In my admittedly anecdotal experience I regularly hear people arguing a point I made, that days earlier they were fervently fighting against. Either I’m incredibly persuasive, or I think it’s really just ego. People can’t admit they’re wrong, even if they 100% know you are right. Once they forget they had their ego tied into your argument, they seem to often accept new information.

My ancestors were Jewish, they were chased out under threat of death. Absolutely repugnant to claim I’m mad about dead Nazis in that context.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excess_mortality_in_the_Soviet_Union_under_Joseph_Stalin

Stalin’s actions killed 7-20 million people, intellectuals, minorities, and poor people. At least a million of which were deliberate deaths. People who defend that for political expedience are unquestionably misinformed or evil, take your pick. My family was fleeing for their lives.

I am all for some form of socialism, defending evil people is not how you get it.

So when Stalin collaborated with Nazis to kill and chase away my relatives from what is now Ukraine that was imperialist propaganda? Why did so many of my ancestors flee Russia at that time?

Disappointed that I have not seen every song Dave Matthews has ever sung listed in here.

I agree they should expand their review protest to all games in the catalog and not selectively review bomb. Consumers have every reason to impact products success through their purchasing power and reviews. I stopped giving my money to game companies I don’t like a decade ago. It means missing some games, but there is so much out there it hardly matters. I don’t give a shit about this specific controversy, but I do think people have every reason to use their bully pulpit to attempt to impact consumer habits and therefore at least attempt change, even if they are often unsuccessful.

Let’s try this logic on other things. Their EULA says they can cut off a finger whenever they want. They haven’t cut off my finger for my purchase of this game, call me back when they cut it off.

If you’re someone that doesn’t want companies to have root level access to your computer, waiting until it happens is silly when they’re telling you it’s gonna happen. It is every reason to complain and be concerned.

Most Jews don’t live in Israel. 18 million Jews, 7 million live in Israel. The way you framed your comment doesn’t really make sense. You’re talking about Israelis, not Jews as a whole.

There are 5 classified levels of automation. At the lower levels of automation, the very article you are responding to quotes this evidence for you. Here is another article that gets deeper into it, I haven’t read it all so feel free to draw your own conclusions, but this data has been available and well reported on for many years. https://www.consumeraffairs.com/automotive/autonomous-vehicle-safety-statistics.html

They only have to work better and more consistently than humans to be a net positive. Which I believe most of these systems already do by a wide margin. Psychologically it’s harder to accept a mistake from technology than it is from a human because the lack of control, but if the goal is to save lives, these safety systems accomplish that.

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Gas

Depends on what you mean by that. I’m not a linguist, but I’ve heard a lot of them speak, so I hope someone more qualified will correct me where I am wrong.

At an early age language needs to be taught in it’s present localized state to give a base structure for learning. With that language learning we need to teach structure of language locally and also more generally. Later in their learning, if we taught everyone in society the reality that linguists already know, that language changes and evolves over time and place, and teach language basics like how language itself works, we see better outcomes. The worst outcomes we see in language learning is when we teach only rote memorization of sounds, spelling, and rigid grammar. We can still teach that stuff, but it needs to be taught along side general language structures, language theory, and an understanding of practical realities to see better outcomes.

Whatever we do, language will always change rapidly over time. It’s better to teach in a way that prepares people for the fluidity of language, than to teach people only the rigid structures that will inevitably change.

Language is largely not prescriptive, no matter how much people want it to be. Prescriptivism is like holding your hand out to stop a river, it completely misunderstands how language flows over time.

I’m not smart enough to spot the error in your comment, so I guess you’re an AI.

And a way of renormalizing misogyny.

God I’ve had that experience, ask a question I have some understanding of, they respond with an answer that completely misunderstands their own products and fundamentally misunderstands how anything works.

Putin getting killed only helps if his own people does it or believe they did it. If another country does it that probably starts WW3.

On the other hand, in my admittedly short visit there, it seemed like the public sector was broken there. You have to summon a magical spirit to find out what day of the month the post office pretends to be open. You have to be currently on fire for the fire department to consider showing up to an emergency… Beautiful country, excellent food, but, I’ve never seen such a dysfunctional “developed” country. If I was a citizen I’d be pretty pissed all the time as well.

Ahh, got it. Well the party is just a mechanism, it can be completely replaced and/or highjacked. I think the problem is really the lack of a cohesive block of people on the left. People on the left have about as many beliefs as stars in the sky, and too much pride to merge those together into a movement with a consensus. I don’t think the left has ever really given real organized effort to highjacking/replacing the party, they’ve spent more time protesting it instead.

Additionally, we are smaller than people on Lemmy believe, part of highjacking the party has to be vastly improved messaging and outreach. Bernie isn’t even that far left and I remember about 3/4 of Dems over 50 in my area hating him, calling him an extremist. True left wing people are smaller than we think.

Accelerationism and violent revolution rarely provide the outcome people are looking for. It just creates a power vacuum that powerful people fill. The idea that we can just break it and start over is a fantasy. If we break it, people like Peter Theil get their wildest dreams of corporate city states, or someone else gets their slavery and genocide. Bernie Sanders and AOC are not going to be starting the new government.