You would think that. But as a person having an iPhone… No it is not. At least the part of iPhones currently not having that option. App-Icons on your “desktop” will always align in dense rows from top left to bottom right, with no free spaces allowed.
It is a bit weird, and I don’t really see why, since you can change the order of icons in this dense row-grid. I am glad Apple warms up to the fact that people might actually want some kind of customization on their devices and not everything “the way Apple decrees it”.
But to be really honest… I did not even notice prior to this post, and I had all Android before switching to my current iPhone. So at least for me this is a really small non-issue, and maybe a nice-to-have feature.
I had an iPad for a while and it definitely bothered me. Really just about everything did. It felt like I had to fight with it to do just about anything I wanted to do.
Well, the issue is just that you’re not thinking with the Apple mindset. If you’re having difficulty doing something through an Apple product, it really just means you were trying to do the wrong thing in the first place. Where Apple products really excel is in their integration, both between software and hardware, and between separate devices through iCloud servihahahaha I’m just messing with you but can you imagine some fanboy actually typing out shit like this?
Well, the issue is just that you’re not thinking with the Apple mindset. If you’re having difficulty doing something through an Apple product, it really just means you were trying to do the wrong thing in the first place.
Lol. That was exactly my take as well. Which is why after a few months of battling my new Apple laptop, I went to buy a generic PC lappie, slapped KDE on it and never looked back (this was a while back).
This remind me when in the 1980’s Cup Holders were introduced in Dodge Caravans, but most cars they expected you to buy this and clip it onto the inside window the story historygarage.com/essential-evolution-handy-cup-h…e. 1980’s
I was going to mention this. You can move them around; but you can’t move them anywhere you want. The icons will always be, as you say, in a dense grid of rows with no “blank” spaces between the icons.
I don’t know if the OP is true or satire or some kind of April fools thing, but it’s still accurate.
Try Mac OS next lol. “Here, hold down alt, smack your left ass cheek, and tap dance around your computer to run this unsigned executable”. It really feels like they’re deliberately violating the principle of discoverability to stop your from doing things that they don’t like.
Technically, Android does that, too, but the limit on that is a few years. If I’m not mistaken, the lowest version of Android that Google will allow a user to install through the Play Store is Android 12 (released in September 2020).
Yes, but 99% (give or take) of Android users won’t know or care how to install 3rd party apps. So most people would only care about the Google Play Store limitation.
The limitation is overcome the moment someone downloads and installs APK from web browser or some store. It is artificial, and for nerds that want to install apps older than those for Android 6, they can toggle that flag with ADB.
Apple on the other hand renders phones outside of its update cycle as junk devices, even if capable.
You can’t even cut/paste in Mac OS without using your mouse and modifier keys. Like, seriously? Also, it’s 2024 and they still don’t have window snapping. Like what the fuck, Tim Apple?
You can tho? You can use arrow keys to move around the text, and hold down control to move by entire words in most apps. CMD + C to copy and CMD + V to paste (CMD is what they call the super key). But yeah, they’re trying to push a pointer-centric design that nobody really wants instead of putting the keyboard first.
That’s copy/paste. There is no cut command in Mac AFAIK. There’s only the move command, which requires an additional modifier when pasting. If there’s a key combo for that modifier, then I would like to know what it is. The only way I know how to do it is with the context menu from right clicking and the modifier key. But still, why do they do it differently than every other operating system?
Cut is just Command + X. You can swap in Command for most of the windows shortcuts that use control. Why didn’t Apple just use the Control button for Control things? That I do not know.
I’m a Windows user, but my church uses a Mac to run its projection and video recording. I’ll admit it works pretty well for what we typically need it to do, but it recently took me like five minutes to figure out how to crop a picture because you apparently can’t do that by simply opening the file and clicking the crop icon.
Mac’s filesystem is an absolute mess, too. This might just be my own inexperience, but I’ve saved things like PowerPoints and videos in order to upload them, and then I’ll go to the website to upload them, and I won’t be able to find them because they’re not in a specific folder or something.
I picked up an iPhone several years ago, I think a 6 or 6s? Anyways, I tried to use it for a while, because I work in IT and sometimes need to support people on their iPhone, and being an Android person, I had no idea what I was doing.
I could not stand it. Everything took so much more effort. I never got rid of my android, I just tried to use the iPhone whenever possible to familiarize myself with the apple way of doing things. I hated some of the layouts, I missed the back button… Even something as simple as copy/paste just seemed a lot more cumbersome for no good reason.
I learned a lot about it and where options and such were located (which is what I primarily needed) then I simply used it a bit less and less all the time until I finally stopped using it entirely. I have no idea where it is at this point, but I’m sure it still works and I’m sure I would still hate it. I’ve wanted to retry the experiment with a newer device like the X or 11 or something, but anytime I consider it, I just think back on my experience and unless I can pick up a relatively modern iPhone for next to nothing, I’m pretty uninterested in trying again. I know iOS has had a lot of updates in the past few years since I used one and maybe it sucks less? But I’m not willing to sacrifice my sanity to figure it out.
I don’t mean to hate on iOS or iPhones. I certainly don’t like them, but if that’s what works for you, then go ham. I find it cumbersome and restrictive, and you’re free to disagree and use whatever you like; don’t let me stop you.
Right? I gotta use an iPad at work now and where the FUCK is the back button!?!? I’m so tired of mashing the home button. It’s cool AF that my stylus will put text specifically where I write it though, and it translates my cursive!
It’s Apple, their entire business model is making their tech as restrictive as possible and stripping away as much freedom as they legally can. You can’t name a company more power-hungry.
If you look at his instructions, he says “Take general internet safety precautions and don’t open zip files from strangers without checking.”. I was making a joke that IDC and I want the theme. I can see why that didn’t really come through if you didn’t actually click his link, given the short nature of my reply.
Everytime this is reposted in a new template I remind everyone that no one is using incognito mode to hide from their ISP they are using it to hide from their spouse or partner.
Yes, but I want auto fill turned on for some websites because they go straight to the section that I want instead of navigating through the site every time.
I produce a podcast that gets us into some twisted corners of the internet. Especially when I fact check things for the other hosts. Mullvad + proton VPN always up, no question.
Beyond that it’s legitimately useful for logging into a second account on a site or for various testing purposes as a web developer. Though if you’re consistently using it for the former, containers are a better solution.
I don’t need the obvious URL’s popping up whenever I start typing. I’m just one fat finger away from a bad mistake and subsequent loud sounds on my studio speakers when anyone could be around if I don’t do that.
It’s best to keep that stuff separated out to spare yourself some incredibly avoidable embarrassing moments.
I use private mode for a whole bunch of stuff, visiting shopping sites i dont want coming up in targeted ads, watching youtube videos that are out of my usual jam and not wanting to get endless suggestions for crap im not into because i wanted to see a plumbing repair how-to or listen to a song wildly out of my usual genres because i was in the mood.
No doubt. Whoever’s making these memes obviously wasn’t around when Incognito/Private browsing was introduced. It was never advertised as hiding anything from your ISP.
i use private windows mainly so i don't clutter up browser histories with useless stuff i won't go back to (if i do run across something to save, it gets bookmarked or printed to pdf).
Yeah thats why I use Firefox Focus on mobile. It has no feature to save history. I use normal Firefox in case I want to save history or login permanently
Yes, they do. I use 4 different browser profiles for various things. But everyone who uses my computer while I cannot control what they do, gets their own user account or can use a guest account.
I’ve always been used to browser clearing everything on exit. On my phone I set Firefox focus as the default browser so whenever I search anything I just dump it after
I’m in my thirties, single for years and occasionally make sexual jokes. People know I fap. Everyone faps (huh, could be the title for an educational children’s book…), I don’t hide my browser history. Other question is who from? I live alone.
I've seen this same suggestion years ago on Blender tutorials. Generating a scene isn't about making it realistic, it's about fooling the audience into thinking it's real without making it too hard to create. Look at videos from Ian Hubert on how to fake it well.
They did this in the Hitman 1>2>3 progression and got H3 down to like… 36 gigs… they reused doors when posssible, fruits in bowls, etc. Instead of bespoke items for each game in the series, they compressed and repeated stuff, and got the entire trilogy game down to the size of one of the individual games.
I just got back into H3 a week or two ago and was caught off guard by the install size! Last time I installed 2 I had to disable a ton of map DLCs and rotate em out as I went to not take up most of the storage on my Steam Deck SD card.
It’d be pretty great if an entire generation referred to this phenomenon as the Nintendo Yuzu Effect instead of the Streisand Effect. Or maybe the YouTube Adblock Effect? These companies keep accidentally telling everybody about shit that is relatively unknown yet universally desired in order to not have to pay exploitative prices. Even early Switch games are still fucking impossible to find for less than their launch price. And actually, now that I think about it, the MSRP of the Switch itself still hasn’t dropped either. It costs just as much today as it did 7 goddamn years ago to legally buy a Switch, BotW, and Mario Odyssey. Nintendo’s greed is the reason Switch piracy was ever big enough to be worth chasing, and now chasing it will cause an even bigger boom in it. Well, that and their shitty controllers. I don’t blame anybody for wanting to play BotW with an Xbox controller on their last-gen PC.
Nah keep it Streisand effect, as that’s where the term originated, if we changed phrases every single time a company did this, we’d be changing it every hour.
Fair, but they still could have heard it on the radio while their parents were driving them to hockey practice or welding seminars or whatever 9yos did back then 🤷
Which adds to the point: even though no one knows who she is anymore or about her giant beachfront mansion she tried to have removed from the Internet, her name lives on in infamy
Historians will look back one day and be like “this woman was so renowned for her terribleness, we can trace the entymology of this modern word back to her name”.
If gameboy games are anything to go by, prices almost never drop. I remember getting a GBA game for 20 euros back when the Nintendo SD was already ending its end of life.
It’s getting pulled down basically everywhere so you’re going to have to find some smaller communities or individuals to get your hands on it now. That’s the real annoying part here lol
The code itself is not illegal, so hosting it is fine.
Just dont encourage piracy, like at all. No linking, no support, and certainly not patching for games which didnt come out yet and offering these fixes early for payment.
Yeah, there's totally not Mirrors around with the original source code that got pulled, and the entire internet having collectively archived it before Yuzu itself pulled the plug
Also it was the only Switch emulator in existence, there totally isn't another emulator going around
Also you totally should not follow what I said here, y'know, emulation is wrong after all according to Nintendo
Studies have shown that in places where porn is blocked, rape occurs at higher frequencies than in places where that is not the case, possibly due to higher levels of feelings of frustration and repression. This may be only one website now, but if others likewise follow the trend out of fear of litigation… then Texas may become a much more dangerous state to live in in the very near future, even compared to what it already is now.
Would you be okay with letting children freely watch people having sex? The issue is not with freedom its with what we allow minors to see. I dont know how it is possible to stop this, but I agree its a problem that needs to be addressed if possible.
I mean, unintentionally, but I’ve been walked in on by my little one before. You can’t always control what your kids are gonna see.
It isn’t rocket science; it’s education. Being sexually repressed is a choice - a bad one. Sit down with your kids, teach them the birds and the bees, and maybe they won’t end up with a completely unrealistic view of sex.
Sexual repression is the American way. Americans wonder why Europeans are buckwild in this regard, and it’s because they have healthy conversations about sex and regard it as natural. They still have laws involving minors and all that, but their view is much more humanistic.
Unless the internet is dismantled and containerized, there’s no realistic way to prevent minors from viewing porn. The problem is that American parents have puritanical views on sex and rely on prohibition rather than being uncomfortable and having a chat with their kids about one of the most natural things humans engage in because they themselves are prudes. It’s the same reason people get all wound up when they see a pair of boobs, because they view them as sexual objects and not yet another part of the human anatomy. Mind boggling, but that’s religious influence for you.
Important to always remember America started because a bunch of hyper religious folks thought the Church of England was too permissive, named themselves “Puritans”, and sailed off to a new land. And many still hold to those warped values today
Seeing sex accidentally of your parents is different than porn. Porn is unhealthy and is ruining minors and adults lives. If we have the capability to stop minors form seeing porn, then everyone should be on board with that.
First sentence, I agree. Second, factually incorrect. 3rd, i agree, parents should be monitoring their children and teaching them about birds and bees for their age, giving them knowledge so they dont go looking cause they are curious.
Nothing said restricts websites in a whack a mole fashion as this will never work. Kids will always find a way around restrictions.
Crime is ruining people’s lives, if we can just make everyone demonstrate that they aren’t committing crime at any given time, crime will go down. So everyone should be on board with that.
Let me be direct. You are not able to understand the difference between something happening at a specific physical location, and access rights to that, vs something accessed via property not owned by that place. You, for whatever reason, either cannot, or refuse, to acknowledge that accessing data, on a device you own, puts the onus on you to stay within the law. If your kids are accessing some strip club’s stream, on devices you bought them, or on your property, then it is you that needs to make sure they don’t. Not the strip club, not the streaming platform, not the ISP. These “think of the children”, reactionary laws, that place parenting responsibilities on outside entities, are simply wedges to reduce protections of liberties from the government. This is moral panic 101.
You are sealioning. It’s literally all you do. You pretend to put forth a reasonable argument, but you ignore absolutely everything anyone else says, and then try to trap them with what you think are clever questions. But you’re just a pigeon shitting on a chess board claiming victory.
And you keep proving you are incapable of realizing that what you are saying is not the same as what is happening in REALITY. Your premise is foundationaly flawed. Accessing a porn site, and walking into a strip club, are completely different things. You, however, only seem to be able to understand that both have naked people in them, so they are the same.
It’s illegal for a kid to walk in a strip club, it’s also illegal for a kid to access porn. The difference is that the strip club has a physical door you can stop the kid from passing through. You can see, and physically interact with, the kid at the strip club. On the internet you do not have that. A kid can not change themselves to be someone else, and have reasonable proof that they are an adult, and in a location where this is legal, at a strip club, like they easily can online. With less than an hour with google, and some basic computer software, a child can easily make themselves look anyway they want to a porn site, ISP, platform, etc. The best one can do with the strip club is provide a fake ID if you look like you could be old enough. Guess what? If they do this it is THEIR fault, not the strip club’s. The strip club can say “hey they had an ID and look like they are old enough” because they can physically interact with them. False identification is what is happening when a child accesses porn. This time they have no physical person there to examine though. They are saying “yes I am legally able to get on here” and, since there is no reasonable way to make sure this is true, they get let in the door. If the legal penalty changes to the site provider, who exists in a REALITY where there is no reasonable way to ensure someone is who they say they are, then there is no reasonable way they can adhere to a law, thus effectively creating a blanket ban of online porn without having to say “we made something ruled to have first amendment protections illegal”.
If parents, who know, and have more control over, their child than anyone else, can’t stop them, what in hell makes you think some outside entity, who can only interact with them via layers of abstraction, could possibly do so? All this shit does is make kids learn how to mask their locations, and fake their credentials online, which is not hard to do. The only reasonable person to hold responsible for this is the child’s parents/care givers. The onus of liability has to fall on them. Even places like China can’t keep people from faking their identities online, yet you want to saddle porn sites with a legal burden if they can’t. But you don’t really want to stop children from accessing porn. You want porn to be illegal for everyone.
Feel free to do you own research, I am not going to do it for you. “BUT THAT MEANS IT DOENST EXIST!!!” Sure, whatever you want to believe, feel free, there is no convincing people that want to believe something.
What’s your point? Are you advocating for increased rape here? What problem needs to be addressed? Kids watching porn? My kids don’t. I don’t know what this post has to do with that, but the Texas government isn’t protecting my kids here.
If you do not want something - an abortion, a vaccine, porn, to own a gun, etc. - then the solution is simply: do not take it. Beyond that, why heap heavy burdens upon other people, rather than offering to help?
I am saying that “children watching people having sex” is not the issue here. Some few sickos aside, I think MOST people are agreement on that point. The issues are all the other issues surrounding that topic - e.g. who should be the ones held responsible for stopping that.
Like, why not the parents? It is exceedingly easy to block websites from a home router, and from devices such as ipads, so why should the website be the one upon whom all of the blame and burden should go to? Will Amazon be next, b/c it is possible to find sex toys on it? What about Wal-Mart, b/c you can purchase dangerous ammunition there? For that matter, any child can go into a gun show and see rifles and ammunition on display - why are those not banned? Children have even been known to be able to purchase those weapons, which are literally lethal - which is far worse than merely seeing some skin!!!
Fwiw I think you mean well, but are missing the nuances of this discussion. Children will end up seeing porn - someway, somehow, I guarantee you that it is possible, b/c that is simply how the internet works. It is like playing whack-a-mole and you can’t stop them all, especially like 90% of all domain names are already registered to porn and pirate websites. This law will not have the effect that it is intended to stop - and there is a goodly chance that it will make things worse actually, bc when people go off the well-trodden pathways, they will find themselves in the… darker corners of the internet.
Then again, I am not a lawmaker, so what do I know. I was just sharing my thoughts, in case they would be of interest to you.
Sex as a whole should be demystified as a culture. I’m sure most people got into porn in general out of curiosity and the taboo nature of it certainly only makes it more enticing.
What we need is sex education that is so comprehensive/ in depth that it’s mind numbingly boring.
Make them memorize the PH value of the uterus and how they affect the alkili levels of the spermatosa.
Just bog them down with the details and then they will give so much less of a shit about sex/porn in general.
It’s the parents job to parent, not the government or third parties.
There are numerous less problematic tools parents can use from parental controls to automated local monitoring to good ol fashion monitoring to good (read: not “abstinence only”) sexual education.
I wonder how many adults here saw porn as a kid? If we’re being honest, probably the majority. Kids don’t find youporn unless they’re looking for it.
There is a highly effective way of preventing kids accessing porn, by being a parent and watching them (ie, put the computer in a public area) and also installing porn blockers in parallel. That’s the solution.
The problem with laws like this, is that they’re easy to abuse and they’re created by people who don’t understand technology either (so they’re happy to make tech less useful, or they’d even ban some of it entirely if they could be to level the playing field).
It’s more important to keep kids away from unsolicited porn specifically and creeps, and that can be some simply by requiring a site warning and monitoring them online
It’s more important to keep kids away from unsolicited porn
That’s how I’ve seen porn for the first time, when I was around 7. From advertisements. Physical ones.
One Slovakian pawn shop chain called “Breva” used this as an advertising strategy. Their advertisement leaflets (put into mailboxes) had nudes. I remember I secretly collected those.
Of course, they were reported for this a couple times, but all that happened was that they got into the news a few times. (Read that as “Free advertising”) Based on news, it seems last occurrence of this was 2017.
I mean, I remember its name because of that, so I guess it worked…
It’s always bonkers (and rather telling) how conservatives always frame anything sex as pushing it directly for children, like not banning porn is the same as launching pornhub Jr.
I guess yall gotta project super hard to cover all the Republicans on the state level in multiple states that have actively been fighting minimum marriage age laws and incest laws.
“NOBODY IS ALLOWED TO TEACH CHILDREN ABOUT SEX, THEIR BODIES, OR CONSENT - until they marry uncle jimbob when they turn 10 and get pregnant”
Pornhub Jr is a great idea. You could have unskippable ads that teach sex ed topics like how to deal with puberty and preventing STIs. It would keep the kids off elsagate and you could satisfy their curiosity about adult topics in an age appropriate way.
I saw printed and video porn right around the time I hit puberty, decades ago, before there was internet in every home. And my parents didn’t have a scrap of it in the house. You think you can stuff that cat back in the bag? You wanna know what actually messed me up though? All the adults in my life absolutely losing their minds at the thought that I might be having sexual thoughts as a young teen. The guilt, shame, and denial of information is what messes up kids, because if they never told us anything, and made us feel horrible about it, surely we’d never have sex before marriage! Be careful, that can backfire on you.
Your kids are gonna see naked people doing it. You need to come to terms with that inevitability, and become the kinds of parents they can feel comfortable asking questions. Of course, growth is hard, and way too many parents delude themselves into believing that bringing some poor kid into this world bestows them divine wisdom and ultimate authority over what’s best for that kid, and never learning another damned thing again. It doesn’t. Parenting is a responsibility and a journey, not a coronation. Growing up doesn’t stop when you have kids. You cannot shield them from reality. It’s your job to guide them through it; to raise them into adults, not to keep them children forever.
You certainly have no right, or even ability, to legislate the nature of reality for others until you feel safe. That deluded fantasy is far more poisonous to society than people having sex on camera. It simply does not matter if you’re uncomfortable with an aspect of parenting. The world does not give a fuck. Nobody ever said parenting was comfortable. Accept what you cannot change, and help your kids become functional adults. You cannot imagine how much I wish my parents had.
Looks like you didn’t read or understand anything I said.
It doesn’t matter whether any of us are okay with them seeing porn or not. They are going to see it. Do you think you can put that cat back in the bag? Do you think it matters whether your kids can come to you with questions WHEN, not if, they have questions about sex? The actions I think need to be taken are people like you growing up and learning how to actually parent.
You might as well ask whether we should be ok with them finding out about extinctions.
Why do you think it needs to be prevented? Do you seriously still think it’s possible to prevent? Do you think it matters whether your children can come to you about questions when they inevitably look at porn and have questions?
I have answered your question several times. I don’t care in the slightest whether you’re unhappy with my answer. I don’t think it matters whether we’re okay with it or not. It’s going to happen. There is no such thing as putting that cat back in the bag. I saw it when I was young, and it did me no harm. What did me harm was people like you.
You didn’t like my answer, but that does not mean I didn’t answer it. You only think I can answer your question with yes or no. If I say no, you’ll ask me why we’re arguing. If I say yes, you’ll accuse me of being a sexual deviant. Either way, you’ll refuse to answer mine, because you don’t have the courage to even consider my questions inside your own head. But I don’t care what your answer is. I just want to see you do the impossible, and think.
Children seeing porn is the lesser evil in a choice of that or authoritarianism. The police are not allowed to just come onto property and demand everyone there prove they have the right to be. Does that mean that lots, and lots, and lots, of people enter property when they aren’t allowed? Yes, does this mean that sometimes people get away with serious crimes? Again, yes. However the downsides of the 4th amendment are lesser than having cops forcing everyone they don’t know to prove their identity and that they aren’t doing anything wrong.
The 1st amendment means that people will be exposed to things, considered speech for legal purposes, that are not good for them. This is less bad than the government getting ever more control over speech. In order to to have freedom you will have to accept that bad things will arise from it.
Uh, not thats not a slippery slope argument… Its an argument about how if there are things happening then we should stop them, even if you think its authortarian. So if we were able stop children looking at naked people, then we should do that too.
I didn’t avoid the question. You made a a bad comparison.
If the strip club was streaming, and children could access it via their home computers, then no the strip club should not be held responsible. That is the parent’s job, and if the parents suck, the parents need to suffer the consequences, no one else.
However, you have made statements that make me doubt there are very many authoritarian measures you wouldn’t agree with, in regards to restricting access to porn, because you are one of those people who blames a disproportionate amount of society’s ills on porn.
You zero clue how much I blame anything on porn. I blame most of societies problems on weak useless men and ignorant people that how no clue what reality is.
And you totally are missing what I am saying, let me be very direct; children accessing porn is not supposed to be happening, but it is. We stop it in real life, but dont do anything about it on the internet.
Did you know that a child accessing porn is illegal? Did you know that, when it is done in their on, or with, their property, the people responsible for that are the parents of those children, and no one else? The only thing these bills do are shift the regulation of personal life onto the government.
Yes we need a STRONG MAN to lead us all to REALITY! We just need leader who is a STRONG MAN that doesn’t get distracted by pussy, weakling things, like freedoms, context, and viability. Just push government force onto everything I don’t like! That will bring people to REALITY!
My kids dont get open access to the internet alone.
If you hadnt noticed, most parents suck, they give their kids cell phones and social media. If kids are not “policed” by their parents and do things that are directly harmful and illegal like drinking alcohol, should the police intervene?
People like you make me want that feature where you can’t see replies with more than 10 downvotes over upvotes. God, I lost so many braincells reading about your idiotic opinions and your inability to accept reality…
Here’s a couple. Not a regional porn ban = more rape like previous poster said, but this is the most relevant data I could find. …and this data isn’t great. My main takeaway from this search is that we need to direct some actual research into what access to porn does vs doesn’t do. Also specific categories of porn - I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that sexual violence increases with consumption of porn that glorifies rape; but then if porn made a point to model good practices around things like obtaining consent, I’d wager sexual violence probably decrease.
TLDR, it’s a complicated question, so take these with a grain of salt, but among the most credible sources I found, they trended toward porn and rape NOT being positively correlated.
“Victimization rates for rape in the United States demonstrate an inverse relationship between pornography consumption and rape rates.”
“The results showed that in none of the countries did rape increase more than nonsexual violent crimes [during a period of increased access to porn]. This finding in itself would seem sufficient to discard the hypothesis that pornography causes rape.”
Sounds like it works right into their plans for controlling the population by forcing people to give birth then. What a hellscape. I’m so sorry for the good humans that live there.
While I disagree wholeheartedly with the relevant law, this is an incredibly dangerous argument to make against it. It insinuates an innate propensity towards sexual aggression and ignores many other factors that might occur alongside such laws.
There might be a misunderstanding. I was talking about a correlation between areas where where porn is blocked i.e. repressive regimes and rape. Not necessarily a casual effect from one directly to the other, although that might not be able to be ruled out either.
Either way it is a question of fact, so not up to either of our mere opinions. Though I find that it is darn near impossible to find such things these days using Google - it refuses to show “relevant” results and instead tries to show only “recent” ones that it wants to promote, and DuckDuckGo is far too narrow to make that easy. So finding the full unvarnished truth is a research project that I do not want to undertake, though in case it helps to share my remembrance of having read such a thing once I thought I would offer. This is nowhere near my area of expertise so was only a comment not an authoritative statement of definitive fact.
Also there could be other factors involved - e.g. higher incidents of rape in neighborhoods that tend towards being poorer and more heavily religious in nature, e.g. within the United States that would be Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, Florida, Texas, etc. I don’t recall if the study checked for similar levels of poverty but with different religious leanings - if suitably comparable places could even be found.
So my statement was saying how sad it is that Texas is choosing to become more like e.g. Florida rather than more like e.g. California, or to remain more of its own separate thing as it has done in the past. Becoming “repressive” does not sound conducive to good health (especially women’s health).
If you find it, let us all here on Lemmy know - it looks like people are very interested (I know I would be to see a refresher). The sad part is how this stuff has been known for decades, but people just ignore it - e.g. “just grab 'em by the p$#&y”. There are some, like John Oliver and Innuendo Studios, who are doing fantastic work to spread awareness of matters that need attention (and Jon Stewart is back, sort of:-), but ofc that won’t reach the ears of people who refuse to listen, and instead choose to highly regard those who spread fear and chaos, most likely purely for profit reasons.
That’s… not just a Texas thing, and yeah, bc saturation may have long been passed on that one, so this is newer territory to expand authoritarianism into.
Pretty much. Being liberal myself, it drives me insane seeing the absolute triple people will buy into. Websites aren’t the things to target, let’s look at things like cruise ships and transitioning to renewable energy.
I’ve never seen low-information voter used as a racist dog whistle, at least not when it was first used during the Obama years. Has it been used differently since?
UC Berkeley cognitive linguist George Lakoff, 2012: Dumb and dumber: :
As the U.S. presidential campaign heats up, Mitt Romney and Barack Obama are piling up money and shoring up their political bases. But they’re also going after a few million voters in a handful of swing states — voters considered critical to winning the election. And within this bloc of voters is a special camp: “low-information voters,” or LIVs, a term that keeps popping up in magazines and political blogs.
The term is mainly used by liberals to refer to those who vote conservative against their interests and the best interests of the nation. It assumes they vote that way because they lack sufficient information about issues. The assumption being, of course, that if only they had the real facts, they would vote differently — for both their own best interests and those of the nation.
The problem is that, as neutral as the term “low-information voters” may sound, it’s pejorative and used to express frustration with these voters, who (we’re told) act against their own best interests. Liberals tend to attribute the problem in large part to conscious Republican efforts at misinformation — say, on Fox News or talk radio — and in part to faulty information gleaned from friends, family and random sources.
to refer to those who vote conservative against their interests
They mean black people who don’t vote for them. That’s why it’s a dogwhistle. It became a lot more clear what they meant by that during the 2016 presidential election between Clinton and Trump. The implication being that the reason they weren’t voting for them was because they were intellectually inferior, and not because they were making a conscious and willing decision to not vote for a neoliberal hag.
I mean you’re probably not murdering anyone by using it, just wanted to tip you off of its problematic connotations.
I can hear him saying, “of course it will be fine” with a tone that implies questioning the fineness was the stupidest thing he’s ever heard, because he thinks projecting confidence works for anything just like it works for tricking people that he knows things he really doesn’t.
And then there’s a good chance he acts like there was no way anyone could see the result coming once it’s clear that it isn’t, in fact, fine.
in 1999 you had the ability to get into a music shop, load the cd and test listen to it. Or just go through the music charts. Or wish for a specific song on radio.
Also 1999 already had Napster, Morpheus and others.
In the 2000s, some electronics stores where I lived had “jukeboxes” with headphones and a barcode scanner, so you could listen to 30-second snippets of the songs on an album before buying it.
I still keep a pencil in my car. I know there’s no cassette to play, but my car feels naked with a pencil rolling around the center console or in the little tray on the dash.
It was less that we were poor and more that my parents had a lot of music and radio dramas on different media. My father still has more than two hundred vinyl disks that he plays semiregularly and I have an old audio tape player/recorder sitting around in my bedroom although I don’t really use that one.
I think there’s also an element of the hit tracks often being a bit more formulaic. There’s a big component of familiarity in music that makes it appealing, so people might not appreciate the more experimental tracks on an album until they’ve heard them a few times.
Also standing there for 45 minutes to listen to the entire thing? Who actually does that?
Me. It was me. I was 14. I listened to the whole thing. I think the name of the store was “The Warehouse” and maybe another was called “Good Guys”? But yeah. Both. I’d take the bus to the mall and sit on that raggedy ass carpet that smelled like a movie theater floor and listened to the whole damn album. All of them actually (usually like 6-8 per station?) until the manager told me to leave. A couple times clerks would hook me up with burned demos.
God, I miss test listens. My favorite record store was very easy going in this, they’d happily let me stand there listening to most of the CD. The unspoken rule was that if you spend that much time listening, you’re going to buy it anyway.
One of the few shops where I always felt welcome.
Horses cant wipe either but they do fine in terms if the smell. The trick is that they have an anus designed to prolapse a few inches so that the feces only ever comes into contact with the rectum and never exterior tissues.
… I did know before reading the post the reason we as humans are the only ones who wipe. Where did I learn this? From you (the internet) of course. Where else xD
If you haven’t bought a bidet (like $50-100 and a few minutes to install) or shower every time you poop, you are probably covered in feces right now. Toilet paper alone is kind of gross.
When I was studying for PMP, I remember there was even a term for this. Because you’re good at one thing, it was expected that you would be good at something else as well, not taking into consideration that managing people is completely different from the domain they were an expert on. Of course, sometimes it helps to have some previous domain knowledge to be able to lead a specific team, but that doesn’t mean it’s automatic.
What companies really need to realise is that there should be different promotion tracks, and some of them are individualistic, i.e. being promoted as an expert in their field, rather than being promoted to have to manage people.
slrpnk.net
Top