Various ant species do a similar thing where their soldiers have really big, flat heads and when their nest gets attacked, the soldiers stick their head into the entrance way, so the attackers can’t come inside.
Apparently, this kind of behaviour is referred to as phragmosis.
I mean Lemmy shares a lot of the same issues as Reddit even if it’s decentralized. I think Lemmy as a technology is better than Reddit because it’s more privacy focused, but most people don’t care about any of this. People put up with Reddit’s shortcomings because it has a massive community that is always active and fills every niche. Reddit’s daily active userbase is over 73 million. That’s hard to replicate in general, but I don’t see Lemmy getting anywhere near that mainstream. I see it as a more stable and active version of Voat, but still a niche platform nonetheless.
You do realize that’s why Reddit went down the shitter right? Appealing to the mainstream is literally what got us to the point that everything is filled with ads and misinformation.
It is probably best to think nothing on Lemmy is private. Any instance with at least one user subscribed to a community will receive updates (messages and votes) on the community. Instance admin can go into the database to see any private message between any user on that instance.
Lol dude got the exact things wrong about Lemmy - clear they haven’t spent much time here. Fediverse is NOT privacy focused, in fact it’s the opposite. You blast your content out to everyone. The only privacy is your username, and that aint much. It’s user owned, that’s the saving grace, that corporate doesn’t own it. We sacrifice fake corporate privacy for open standards.
It’s not the force of the bite, although it does hurt (they bite through wood after all). It’s the humiliation from having one of the most fragile, easy to kill pets decide that it can express its displeasure by biting your hand.
Damn little meat potato. The only reason you can even bite me is because you’re so damn fragile I can’t risk dropping you. Also, the reason I’m holding you is to trim your nails because you don’t wear them down naturally since you live your entire life on padded flannel blankets. Where do you even get off having displeasure to express?
If you weren’t so damn cute, you’d be on the grill.
Yeah sometimes that is the nature of potato love. They live in a world of absolutes and tremendous dangers; they don't always have time for calm reflection.
I’ve had a guinea pig and he never bit me. Not once. Only licked. He trusted me and I made sure he had a good life. He was outside and free to roam the garden until dusk. And inside the home if the outside was too cold/dark/wet. The garden also offered lots of plants to eat and hide under. He had great avriety in diet alongside the petfood and guineapig essentials. He would join me at the dinner table with his own plate of safe greens. We would snuggle every day. Everytime I had to catch him, it sometimes turned into a chase. He ofcourse didn’t want to go into the cage. The cage only served to protect him against predators at night, and from our electronic cables. Which ofcourse he didn’t understand. But he still accepted me picking him up when catching him. No biting. He knew he’d be free again come morning. He died how he lived after my dad let him out and left him outside overnight because he couldn’t catch him. My only regret is that I didn’t know they had to come in pairs.
So what in the fuck are you doing with that guinea pig that it distrusts you so? I literally had to chase him sometimes and he still didn’t bite me when I gently but quickly scooped him.
Well, if you had more than one, you’d find that they are all different, with different personalities, and you wouldn’t be so quick to assume you know all guinea pigs because of your experience with your sole pig.
GNU’s Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix Not Unix CORE DUMP: OUT OF MEMORY EXCEPTION
I’ve been banned from .ml for being a ‘racist’ for being anti-Xi, despite the fact that I am Chinese, and pointed out my ethnicity as such in the discussion. I guess antisemitic Jews aren’t the only weird accusation getting thrown about nowadays.
I got a ban for pointing out the nuclear strikes on Japan killed less than the conventional firebombing runs leading up to it, and if nukes wouldn’t have been used a shit ton more people would have died.
Like, no opinion on if what was morally right or not, just what the numbers worked out.
It’s all trolls over there, when a rational person makes a community, the admins start drama there and troll the mods till they leave or get kicked out for stupid shit.
I just blocked the whole instance. I never see any of their posts now, and as an unintended bonus I don’t even get notifications when their users reply to my comments.
Like, it would be best if we defederated from them and that hilariouschaos troll instance.
The theory that more people would have died of the nukes weren’t dropped is FAR from settled fact. The Japanese were already looking to surrender and it’s not likely the bomb played a big part in that decision.
Whether that alone is something to be banned over is probably context dependent, and I don’t have any faith that that instance had a good reason for it. Nevertheless that person holding up their great take about the nuclear bombs being good actually does not paint a great picture of them as a person. It makes them look like a reactionary US nationalist who wants to believe anything that makes their side the “good guys”. They can pretend it was morally neutral all they want, but morality is the only reason anybody argues something like that because it’s so nebulous the only way you get there is with motivated reasoning.
At any rate I wouldn’t put that on the pile of reasons to hate on the .ml instances, not when there are so many good reasons.
I honestly disagree that blocking works the same. Social media relies on a network effect, and if they keep being allowed to operate popular communities then they will have that network effect in their favour, and new users that don’t know any better will keep joining.
Defederation is an important tool to turn certain instances into pariahs for bad behaviour, and individual blocks don’t achieve that.
This is a lot of the problem with gen z, especially among the left. Everyone is quick to smash the block button, which in aggregate just makes everything worse for everyone else.
When you block someone you cede the conversation to them. When lots of people block someone, fewer people push back against their bullshit. Because the people most able to push back against it no longer see it.
Well I’d be fascinated to see how you arrive at that conclusion but until then I’m going to have to disagree on the basic principle that the generalisations people make about generations are usually pretty useless.
If you truly don’t see any difference between Boomers, Gen X, and Millenials then I think our views of reality are so wildly different we might not be able to have any sort of communication.
Okay, but you brought it up and then when asked about it instead of explaining you fell back on the idea that it’s self-evident, which I think I’m right to not be convinced by.
To the extent the generations appear different I think is easily explained by the difference in material conditions that each has grown up within and the necessarily different ages of each group at any given time, and nothing to do with the inate characters of the people involved.
I see zoomers intensely involved in the issues that affect the world and any extent they feel the need to check out I think is 100% valid given the bleak world they have been born into, much bleaker than at any earlier time.
I see a hard-nosed pragmatic awareness of the need for hope in the face of our grim reality because it is the only way we can find a path through. I have heard that message from people of all ages, but also from zoomers.
Again, I don’t think there’s much difference and one thing that absolutely hasn’t changed over millenia is bemoaning the state of the “kids these days”.
To the extent the generations appear different I think is easily explained by the difference in material conditions that each has grown up within and the necessarily different ages of each group at any given time, and nothing to do with the inate characters of the people involved.
Well, I mean…yeah. Of course. I don’t think anyone is saying there’s like a BIOLOGICAL difference between generations.
much bleaker than at any earlier time.
I do disagree with this. In my lifetime, the great recession was much much worse than now.
You fell back from the motte to the bailey then went ham on a strawman because the actual argument was getting too much for you.
You accused Gen Z of some specific behaviour and when I asked you about it you fell back on some vague notion of the generations simply being different.
You were clearly implying some difference of character, but when I point out that that’s pretty weak you pretend I was talking about biology, which I never mentioned.
If you think Gen Z is more likely to block, check out, whatever, explain where you get it from. If you’re not going to do that then I will just continue to believe that you’re basing it on your own biases and move on. You clearly aren’t very disciplined about your thought processes.
Oh but you had it worse as a kid? Also something we’ve been hearing for millenia from intellectually lazy entitled assholes.
You accused Gen Z of some specific behaviour and when I asked you about it you fell back on some vague notion of the generations simply being different.
Generations being different means they have…different behavior. Wtf are you even talking about?
You were clearly implying some difference of character
People’s actions are their character. That’s a distinction without a difference.
If you think Gen Z is more likely to block, check out, whatever, explain where you get it from.
My personal observations, which is different than bias.
Oh but you had it worse as a kid? Also something we’ve been hearing for millenia from intellectually lazy entitled assholes.
Millenials objectively had it worse as a kid, at least economically which is what I was referring to. Not my fault you have recency bias.
Okay, that’s not how this works, but you seem to be incapable of following the most basic line of reasoning. This wasn’t you defending an argument, it was you mentally shitting the bed. I think I’m done here. Have a great life. Or I guess have a shitty life, since your generation has it objectively worse than everyone else.
Like, no opinion on if what was morally right or not, just what the numbers worked out.
I don’t want to get in the merit of the comment, but unless you see the future, this statement is simply not true. Your argument is simply based on accepting certain assumptions as true.
Coincidentally this argument is routinely used by people supporting american atrocities, who consider nuking hundreds of thousands of people the humanitarian solution to WWII.
To be clear, I don’t agree with that line of moderation, I don’t agree with most of the views that seem to characterize .ml, but it’s a year that people make posts like this one, you can’t tell me you don’t understand the ban based on the above.
And where is the count of deaths in the different timeline?
Look, my point is simple: human history is not deterministic and we simply can’t know what happens tomorrow like if we were predicting the laws of phisics. Maybe there were other 100 different course of actions leading to as many outcomes.
You can analyze what happened, but it’s foolish to say “this was better because the alternative would have led to”. You can only analyze and discuss what happened, otherwise anything can be justified with “it wouldn’t have been worse”.
“this genocide was good, because without it the oppressed population would have led to civil war and many more deaths”.
I am genuinely curious where people presented all of this stuff you’re saying as history.
Like, it’s almost like the only thing you know about civilian deaths in WW2 was American dropped nukes.
There’s sooooo much that you’re missing. But unless you dropped out of school at a very young age, I can’t be the first person that tries to explain this to you
So where are your opinions coming from?
Is this a thing where you learned everything you know about a subject from YouTube videos?
I just made an example of speculating on future occurrences to justify concrete actions that instead happened. In fact, the entire comment was about the general idea of considering history deterministic, not about the specific atomic bomb event…
You need to learn what abstraction is, my friend. I am not speculating. Quite the opposite. I am saying that you like to think the world works according to precise laws that you can use to predict the future. This is why you are arguing in multiple comments that “they would have…”, as if people are NPCs with 3 different behaviors and the outcomes are predetermined so it’s just a matter of choosing.
The reality is simple: you, me, nobody can know for sure what " would have happened" if history happened differently. This is a methodological issue, not a discussion on the merits of your speculation.
I don’t know if nuclear bombs caused less deaths than the millions of other potential courses of actions, and neither do you, neither does anybody else. I don’t know if Israel wiping off Gaza from the map potentially saved thousands of lives in future conflicts. You see the problem?
Now, before assuming that everyone else is an idiot and that you are the only smart one in the room, you might want to try a little harder to understand the point of your interlocutor, considering we are also discussing in what (I assume) is your native language but not mine. If you didn’t understand so far that my critique is in the method, not in the merits, of your claim, then I agree, there is nothing to talk about.
the nuclear strikes on Japan killed less than the conventional firebombing runs leading up to it, and if nukes wouldn’t have been used a shit ton more people would have died.
That’s an absolutely disgusting thing to say. Japan was already surrendering, they were only nuked as a show of strength.
I’m not sure what you imply when you say that “a shit ton more people would have died”, but if you’re saying that the US should have napalm bombed an entire surrendering country just to make an example, I don’t think it makes your argument valid. It’s not ok to do something horrible, just because you could have done something even worse if you had wanted to.
They weren’t already surrendering, ok. I’m not an expert but imo it could be argued that the Soviet Union joining the war (as they were about to) might have given Japanese command an excuse to surrender while saving face, or triggered an internal coup or something. They weren’t stupid, surely they could see the writing on the wall.
People thay think Japan surrendered because of loss of life, have no idea what they’re talking about about.
Japan surrendered because they thought America had more nukes, and if they kept fighting then Japan would be left uninhabitable for centuries due to atomic contamination.
The people who tried the coup, did so because they thought America didn’t have more nukes.
They weren’t stupid,
They weren’t, but honor was/is huge in their culture, and Japan was an empire for thousands of years.
They’d have fought to the last Japanese civilian was alive
They surrendered, and I know I’m repeating myself, because they thought their islands would be literally wiped off the face of the planet.
Anything less wouldn’t have won the war and cost more lives on both sides.
Even as a trolly problem, it’s not a tough call on if nukes saved lives.
I don’t think any of this is even real to them. The same way that a majority of the white-nationalist 4-channers are just roleplaying and losing themselves in the storylines, as a species we tend to do that, we just get lost in a narrative because it explains how we feel.
The tankies are doing the same exact thing. They’re not impacting policy, they’re not marching for anything, they’re not taken seriously and it’s just another in-club that has its own language and imagery and secret handshakes and a unifying message to rally behind (America bad!) and instead of turning that criticism into actionable plans for changing representation and making anything better, they put on WW2 Russian Tanker helmets and have erotic fantasies about a communist uprising that will never happen.
I’ve been banned from .ml for being a ‘racist’ for being anti-Xi, despite the fact that I am Chinese, and pointed out my ethnicity as such in the discussion.
And I’ve been censored (not yet banned, but I guess it won’t take long till that as well) on lemmy.world (and beehaw) for spreading “misinformation” about Ukraine, despite being a Ukrainian and actually reading (and sharing) the local news of what’s actually happening there, contrary to the government propaganda.
You claim Zelensky is illegitimate and authoritarian for not holding elections in the middle of a fight for the country’s survival. The logic there is hilariously bad. Setting aside the absolute waste of resources, the last thing any country needs in such a scenario is for their leaders to start campaigning over who’s going to take control. It’s not the time and place for it. If you want to blame anybody, blame Russia
Right, so basically it’s okay for countries to be authoritarian, it’s okay to slaughter thousands of people and making everybody else live in constant fear, as long as the government aligns itself with the west.
Why would I blame Russia? It’s not Russia, it’s not Putin who is kidnapping people of the streets in Ukraine and sends them to die. It’s Zelensky’s regime.
Very cool and humanitarian and obviously I don’t agree with that. But out of curiosity - can you please explain to me why is North Korea different?
It is also officially still in a state of a war with South Korea. Does it mean Kim Jong Un is suddenly also a hero that leads his country against the enemy? It doesn’t matter that people are trapped there, it doesn’t matter that people may not support him, all the atrocities committed by him do not matter as well, because they are in a war, am I right?
Because South Korea is not actively trying to wipe out NK from existence, but actually the opposite is trying to reach out to NK and stabilise relations. ‘War’ is a hilarious way to describe their status. Way to strawman the argument.
but actually the opposite is trying to reach out to NK and stabilise relations
That’s just super fucking ironic, considering that Russia never stopped saying that they are open to negotiations (and the very first peace deal was actually they they go back to before-2022-invasion borders) and it is Zelensky who always refuses to negotiate and instead sends more Ukrainians to die.
Oh you mean the deal where they tried to make their seizure of Crimea legitimate?
Ok, this is reaching russian troll levels of disinformation. I think it’s clear enough to any 3rd parties just why you’re getting your comments deleted.
Now, I answered your question, would you please be so kind to answer mine now, which is also quite simple?
If there are two men, man A is simply operating a meat grinder while man B kidnaps people from the streets (soon he will start breaking into people’s homes as well), forcefully pushes them into the meat grinder, and watches to make sure they can’t get out of it, he also makes sure nobody leaves the city so that he can continue his game, who do you blame more for deaths of people in the meat grinder?
The man who operates the meat grinder? The man who started the business of shoving people into a grinder??? An everadvancing grinder? Jesus. At least get your metaphor right
No. Russia isnt just hosting a meat grinder that operates on the front, stationary and non threatening. The meat grinder is ever advancing and as we have seen in Bucha, its business is tp shove people in there. Russia is the aghressor after all.
I installed Linux on my gfs (now wife) old laptop years ago when the beginner distros was way less user friendly. When I asked on a forum for help it was just the sound of crickets. When she made her first post starting with “my boyfriend installed Linux and I don’t understand how to…” They fucking fell out trees to answer her questions
“Girls desire a knight in shining armor to come sweep them off their feet!” — my pastor
For the longest time, I struggled because I was told all my life what a “woman’s purpose” was, and my desires never lined up with that. Felt like a freak because I never desired romance, sex, or partnership with a man (or anyone else, for that matter). If that was my purpose, was I supposed to will myself to want that for myself? Was I doomed to be alone forever? Was I wrong to want to pursue adventure and things that I wanted?
If my desire ≠ God’s desire (which was apparently union with a man at some point in the future), then my desires were… wrong. Maybe/probably even evil.
So I fucked up my life trying to follow that and fit into that mold. I did things I never wanted to do because it was the “right thing” to do in the eyes of God.
After I escaped, I never really recovered. But… I discovered a lot about myself.
I did bearded dragon rescues & fostering, I got into cosplay, learned how to sew stuffed animals, got some mental health care, rekindled my love for nature… all by myself. I learned to love me and not base my worth on what other folks believe I should do or how I should behave. I don’t have a partner who gets to dictate my personality. I got to grow on my own.
I’m still coming to terms with… a lot of things about myself, but now I’m able to grow freely instead of being confined to such a small pot.
Don’t let people define who or what you are, or what your purpose is in life. Only you get to do that. It’s both terrifying and freeing, but you can do this.
Even for those us who fit into the straight/white/cis mould, learning how to create purpose and meaning for yourself is a really hard battle against expectations imposed growing up. Thanks for sharing a really wholesome story :)
Think about the ways that information tech has revolutionized our ability to do things. It’s allowed us to do math, produce and distribute news and entertainment, communicate with each other, make our voices heard, organize movements, and create and access pornography at rates and in ways that humanity could only have dreamed of only a few decades ago.
Now consider that AI is first and foremost a technology predicated on reappropriating and stealing credit for another person’s legitimate creative work.
Now imagine how much of humanity’s history has had that kind of exploitation at the forefront of its worst moments, and consider what might lie ahead with those kind of impulses being given the rocket fuel of advanced information technology.
These days the best way is to download the official ISO, install without key, open powershell with admin rights and run the massgrave one-liner script with a quick copy/paste.
urban dictionary Dog whistle is a type of strategy of communication that sends a message that the general population will take a certain meaning from, but a certain group that is “in the know” will take away the secret, intended message. Often involves code words.
Republicans say they want to make civil rights for gays a state issue, which is really just a dog whistle strategy for saying that they will refuse to grant equal rights on a federal level.
In case this is genuine asking, here’s the coded logic dogwhistle:
H is the 8th letter of the alphabet So 88 = HH, which was used in WW2 communications by the Nazis for Heil Hitler.
So people who just so happen to randomly put 88 into a random thought online are signaling to the people in the know that they’re also in the know.
Before you say “but thats stupid and childish, why would anyone go through that much effort to hide their shitty beliefs that way?” that’s exactly the purpose of dogwhistles. It’ high effort enough that normal people wouldn’t expect anyone to put that much childish effort into it, and anyone who points out the dog whistle looks crazy to the normies because of how childish it the dogwhistle is and the dogwhistlers get to feign innocence being attacked by the twitter mob over a number.
Frequently how it shows up on “No Stupid Questions” is that they’re pushing a bigoted agenda under the guise of “I’m just asking a question and everyone’s attacking me for it.” Like if someone came to No Stupid Questions and asked (and this is just an example, not my position at all) “why is there so much trans propaganda on Lemmy?” or whatever. (And in the thread when people are like “you’re a bigot” they respond with “I didn’t say anything bigoted. I just asked a question.”)
But yeah. Like what Xtallll said, it’s more generally using language/symbols that for the in group is a reference they’ll all get but for everyone else at least retains an air of plausible deniability. Often it’s done by politicians (particularly right-wing politicians) to try to straddle the fence between the extremits and more moderates in their party. If a politician speaks in support of “states’ rights,” they’ll get the vote of the extremists who know that “states’ rights” actually means racist policies and also the moderates who still think or perhaps are still deluding themselves that it means somthing vague but more benign.
It’s a shibboleth, a way of asking a question that people who share your ideology will recognize as pushing it, while those who do not will not. This is like a dog whistle that can be heard by dogs but not by humans.
In question form it’s also often subtle propaganda, asking a question that presupposes something controversial, like “Why are trans players allowed to win so much on sports?” where the simple shibboleth might be “Should trans players be allowed in sports?” Both are confronting the same point, but the former assumes a trend that has not been demonstrated, while the latter simply assumes some reason without making it clear what the reason is.
An actual dog whistle sounds at a frequency (?) inaudible to humans but is heard by dogs. The “secret phrase” can be said out loud, but like the whistle, only the big dogs hear it - the rest of the humans don’t. Does that make sense? It’s used as an analogy.
You take care of that part later, I guess. The whole point of the shower orange IMO is to go primal on it and tear it open and chow down without concern for mess or eating it efficiently. Leaving the peel to pick up afterwards probably just gives the rest of your shower a nice citrus aroma.
More like… take the orange, with the peel still on it, into the shower. Dig your fingers straight through the peel deep into the center of the orange, and then rip it open. Smash your whole face into the middle of the orange, shoving the sweet insides into your mouth and not caring that much of it is smearing on your face. Then shower normally… no sticky residue because you’re already in the shower and it washes right off.
Flip it around. If you missed an appointment, would you want them pissed off you wasted their time? Would you want them to yell at you? Most likely you would have had a good reason and would want them to understand. It’s most likely the same for them.
Emotionally mature adults shouldn’t have to shout at anyone in daily life. It’s not repressed rage if you have an even temperament.
I do know several volatile people who consider it normal to ‘blow off steam’ by having a raging argument every now and then. It may be helpful to them but it’s childish and unfair to those around them.
The context of the comment I asked the question to was a situation flip where they stated they’d be more comfortable if the therapist raised their voice in response to them being late…
So, yes. I wouldn’t expect a therapist to have anger issues like that.
You can split hairs, but I certainly don’t ‘feel safer’ around people who raise their voice to me. It’s intemperate, threatening and often bullying. But I can see we won’t agree.
That’s…a really weird way to feel. Essentially, you’d feel safer with someone that lacked empathy? This isn’t your buddy, this is a professional. You’d prefer it if your therapist wasn’t in control of their emotions, and would rather get angry at you than someone simply saying, “It’s okay”?
There’s something to be said about emotional honesty and transparancy, I suppose. Most of my family’s pretty inscrutable, so I’m always much more wary around them than my more heart-on-the-sleeve friends.
For a professional relationship though, ehh yeah i dunno.
In a professional setting the real feeling is more likely “stop apologizing so we can get this over with and I can get back to doing the other stuff I have to do” than “I need to punish you for being late”.
Raising one’s voice isn’t a loss of control. I don’t feel safe around people who let others abuse them, because I know their lack of a visible response doesn’t mean a total lack of response.
Someone who isn’t visibly addressing disrespect against them, is instead building up resentment.
People with boundaries that are too permissive are less safe, in my book, than people who address disrespect immediately and openly.
Do you mean “speaking up” when you say that? Because “raising one’s voice” implies yelling to most people, I think. If yes, then I agree. Being comfortable addressing issues like this is very valuable. That said, I disagree that not addressing it means they’re just “building up resentment”. They could be, but it’s not a certainty by any stretch.
Except the therapist works for the OP, not the other way around. If it were just OP’s friend who stood them up, then you’d have a point. But this is someone OP had an agreed-upon appointment with someone they are paying to treat them. And also keep in mind that many doctor’s offices will charge for a missed appointment if the patient didn’t show and made no attempt to communicate ahead of time.
Sure, there are probably understandable circumstances that have caused this, and the therapist will probably make it up to them. But that doesn’t invalidate OP’s feelings and expectations, especially in the moment.
Not only does this phenomenon have a name (Fundamental Attribution Error), OP’s situation is the example case given on the wikipedia page:
In other words, observers tend to overattribute the behaviors of others to their personality (e.g., he is late because he’s selfish) and underattribute them to the situation or context (e.g., he is late because he got stuck in traffic).
kbin.life
Top