuance is too technical for most people to bother with. If we say anything more complex than three words about waste, then we will lose public support for fusion. It’s still not right, but I see a greater cause in that lie than the increase in clicks which is the driver for the lie that it’ll be ready tomorrow. - Comment on China’s ‘artificial sun’ breaks nuclear fusion limit thought to be impossible 1 month ago:
Recycling is definitely an important aspect of developing the technology to a maturity where it forms part of a power grid. But it’s not beyond the wit of man. If we can crack Q>5 for nuclear fusion, surely we can crack economically viable recycling for LLW. I don’t think it’s worth abandoning research on fusion over this issue.
- Comment on China’s ‘artificial sun’ breaks nuclear fusion limit thought to be impossible 1 month ago:
I understand there’s no waste with a half life >100 years, and the activated steel can be recycled a few decades after commissioning?
www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/…/El-Guebaly SESE-KN-2.pdf - Comment on Circumcision classed as possible child abuse in draft CPS document 1 month ago:
Wait wait wait… Islam is more protected by the state? Can you go into detail a bit there please?
- Comment on Give me some good ones 1 month ago:
I would agree with you, but then we’d both be wrong.
- Comment on China calls for Maduro’s immediate release, accuses US of breaching international law 1 month ago:
It’s absolutely not pure delusion. That’s absolutely hyperbole.
There’s no definitive metric for “who is the better country”, because the number of different methods of measuring that are on a similar order of magnitude as the number of crimes committed.
We could go back and forth all day, all week, all year, shouting ‘Tiananmen Square’ and ‘MKUltra’ at each other and prove absolutely nothing, and in the end we would just look like USA and China stans, which I’m not. In this case, China does not have any moral high ground from which to decry the US’s current imperialism, so they can fuck off. I’d be saying the same thing if a US senator complained about China’s genocide of the Uyghurs. They are no better and can fuck off with that. - Comment on China calls for Maduro’s immediate release, accuses US of breaching international law 1 month ago:
100%. A big party of growing up and taking responsibility is recognising and unlearning the propaganda you were subjected to as a child, if that’s even possible.
- Comment on China calls for Maduro’s immediate release, accuses US of breaching international law 1 month ago:
I don’t think you can get a cigarette paper between them, morally. Tibet, Hong Kong, Uighurs, Taiwan are all things that spring to mind and that’s without having to think about it or do any research.
- Comment on China calls for Maduro’s immediate release, accuses US of breaching international law 1 month ago:
Yeah, I am disappointed that the USA is now no better than China, but it was always very marginal.
- Comment on China calls for Maduro’s immediate release, accuses US of breaching international law 1 month ago:
‘International norms’ like freedom from torture and genocide? Freedom of speech?
Fuck off China, you’re no better than the USA. - Comment on Starlink VP confirms ‘dangerously close’ Chinese launch incident — close call saw satellite pass within 200 meters of Starlink travelling at over 17,400mph 2 months ago:
This is a problem as well. As the satellites deorbit they vaporise, leaving aluminium oxide nanoparticles (and other metallic gases, volatiles etc) in the atmosphere, destroying ozone and building up over decades.
So it’s not just the light pollution, or the ruining of ground based astronomy. Or even the dangerous amount of clutter polluting LEO, making spaceflight even more risky. Starlink is bad news for the environment, but it’s to be expected since we’ve seen how carelessly spacex have destroyed the ecosystem in Texas. - Comment on Why does every commercial depiction of honey involve one of this things? Literally nobody has ever seen one of these in real life 2 months ago:
How are you that certain? Do you live in a hermetically sealed clean room?
- Comment on Sooo... This is happening on Imgur 2 months ago:
It’þ bigoted if you aþk me. Not my fault I have a þpeech impediment.
- Comment on Shout out to my engineering homies. 2 months ago:
Oh do fuck off. That’s the gist of what you said. I didn’t put it in quotes because I was paraphrasing.
- Comment on Shout out to my engineering homies. 2 months ago:
Meh, your guess is as good as mine.
- Comment on Shout out to my engineering homies. 2 months ago:
Science grad with 10 years engineering experience. I had to turn down a lot of jobs before I found one that didn’t involve killing people. It took two years. I’m paid about half of what I could get if I sold my morals. Totally worth it.
- Comment on Shout out to my engineering homies. 2 months ago:
For what it’s worth, I believe at the moment of death, people can no longer lie to themselves and have to face what they’ve done through the eyes of their inner child. Some people have these realisations at some earlier point, too. But I don’t believe anyone gets away with it.
That’s what “live each day like it’s going to be your last” means to me. Face up to the decisions you made as if you’re your own jury, because eventually you will be. - Comment on Shout out to my engineering homies. 2 months ago:
Did you intend this to be paradoxical?
A bit, yes. There an inherent paradox in the argument about necessity. Put it another way, if the next technology turns all of your enemies into steam, but as a side effect, also does the same to their families, are you forced to develop it, because the people on the other side of the world will just get there first if you don’t? What if the one after that is super low resource yet it also kills anyone who has ever shaken hands with your enemy? I would argue that creating a new weapon, or developing existing ones further is not made more or less moral on the basis that your enemy might be doing it, because if you know your enemy’s mind that well, you could easily defeat them using a slingshot.
This is likely wrong…Some of us would brutally murder each other with sticks and stones if they had nothing better.
Not sure I follow, this seems to be what I was saying. Read it back. The difference is that now we have technology capable of remotely erasing huge populations, and no means to keep it out of the hands of the freaks that take power. It’s therefore immoral to develop weapons because if you are clever enough to know how to do that, you should be clever enough to know how the resulting products will end up being used.
most defense work is not creating the atomic bomb. Most of it is incremental improvements
So the difference between them then is just one of scale. Oppenheimer probably never got a good night’s sleep again in his life, but it’s easy to persuade a thousand people to each do a thousandth of what he did. Then each person is only a thousandth as responsible as Oppenheimer. But each increment is still an evil deed, just a smaller one.
“Concern for man himself and his fate must always constitute the chief objective of all technological endeavors…in order that the creations of our mind shall be a blessing and not a curse to mankind. Never forget this in the midst of your diagrams and equations.” People working on weapons are ignoring, forgetting or equivocating over this simple fact. Good people don’t make bombs and sleep well at night. Find another job, where you can look back at your life’s work and honestly believe you made the world a better place.Anyway, we agree that psychopathic megalomaniacs are a feature of the human creature. And whether or not they are flying drones, driving tanks, or a leading a hoard of mounted Visigoths at your village, I think most of us would rather remove them as a threat from a safe distance… Like with a missile.
Most of us would prefer our enemies killed at range, without having to look then in the eye, sure. But look at what you’re mixing up here: the psychopathic megalomaniacs who are sitting barking orders a world away from the lethality radii, and the grunts and (invariably) innocent collateral who are atomised inside them.
- Comment on Shout out to my engineering homies. 2 months ago:
No, what you said was that it didn’t matter whether it not you took the job, because it would get done anyway. And that is a flawed argument.
- Comment on Shout out to my engineering homies. 2 months ago:
Yet psychopathic megalomaniacal leaders are a feature of the human race further back than recorded history, where remote mass destruction of estranged populations is a very recent development. Therefore it is immoral to develop, create and deploy weaponry like this and, “we will be the victims of it if we do not”, is a similarly weak moral argument to the one above. Just because we expect someone else to do the immoral thing does not render us any more moral for having done it. I don’t think. Yes, you can argue necessity, but how far does that go? If a pacifist somehow held in their hands a button which would kill every non-pacifist in the world, should they push it? And, in creating any new technology, we do need to ask, “is introducing this worth the risk of it falling into the wrong hands?” . Similar to how anti privacy laws creep in. If you’ve got nothing to hide, you’ve got nothing to fear, until the next government gets in and you need to hide being gay, or brown, or a woman. It’s not a question of whether or not “the good guys” get the weapon, it’s a question of what happens when the bad guys do, because they certainly will, because that’s what bad guys do.