frazw

joined 1 year ago
[–] frazw 37 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (6 children)

AI: Dave, turn right and walk across the bridge.

Dave : But AI, there is no bridge

AI: I am 99% sure based on 99 billion images that there should be a bridge

Dave: ok , you're the smart one

Dave: aaaargh . . . .

SPLAT

[–] frazw 137 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Bracing for "Wait, I didn't think you meant me?!?!?"

[–] frazw -1 points 4 days ago

This is recent history, not all history, and FYI it is a meme not a scientific study.

[–] frazw 3 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I'm not arguing what the actual issue is, just how they consider the issue.

[–] frazw 36 points 6 days ago

I think the only thing you can do is remind her to be careful with her heart, and be really honest with herself about what she wants. I.e. Does she want him, or her, or does she want them both because there is twice the potential to be hurt when there are twice the number of partners.

Anything more than that will risk alienation.

[–] frazw 54 points 6 days ago (15 children)

I think the question they ask is more like "why are people voting for the other side?" ...leading to "we need to be more like them"

 

Democratic political strategy

[–] frazw 2 points 6 days ago

"I need to do a rectal exam now"

[–] frazw 38 points 1 week ago

Anything which drives nails into the xitter coffin is a good thing as far as I'm concerned. Bluesky may not tick many people's boxes here on lemmy, but this migration shows that lots of people wanted to leave xitter but didn't see an option. Threads clearly didn't attract them, likely due to the owner. I hope it nothing else, Bluesky is a less toxic place and xitter and musk become less relevant. In the long run Bluesky may end up being another head of the hydra , but for now, it's not, and it may get people used to the idea of federation.

[–] frazw 6 points 1 week ago

To me the cool kids were generally the ones not doing very well in school so they would try to make it seem like their choice and adopt an "I don't give a shit" rebellious attitude. They don't follow the rules, that's why their grades are bad, not because they don't have the intelligence. (in their mind).

They would continue to do average or even worse but they would get the admiration of other kids for seeming to have confidence and control and rebelling against the establishment (teachers).

Of course not every one admired that type of behaviour, but the attitude of not caring about the rules is exactly what Donald Trump does. I think most of his life he has been pretty average at what he does, but he was good at self promotion. A skill he probably learned in the playground when he was struggling with school.

In this sense Trump is a "cool kid". He is just a rare example of the cool kid succeeding enough to become famous.

And for what it's worth, I don't think being one of the cool kids is something to brag about once school was over. In fact it generally becomes the opposite at that point. American TV often painted the cool kids as the most capable and popular in every way, but that is fantasy.

Musk on the other hand was not a cool kid, but he desperately wants to be one. He must have some issues from school when he was likely shunned by them or bullied and he is trying to make up for it. Explains a lot of his recent actions actually.

[–] frazw 84 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Democrats: "Moving right a little didn't work this time. Next time let's try moving a little more to the right."

[–] frazw 30 points 2 weeks ago (16 children)

Why do people insist on saying "The American experiment"??

[–] frazw 38 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (5 children)

Where are all the passionate leftist politicians.

"We will fix the roads"

"We will find public services better like the police, fire departments and medicare so you never have to worry if help is coming in your hour of need"

"We will ensure everyone has access to healthcare whether rich or poor, insured or not so you never need to worry about losing your job and your health cover at the same time."

"We will invest in public transport to better connect our rural communities to make it easier to get well paying jobs even if you don't live in metropolis"

"we will invest in green energy and transport and retrain workers from the fossil fuel industry to improve the quality of the air you breathe, without putting coal and oil workers out in the cold“

"We will pay for this by taxing corporations who have for too long got away with paying lower tax rates than you, all while making record profits and creating billionaires like Bezos and Musk who use their immense power to convince you that what is good for you is actually bad for you."

 

Every decade has its musical style that generally makes it easy to place what decade a song was written in if you haven't heard it before.

40s big band

50s rock and roll

60s essentially has its genre named after the decade or at least I can't think of anything I'd call a genre.

70s punk and beginnings of heavy metal, disco

80s electro synth, rap

90s grunge, dance, R&B, trance

Etc etc. Obviously these don't entirely define the music of the decade but are highly recognisable genres that can more often than not pinned down to a decade.

So my question is, since the 2000s I don't see as much differentiation but that might be because I'm too old (44) and not as exposed to be music as I was in my teens, so help me pretend I'm "hip" and "with it" by giving me some clues. I'm curious to know what you think defines the music of the 2020s, what defines the 2010s and what defines the 2000s. I.e. When someone says they are going to listen to noughties music what do they put on? Etc. Or have we reached a point where music has been explored to the point new genres are much rarer to establish?

 

The Geneva convention was established to minimise atrocities in conflicts. Israeli settlements in Gaza are illegal and violate the Geneva convention. Legality of Israeli settlements Article 51 of the Geneva convention prohibits indiscriminate attacks on civilian population yet Israel attacked hospitals with children inside. Whether you agree or not that Hamas were present, children cannot be viewed as combatants.so when no care was taken to protect them, does this not constitute a violation? According to save the children, 1 in 50 children in Gaza had been killed or injured. This is a very high proportion and does not show care being taken to prevent such casualties and therefore constitutes a violation.

So my question is simply, do supporters of Israel no longer support our believe in the Geneva convention, did you never, or how do you reconcile Israeli breaches of the Geneva convention? For balance I should add "do you not believe such violations are occurring and if so how did you come to this position?"

Answers other than only "they have the right to go after Hamas " please. The issue is how they are going after Hamas, not whether they should or not.

EDIT: Title changed to remove ambiguity about supporting Israel vs supporting their actions

view more: next ›