I’m a German trans woman (female pronouns) working as a post-doc in cryptography.
I think there is a decent case to be made that the systematic and irreversible destruction of contemporary art for no good reason whatsoever is a pretty cut-and-dry act of barbaric destruction of culture. And preventing that is generally considered a worthwhile thing.
I’ve said that on Reddit and people got mad at me.
A single warehouse burning because of low wages is like a single healthcare CEO getting shot: Funny to read about, but ultimately not going to change much.
Turn it into a monthly thing, and it becomes a revolutionary act that will change things!
Eating people’s faces isn’t okay in general, but the point is that Denmark went along with that kind of shit…
This is actually a leopard eating the face of someone who joined the leopards eating people’s faces campaign…
For ADHD: YES! I’ m literally currently in the process of getting it checked, because of this!
But I was talking about autism, where you do not get meds or anything useful, which really makes it a useless diagnosis that will do more harm than good in most places. (One ceveat: If I moved back to Germany, I could probably get tax benefits because it counts as a mild disability, but until I decide to do that and stay there, it’s not worth the risk.
When I got my gender-dysphoria diagnosis, one part was to look into any other disorders I might have and OCD did come up. The problem is that a lot of these disorders have descriptions that are so relatable that you can feel genuinely insecure.
Even OCD sounded so relatable at that point, that what really ended the discussion there was when my psych asked in the end after I was saying that I wasn’t sure, whether my symptoms were clinically relevant, to which I immediately responded with “no”.
So yeah, it’s probably relevant to remember that most things come on a spectrum and that people can be OCD-adjacent without crossing into the boundary of where it is enough of a problem to be a disorder, but rather a mere personality quirk.
And that’s okay! In both directions!
I don’t care if Karen can’t eat them because she is allergic or because they taste like shit to her; if she hates them so much, then you are the problem for trying to make her eat something that she hates so much that she feels her only choice is to tell you it’s an allergy.
Also in some cases simple ableism:
I am highly certain that I have autism, for many reasons, up to and including the screener results when I got my gender-dysphoria diagnosis, but I have made an active decision against getting an official diagnosis, because it would not as of now bring me any advantages, but would for example rid me of the possibility to ever move to certain countries. So what would be the point?
The main struggles I have are in interactions with other people and that is getting a bit better these days and having a friend group that almost exclusively consists of neurodiverse folks who have learned to deal with some of my quirks and a girlfriend who has a diagnosis of both autism and ADHD helps a lot as well. Why would I then put effort in to get a confirmation for something where I kinda already know the result? It would be like taking an IQ-test (A comparison that my psych found quite fitting in fact).
There is a huge difference between voting for a party that fails to be better less awful than another party in one single place (not even being worse!) because they are the only alternative, not because you have any love left for them on the one hand and campaigning for awful policies on the other!
One is a form of harm reduction, the other is a form of actively trying to harm people and that you pretend to not understand that makes me seriously question your motive.
Especially since there was not a single party running that was remotely decent, even if we look into the fringes. The American greens had kinda somewhat a not completely wrong take on Palestine (maybe), but were dogshit about Ukraine, because they were bought out by another imperialist mass murdering regime.
That’s by the way why “third reich” is a really bad way to call it: Either call it “drittes Reich” (German) or “third Empire” (English), but mixing the two is just stupid.
If I had to guess this half-way nonsense is probably a result of the English not wanting to be associated with it, giving they kept talking about the “British empire“…
First of all: It’s not clear that they want nukes. Like, seriously, they have been accused of almost having nukes for thirty years, it’s much more plausible at this point that they are much more interested in the ability to acquire them quickly in case they need them.
But even then: It makes no sense for them to use them aggressively, but it makes an unbelievable amount of sense for them to want them for defensive purposes. Like: They have time and time suffered from western interference, including the extremely bloody Iran-Iraq-war and have a hostile, nazi-run rouge state running a genocide and storing nukes without NPT-approval that is receiving unlimited support from the US in their vicinity.
The fact of the matter is that there is no country on earth that is as justified in pursuing a nuclear deterrent on earth as Iran.
And none of that changes anything about the government being made up from horrible tyrants that are almost as bad (but definitely not actually as bad, let alone worse!) as the one in Israel. They absolutely should be overthrown, but that’s not the job for the genocidal nazis in Israel.
AFAIK it was a reference to the “Italian Salute”, aka Mussolini, the coiner of the term fascism… So not really all that much better…
The F22 in the image is about 7 diagonal pixels long, that is √2⋅7 pixels length. The ship in the picture is 1727 pixels long, which equates to an actual length of almost exactly 3300m.
As a bonus this allows us to calculate the barrel-diameter: At 14 pixels width, this indicates a 27m diameter or a barrel-strength of a bit over 12m. Not sure if that is enough to contain the nuclear explosion that is mean to be fired inside it…
They have to have a lot more barrel strength though: If you look closely, the propellant charge is literally a nuke.
Anyone who thinks this was about getting AI working was the idiot from the start, there still isn’t even a real use-case for it. This was always about funneling huge amounts of money from the government budget to a bunch of rich assholes. The outcome doesn’t matter at all here.
I suggest you look up what most concentration camps were like. Auschwitz was an exception even by the standards of concentration camps and is nowadays usually called “extermination camp” for that reason.
That doesn’t mean that the other camps weren’t horrible, they were, but they were also awfully comparable to a lot of things that happen in the US prison system.
Except in the Netherlands, where your risk a response of “I’m not your Dutch teacher, we will speak English”. (Actually happened to a former colleague of mine.)
Honestly: While it may feel wrong, and requires some emotional distancing, if you start thinking about it rationally you’ll find that there isn’t really a fundamental problem with this one. Note that you gave an argument why the first case is bad but not for the second.
If we think things through, the main issue we have with killing is that people whom we don’t want to die die; [while I reject capital punishment in the vast majority of cases](https://fiona.onl/positions.html#no-death-penalty-for-individual-crime), the assumption here is that we have made a decision that we want someone to die, so causing that person to die is within the deployed ethical framework not unethical.
And if there is someone who wants to perform an act that is usually highly unethical, but in some instances is, according to the accepted ethical framework, not, then there isn’t really a clear issue to let that person do that thing in those cases, especially if others don’t want to do it.
The issue here is the framework in which the death penalty is a commonly available punishment itself, not that some things feel wrong within that framework.