I very deliberately avoid politics. If I fail let me know.

  • 2 Posts
  • 16 Comments
Joined 28 days ago
cake
Cake day: May 22nd, 2025

help-circle
  • jeans and a t shirt pretty much daily

    Not great but acceptable gym garb.

    I feel like I could do all of that at home.

    You could do it at home with light weights. But heavier weights and equipment are really expensive and otherwise problematic to keep at home. Also, I find that there’s something about being at the gym that makes it easier for me to work out. I did home workouts during covid but it just wasn’t the same and I didn’t get as good of a workout.

    Also gym membership prices vary widely. Planet Fitness if you have one near you at least used to be as cheap as $10/month. Ignore anyone who says it’s not a real gym, it’s good enough for like 99% of people.YMCAs and other community centers tend to be on the cheaper side.


  • The problem then is that by responding, you’re engaging with it which typically helps it spread in the algorithms*. Ideally there should be multiple downvote options - maybe separate it out as “misinformation” vs “bad opinion” or something. Removing downvotes and banning users who disagree is the typical cult strategy (recall the classic cult sub, r/thedonald, was notorious for this). If you’re worried about downvotes being used to silence people, maybe another way to mitigate that would be a “sort by downvoted” option so that being downvoted a lot could actually put you at the top of at least that feed.

    *On Lemmy, notice the following:

    Active (default): Calculates a rank based on the score and time of the latest comment, with decay over time


  • Do you think vote sould be private ? Public ? And why ?

    Public. Lots of downvotes is information that could indicate that the commenter is lying, or just saying something unpopular. But either way, it’s information. Before youtube started hiding downvotes, it was easy to tell that a video had a misleading title based on downvotes. Now clickbait dominates the platform.

    Are you sastified with the current voting system ? And why ?

    No. I agree that the slashdot method with more than just upvote/downvote is better. In a perfect world I imagine we could have every emoji be a reaction option, and then you could sort by putting an emoji in a bar at the top. In reality I imagine this would be a challenge from a backend perspective, but maybe like the top 5 or 10 emoji reactions could be an option for selection.

    What other interesting software/website that tried something different do you know ?

    I’ll do the opposite and say - please do not remove downvotes like Twitter/Bluesky/mastodon etc. Downvotes are super important. People need to be able to boo, the only place people aren’t allowed to boo are in church or at cult rallies. And that’s why those platforms are especially bad for misinformation, hyperbole, and overall depravity.

    What way do you imagine to highlight content and improve search, discoverability ?

    Remove all as a forced/default option on the main page. Back in the day before reddit had r/all, communities were much more diverse and niche, and this helped separate communities flourish in their own way. When r/all was added, the content started to resemble twitter, if not just becoming screenshots of twitter, on just about every sub. This actually improves discoverability because it would force users to branch out and look at subs instead of just looking at what’s on all.


  • For me WFH has helped me have a community. The office was never a real community, and the fact that we all worked together got in the way of being actual friends. Instead with the added time from WFH I was able to prioritize my social life and go to more events and meet people I actually have stuff in common with. Additionally my in-office job forced me to live in a dead suburb, WFH allowed me to move to a city with a lot more social opportunities.

    Of course probably not everyone prioritized that. The office might be good for some people, but for people like me who don’t necessarily socialize at the office very easily WFH is much better for community.





  • I just want to point out something that I’ve not seen others mention - sometimes girls are just way too paranoid about what their families will think. I know one girl who keeps insisting that her parents wouldn’t let her date a black guy, but then she also admits that she dated a hispanic guy before and thought the same thing but her parents loved him. Honestly I think like 70% of girls imagine that their parents wouldn’t accept some huge swath of men due to some superficial characteristic, but probably in reality only maybe 20% of parents would actually be against their daughter dating a guy who treats her well, even if he’s of a type they dislike.





  • I have to disagree honestly. So many times someone tells me about some question they’re pondering, and when I offer some suggestion about what may be going on or how to fix it, they’re like “Why are you talking about something you know nothing about? You don’t have to have an opinion.”

    But am I allowed to? I’m a curious person. If something interesting or strange or problematic is happening in your life, the first thing my brain is going to do is start trying to explain it. So I could keep it to myself, but then since my mind is on something I’m not allowed to talk about, I’m going to sit there and be silent and then they’ll be like “What? Do you have any reaction at all or are you going to just sit there in silence?”

    And then I pull out my beretta…


  • The month first is best because consider what happens if a message gets cut off. You might get: “You’ll be flying to New York on the first of …” or “You’ll be flying to New York on June…”

    The first message doesn’t tell you anything useful. Do you need to buy shorts or a parka? Do you have months to prepare or are you leaving in a few hours? Could this be an april fools joke? It’s a 1/12 chance. Totally useless.

    Second message, sure the details are unclear but at least you know what to pack and that you need to hurry about getting the rest of the message.


  • He didn’t. The quotes in these tweets are fake. If I search for these quotes these tweets are the only results. Twitter is a hostile platform to reality as reality can get in the way of virality. Hence why you never see sources on twitter. This was likely written by someone with only a passing familiarity with gandhi’s position on WWII who probably guessed at how he would speak based on his character in Civ.

    What did gandhi actually think the Britiish should do in 1940? In his actual words:

    I want you to fight Nazism without arms, or, if I am to retain the military terminology, with non-violent arms. I would like you to lay down the arms you have, as being useless for saving you or humanity. You will invite Herr Hitler and Signor Mussolini to take what they want of the countries you call your possessions. Let them take possession of your beautiful island, with your many beautiful buildings. You will give all these, but neither your souls, nor your minds. If these gentlemen choose to occupy your homes, you will vacate them. If they do not give you free passage out, you will allow yourself, man, woman and child, to be slaughtered, but you will refuse to owe allegiance to them.

    Basically he was speaking for an extreme form of non-violent civil disobedience, not capitulation.

    Also a famous gandhi quote: “Stop believing everything you see on twitter you gullible rube”



  • In most cases, it’s wrong to violate the social contract, especially while benefiting from it. However: the harm done by violating the social contract should be weighed against the harm of not violating it.

    In this case, the harm of violating the social contract is pretty minimal, as copyright law is not a fundamental part of the fabric of society. One can even argue it’s kind of dubious, as something that moneyed interests favor very heavily with no similar moneyed interests favoring a strong public domain.

    The harm of not violating it is not only do you give money to a holocaust denier, you’re giving it to him for denying the holocaust. Even worse, you’re giving him money for being wrong, and so effective at deception that you are compelled to spend money disproving him.

    The whole point of copyright is to encourage useful works and spreading of knowledge and art. In this case the work is not spreading knowledge, but un-knowledge. Irving is exploiting a loophole in copyright law that allows him to work against its very purpose.

    Thus I’d say violating the law is ethical as the benefits far outweigh the costs.