dustyData

@dustyData@lemmy.world

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨With how shitty some Christians are, you really have to wonder if Lucifer or Satan is truly "evil"⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago⁩:

  The concept of good and evil is actually very limiting and tends to raise people with twisted worldviews. Most intelligent people learn that morality is complex, reality is not black and white, and to wish harm upon others to ensure personal bliss is rather sociopathic and fucked up.

  Christianity faces a major foundational dissonance. Early tribalist (in group, out group thinking) values that have to coexist with radical empathic universalism. They usually ignore the development of Jewish traditions, and it took priests centuries of dissertation to mesh both views together. But they are incompatible. To believe in clearcut good and evil, and also things like a reward heaven (an idea also eradicated in most Jewish tradition). One must learn to suspend empathy for the fellow human being. To be happy while knowing others are harshly suffering (aka “they deserve it”). To think that one’s own cruelty will be forgiven just by saying a magical incantation is also fucked up.

  Now, the solution given to it is not widely accepted, and is the source of schisms in different Christian cults. Jesus’s message is that of universal forgiveness with radical empathy. The abolition of heaven and hell. But many intermediate concepts had to be inserted to make it make sense with organized religion. Like sin forgivenes through repentance, second coming prophecies to delay the forgivines, apocalyptic prophecies to delay the abolition of hell and other exceptionalist interpretations.

  Anyways, I started rambling, but Christianity is incapable to be internally consistent as it is. And some dogmatic views require people to be actively assholes by definition.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Long-time iOS user considering switch to Android - Need advice on $1000 flagships⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago⁩:

  None of that comes activated by default. Sure, there are some dark patterns that trick people into activating bullshit. But anyone with half a brain and a minimum attention span not rotten yet by social media will click no on those prompts. Once disabled at the first startup, Samsung doesn’t bother you ever again. You can uninstall every single Samsung app and substitute with your favorite, no issue. This includes all Google apps, except play services because of Google.

  As for ads and uninstallable bloat, it’s probably a carrier version. Those do get bloated and get ads. But otherwise, the international unlocked versions don’t show any ads at all. I’ve never seen an ad in my S25 phone and use nearly all Foss apps. The phone has never refused to uninstall anything. The effort to do that is pretty minimum, no tech knowledge required. Just learn to say no to software, it’s not rocket science. People got conditioned to saying yes to every prompt just to make it go away. This is how they get you. But it is not mandatory or out of your power to disable that stuff.

  And for the UI, it’s a subjective matter of taste. I’ve never liked any of the alternative launchers either, they all suck in some minor way that breaks their gimmick. OneUI is fine and perfectly functional, it even has more customization and QoL features than stock launcher and other truly bullshit launchers like Xiaomi’s.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Nearly 90% of Windows Games now run on Linux, latest data shows — as Windows 10 dies, gaming on Linux is more viable than ever⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  Multi monitor also breaks some games on Windows.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Nearly 90% of Windows Games now run on Linux, latest data shows — as Windows 10 dies, gaming on Linux is more viable than ever⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:

  You think you’re describing a problem with Linux, but you’re just describing a problem with the game. If it’s not on steam it would be the same way on Windows. It will most likely be in a different, less popular and barely supported launcher. By then it is the publisher who is screwing you up, not Linux.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨The people who protest against the Palestinian Genocide would be the same people who protested against the Holocaust.⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Agree, but it was just how normalized internment camps were (Hitler claimed he got inspired by US ideas of population control). Even though there weren’t executions, the conditions were so bad that at least 1800 out of 120 thousand people died.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨The people who protest against the Palestinian Genocide would be the same people who protested against the Holocaust.⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  That’s nation-state apologia. They just ignored all the evidence because genocide wasn’t even defined yet in International Humanitarian Law, they just didn’t care. Remember that even the US had concentration camps inside the US for foreigners, almost all of them Japanese people. They just felt this was a normal thing armies did to control populations deemed risky (see the ghettoisation of black communities, history of segregation and the systematic wipe out of indigenous tribes). They knew, armies even went directly to the locations of the concentration camps, they already knew where almost all of them were. Like, inside Germany it was not entirely a secret either. German officials boasted about the whole thing in international forums and in propaganda.

  The term Genocide, even, was coined by a polish-Jewish lawyer in 1942, Raphael Lemkin precisely because of what was known at the time of what the Nazis were doing against Jewish people and his own experiences surviving the Holocaust.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Just answer the question you fuckin' nerd⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  You’ll be surprise how often paradox is just a proxy term for we don’t fully understand it yet. The point remains, scientists, as subjective human beings we all are, can only approximate natural truth through our own perspectives. Socially constructing knowledge that we deem our truth. Is it game? Yes. Can it be politized by bad faith actors? Absolutely. Best we understand it than try to pledge absolutism as a banner, because that will pe politized too. And there we will lose. Absolutism feeds fascism, nuance and empathy are the enemies of fascists.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Just answer the question you fuckin' nerd⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  You had shitty teachers. That doesn’t mean social-constructivism is wrong. Quite the contrary, it kind of bizarrely proves how social relations alter your perception of reality.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Just answer the question you fuckin' nerd⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Oh, please. Let’s not go there. Epistemologists have never suggested or promoted any such thing, your wariness is misplaced, it seems. If anything, fascism will use any and all rhetorical resource to promote their rise and stay in power. Remember, before post-modernism—which is the source of the “every person has their own truth” thing you dislike, not epistemology which predates post-modernism by a couple of centuries—fascism used objective truth as justification for the superiority of the in-group in power. Eugenics was touted by fascists in the 1800s as the epitome of scientific enlightenment. It was obvious and proven scientific knowledge that black people were an inferior race, etc. All the classical Nazi pseudo-arguments. A harsh and closed view of objective truth is precisely the kind of mindset where fascism thrive. Fascists like absolute truths quite a lot, even when they contradict each other.

  The point of epistemology is to analyze the ways in which humans come up with and use knowledge. It has absolutely no prescriptive tenets at all. It is entirely descriptive.

  Like, you can’t look at me in the eye and seriously suggest that Bertrand Russel, Jean-Paul Sartre, Locke, Hume or Immanuel Kant were fascists.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Just answer the question you fuckin' nerd⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Exactly, remember the point was not to be right. But to have the discussions. It wasn’t the physics we were interested in, but in the ways to construct knowledge. Definitions and models are human constructs. The universe doesn’t care that we do or do not have neat words and models of its workings. However, language and knowledge, as human endeavors, require human interaction.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Just answer the question you fuckin' nerd⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  One of them was that in a vacuum, absent of any container or gravity, a liquid’s shape is that of a sphere.

  Another one was that depending on the definition of liquid, liquids might or might not have a shape. It also varies depending on the definition of the attribute shape.

  The point of the exercise was to challenge the notion of objective truth in science.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Which operating system should I choose?⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  For a noob, better something with a webui.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Just answer the question you fuckin' nerd⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  I had a very cool class in research epistemology and the exercise was basically to answer the question, do liquids have a shape and if yes, which is it? How would you prove it?

  It was the source of the most deranged but valuable discussion I’ve ever had.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Why are children always portrayed as the epitome of "innocence", when a lot of kids are evil af and bully their peers, and name-calling runs rampant in schools?⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Children are the epitome of innocence in the meaning of the word for: moral discernment between good and bad. In moral philosophy the reason why someone is culpable is because they understood the negative consequences of their actions but decided to do it nevertheless. This is, for example, in the law, there is a difference between murder and manslaughter. Children must be taught morals. Another example is in Christian morality. The original sin is the ability to discern between good and evil. Thus the loss of innocence of humankind.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨kurzgesagt – AI Slop Is Killing Our Channel⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Veritasium was bought years ago. No editorial freedom. Never heard of SpaceTime. I have better sources for science than YouTube slop, thank you.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨kurzgesagt – AI Slop Is Killing Our Channel⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Climate change whitewashing for corporations with awful conflicts of interest. Others have posted the links to the videos elsewhere in this comment section.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨kurzgesagt – AI Slop Is Killing Our Channel⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  The channel hat always been disingenuous. It’s not the first video they have where they develop a well written essay that has conclusions that make no sense with the information presented. It’s the theater of research without any of the substance. The editors just do whatever they want, under the expectations that the writing team will support their preconceived notion.

  They’re an entertainment channel, not a science communication channel. They have said some awful, totally not fact supported stuff in the past.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨A cartoonist's review of AI art, by Matthew Inman⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Uh, lots of really great painters have aphantasia. It’s very prominent in the population and 100% not a medical disability. Art is a skill. There’s people without arms that paint. Deaf people who make music. There’s blind people drawing. There’s this cool japanese girl without an arm that plays the violin. There’s all sorts of people who make art, because humans can’t not make art.

  Are you going to win prices and sell work for millions of dollars, or feature at the MOMA, or play at the Superbowl half time show? Or achieve any of the inane arbitrary goalpost that people like to set for calling stuff real art. Most assuredly you won’t. Because less than 0.1% of all the people in the planet will achieve any of that. But every single child has and will be born an artist. Every child draws, sings, dances and plays spontaneously. All that is art.

  If you think only people born artists can make art, congratulations, you were born an artists, every human is, go do your art. If you think only specific people with extraordinary characteristics get to make art. I’m sorry you were hurt so bad to develop such bleak worldview and poor self image.

  If you do art, you’ll get good at art. If you don’t do art and instead make the slop machine manufacture expensive Styrofoam for you to chew on, then you’ll never get good at art. Regardless of your biological makeup. Being shit at doing something is the first and mandatory step for becoming good at doing something. Do it poorly until you can do it decently, then do it some more. Art is the experience of doing art. Even bad art is superior to mass consumption generated pixels.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨"fridging" is honestly the only good motivation to become a superhero or good person⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  If true, then OP is on the high pressure pipeline to incel manosphere.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Thoughts about responsibility⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  You were raised right. What you are describing is the “fundamental attribution error” bias. As an interesting side point, you are doing it with this post right now.

  All humans tend to judge others more harshly than we judge ourselves. It is just the way our brains are wired. If it wasn’t that way, then your parents wouldn’t have needed to be so insistent on you being responsible and accountable. The fact is that, it is not a moral failure in itself. Everyone does it spontaneously and it takes a good deal of life experience and maturity to recognize it in oneself and to correct for it.

  This is a different point from institutional and cultural patterns that you identify as hypocrisy or irresponsibility. Corporations are not individuals so they can’t have morals. At most they can have ethical codes and people willing to police and enforce them. This is different from individual human morals.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨do you use non violent communication at the workplace?⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  I’m sorry, What?

  I invite you to go to the top of the thread too. The part where I made a comment to a third person, not you BTW, and then you decided to interject with aggression and insults. You tell me who is the petulant child. Because I did gave you the benefit of the doubt and attempted to deescalate this idiotic conversation being patient and reasonable. But you had to win the conversation, didn’t you?

  You gave me the win? Do you think all conversations are about win or lose conditions? That’s the most immature and stupid way to go about communication in general, and specially the internet. This is precisely the kind of Manichean worldview I identified and referred to previously. I don’t need your win, not everything is win-lose, not everything is black and white.

  Then you try and give me a lesson? Yes, I have downvoted the whole conversation because after the second reply or so, this whole thread has not contributed at all to Lemmy as a whole and I regret the time I have invested in trying to educate a childish doorknob. I will not be replying anymore. Have a day.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨do you use non violent communication at the workplace?⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  This whole post—not just this comment thread—is precisely the definition of “my ignorance is equal to your expertise”. Bunch of people spouting opinions from common understanding on things they don’t understand. It’s not the first time that common usage of groups of people is entirely off with scientific facts. Like, the whole point of OP is that they disagree with something because they don’t understand it. It’s a tale as old as time itself. If we only followed common usage you would not be using soap and treatment for fever would still be bloodletting.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨do you use non violent communication at the workplace?⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago⁩:

  Not to nitpick, but a dictionary definition has no bearing. When I have more time I could share part of the scientific literature on violence that has a more integral and exhaustive definition.

  On this point.

  Can they be reasonably lumped into the same group? I would think no,

  And they are not. No one is proposing that. Again, it is a strawman of your own creation.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨do you use non violent communication at the workplace?⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago⁩:

  Hey, sorry. I actually work and had no time to follow up. Thanks for the insightful response. Even though I still don’t agree with most of your point. You are, indeed, conflating all of violence and reducing it to just assault. Which is hurtful and trivializes the suffering of victims of harassment, rape, and many more. Yours is the same logic by which rapists argue that it was not “actual” rape.

  The confusion seems to derive from a desire of making violence be a binary flip. Violence or not violence. And that is just not how any professional working with victims and aggressors ever think about violence. Violence is a gradient.

  Of course that hitting a child in the face is not equivalent with calling them a racist slur. But, the point is, that although they are of different degrees, they are both acts of violence. Is it better being called an asshole than being punched? absolutely. But this doesn’t make it a good thing to do. It was still psychological violence.

  It’s an atrociously disingenuous strawman to pretend like I, or anyone here, equates verbal violence with life threatening physical violence. Because it is just not what I have suggested, anywhere, ever. But only mentally ill people think it is alright to verbally abuse people as a normal and appropriate response to any situation. Again, I’m not using metal illness like a binary flip concept. Mental illness is also a (multidimensional) gradient. I’ve met very nice and well adjusted sociopaths in my practice. With family and a thriving social circle. But that doesn’t mean they didn’t need help and support from professional to get there, or that they occasionally struggled and needed help to point out morally dubious or potentially dangerous behaviors.

  I agree, nuance is much needed. But your position is not one that provide as much. As it relies on Manichean, all or nothing, good vs evil, logic. Reality is much more complex than that. I’m offering nuance, you are just arguing about where the line lies, I’m telling it’s not a line.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨do you use non violent communication at the workplace?⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago⁩:

  I believe it’s valuable to recognize that the knee jerk reaction was a result of tone and not content. It’s the whole point of nonviolent communication to refer explicitly to facts and to address emotions directly in order to prevent “tone issues”. However, I never implied any form of moral responsibility over the malaise, mental or otherwise. Communication is a two party process, it’s not just what is given as communication by the sending party, it’s also about what the receiving party does with it, how it is interpreted. So the tone problem is a result of two people communicating, the one writing and the one reading, in this case.

  You see, I worked psychological care three years with people in detention and learned that mental illness, with the affected person, is better to address it directly without euphemisms or roundabouts. Most people (not all, just most) who end in detention, have or develop mental illness, many of which are personality disorders. These disorders mean people who have them don’t react too well to any sign that you’re hiding thoughts or secretly passing judgement of their conditions. So I did just that, actually debated over replying and wrote my reply with intent and complete transparency over my feelings and thoughts about the comment. Apologies if my intentions didn’t land, but they don’t come from a place of ill will or bad faith. Quite the opposite. Here’s my rationale.

  If you are punched in the face that is, inequivocally, violence. If you insult a person calling them names or threatening to hurt them that is violence. If you do the opposite, being honest, direct and transparent with emotions, then that is almost impossible to be construed as violence. Most people know this intuitively. As you can see by other comments in this very post, most people find it baffling that you have to explain to other human beings that using insults or threats is a form of violence. However, the OC called nonviolent communication violence. How is that? Well, typically, most people understand the relationship of words, interactions and violence from a place of empathy. The ability to imagine and feel what others would feel like in such situations. To consider intentionally nonviolent communication as violence, one must dissociate actions from emotions. This is only possible if one either, can disconnect empathy selectively, or cannot feel empathy at all. Both are strong traits of sociopathy. Violence is not defined by harm, emotional or otherwise, to others in the mind of sociopaths, but as a form of negative transactional process. Material loss and functional inconvenience to a special party, them. The emotional side is erased, because they can’t relate to it healthily. A sociopath doesn’t consider a punch to the face as violence, unless it is detrimental to them, personally. I need to remove a person, so I do. You hurt someone I care about, so I hurt you back. People are objects. No feelings involved. This is how nonviolent communication can become violent, because it disarms the typical instruments of sociopathic behavior. Manipulation, lying, backstabbing, gaslighting, intimidation, etc. are viable tools for the sociopath that carry no remorse. If you take away their tools with clear, direct, honest communications, you disarm the veil of concealment that enables sociopaths to thrive. Thus it is violent, against them. Also, consider the underlying insinuation that people who are kind and compassionate have a hidden agenda or are being secretly hyprocrites and manipulative themselves.

  What to do with it? I learned that addressing the elephant in the room is the best policy. I clearly stated what was wrong, to suggest that proper, clear, honest and direct communication is violence is incorrect. “Your kindness is violent” sounds mad and nonsensical, because it is. I can offer further examples, if you look closer to the comment:

  distinguish between actual violence and hurt feelings

  Separation of material actions and emotions. Dismissive of emotional consequences. Disconnect with other’s people emotional experiences. The term “actual violence” itself is troubling as it implies an objective definition of violence, which, by the way, implies that it is their definition, disregarding other’s subjective definitions, lived experiences or even socially normative definitions of violence.

  I’m not trying to negate shitty bosses or toxic work environments, not at all, but I hate that this is now called violence.

  Dismissal of emotional suffering as trivial or inconsequential.

  calling everything rape

  Disregard for emotions and trivialization of sexual violence.

  anything that isn’t sweet and nice

  Normalization of rudeness, plus the insinuation of hidden agendas from people who are genuinely being nice.

  This kind of statements are not opinions I have heard any mentally stable and sound of mind individuals make. But I heard them a lot, in detention, from mentally ill inmates. So, my choice was to be direct and speak my mind. Because I’d rather offend a mentally ill person but get them to seek help and be less of a threat to others around them than to ignore it and let someone with a harmful belief system continue to think that what they’re thinking is ok or normal. If I’m wrong, I’m wrong. I don’t mind to risk mistakes that hurts nobody if it carries the chance of doing good.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨do you use non violent communication at the workplace?⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago⁩:

  I just want to take this time to thank you for teaching me a new word. It is important to learn everyday and I appreciate your contribution. However, I am sad that you considered my comment as violence. Some people are not aware that they’re sociopaths. And well adjusted sociopaths do exist in greater numbers than people assume.

  However, unlike you, I do not consider it an insult. I’m sorry if it was misconstrued that way. Sociopathy is a disorder, a personality disorder specifically. Just like narcissism, borderline personality disorder and others. I understand that it is a heavily stigmatized word and used as an insult frequently, specially on the internet. But unless we talk about it appropriately and dispel misinformation, we won’t be able to bring mental healthcare to people who have such conditions. Mental disorders are not a moral failing on anyone’s part. And being aware of it is the first step to get help.

  You wouldn’t be offended if I told someone with a broken leg to go see a doctor. Why is reminding people that lack of empathy is a disease and they might benefit from mental health care suddenly an offensive attack?

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨do you use non violent communication at the workplace?⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago⁩:

  Well, this is not something you do, as in a once and done action. Like, you don’t schedule a meeting to talk feelings. It’s an approach. The idea is to practice it consciously to reach the goal of just doing it spontaneously. Stressed people with deadlines are exactly the kind of people who can take advantage of and appreciate nonviolent communication. It can help teams in highly stressful circumstances reach high levels of performance while keeping dysfunctions from stress to a minimum. Angry, burnout and fatigued people are actually really lousy workers and the least effective overall. Dealing with negative feelings can help reduce these ill effects.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨do you use non violent communication at the workplace?⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago⁩:

  You are nearsighted.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨do you use non violent communication at the workplace?⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago⁩:

  Psychological violence is violence. It doesn’t matter if you disagree. Because you are wrong. I invite you to search online the stories of people who have been victimized and try to empathize with their lived experiences and emotions. If you cannot find this empathy and feel the urge to dismiss them as overreactions or as trivial, I suggest you seek psychiatric attention. Lack of empathy is the leading trait of sociopathy. Therapeutic and psychiatric treatment can help you to adapt well in a nonviolent manner to society.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨9 months after its 1.0 launch flopped, an indie dev just learned that Steam never emailed the 130,000 people who wishlisted its game⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago⁩:

  Partially. Now they’re trying to withhold payments to developers. GOG still sells most of the removed games because Europe and puck PayPal.