No Stupid Questions
No such thing. Ask away!
!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rules (interactive)
Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.
All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.
Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.
If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.
Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.
If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here. This includes using AI responses and summaries.
Credits
Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!
The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!
view the rest of the comments
Race is certainly not arbitrary, as your previous comment proved and common sense would substantiate.
I’m not sure why you’re looking at edge cases and making sweeping statements on effectiveness based on those examples. That seems misguided at best. No one claimed these are perfect data points for officers, only that they can help and are therefore warranted.
The information on IDs is the information officers have access to in their computers, it’s also the information dispatch has access to while giving a description. That is why having them on an ID in this particular example is important.
If you want to look at specifically why gender could be useful information in this one example, you can simply envision someone with a beard who identifies as female. The fact that their gender is female could inform an officer what they’d be wearing, where implying looking at the picture would guide the officer to assume the opposite.
This, again, is one example. As a general rule, more identifiers on an ID= a more effective ID, asking for specific examples and trying to reason them separately won’t change that, though we can do that if you’d like.
Which part of my comment proved race is not arbitrary?
Black Irish?
Do you expect my drivers licence to list "black Irish" as a race?
This example is so extreme.
Even in this example I still dont understand why gender needs to be on the licence
If police know they're looking for a trans woman, why would having the gender on the licence help?
I clarified that in my previous comment.
I’ve also tried to steer us off this subject and into the realm of a debate centered on theory multiple times. If you’re unhappy with the example, please join me in not continuing to bring it up.
Do you have any thoughts on anything else I’ve said?
You can't just declare yourself as someone making sense lol
Reiterate your point: give me an example where having gender on a licence is helpful.
I reject your previous example because the police looking for a trans woman would know it's a trans woman they're looking for. Having that info on the licence doesn't help them at all.
No. I’ve stated multiple points in multiple different comments that bring this out of the realm of examples you brought us into. You can engage with any point you take issue with or agree with, I don’t care.
That is why I tried to steer us out of the realm of examples, you can make an example for your position no matter what your position is. Engage with any of my actual statements on the matter.
Nah I'm good. I don't think youre arguing in good faith.
Both law-enforcement examples were yours. All I've asked for is one where a printed gender field helps, meaning it tells an officer something they couldn't get from the photo, the police record, or the dispatch description. You said there were "more than enough examples", gave two (which I reject), and declined a third.
You acknowledge police work from the information on their computer systems. Gender can be recorded there without being printed on ID, and neither example gets from "recorded" to "printed". Your rule that more identifiers make a more effective ID only holds for identifiers that add something.
My question was why it needs to be on a licence. You still haven't answered that.
You don’t think I’m arguing in good faith? That’s certainly one way to look at this conversation. Your inability or unwillingness to read my comments in their entirety doesn’t constitute bad faith on my part. You’ve once again ignored my comment and made a completely seperate point that I’ve already addressed 3… goddamn times. I’m trying my best to remain cordial but you’re incredibly frustrating to debate with. If your reading comprehension is so low, or you’re unwilling to actually read my entire comments, then please stop commenting. At this point you are outright ignoring the majority of any of my given comments so that you can continue claiming very basic things I’ve addressed and refuted.
The fact you claimed I’m not acting in good faith is fucking unbelievable. Something something every accusation is a confession or something.
I'm going to leave it up to the court of public opinion. If anyone else is this far down and has an opinion, feel free to weigh in, i'd like to know what piece of this I'm missing.