this post was submitted on 31 Oct 2026
236 points (78.9% liked)

Showerthoughts

44381 readers
1211 users here now

A "Showerthought" is a simple term used to describe the thoughts that pop into your head while you're doing everyday things like taking a shower, driving, or just daydreaming. The most popular seem to be lighthearted clever little truths, hidden in daily life.

Here are some examples to inspire your own showerthoughts:

Rules

  1. All posts must be showerthoughts
  2. The entire showerthought must be in the title
  3. No politics
    • If your topic is in a grey area, please phrase it to emphasize the fascinating aspects, not the dramatic aspects. You can do this by avoiding overly politicized terms such as "capitalism" and "communism". If you must make comparisons, you can say something is different without saying something is better/worse.
    • A good place for politics is c/politicaldiscussion
  4. Posts must be original/unique
  5. Adhere to Lemmy's Code of Conduct and the TOS

If you made it this far, showerthoughts is accepting new mods. This community is generally tame so its not a lot of work, but having a few more mods would help reports get addressed a little sooner.

Whats it like to be a mod? Reports just show up as messages in your Lemmy inbox, and if a different mod has already addressed the report, the message goes away and you never worry about it.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

All their responses are generated, no conscience there, just AI. "Another brick in the wall" hits stronger than ever now.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] XiELEd@piefed.social 1 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago) (1 children)

the system is bad, people exist in the system, people need to remain sane, people can indulge in a bit of badness sometimes in order to remain sane without being labeled as bad

What do you mean? What I'm getting is that people must do bad things to remain sane in a bad system but they have to do it in small doses so they don't be labeled as a bad person? Sorry, this part is just unclear to me.

I guess what I can get from that, is that some people think huge doses of it are normalised, it's what they're used to. In a bad society, unethically produced chocolate is cheap, advertising says—and omitting the fact it is unethically produced—it will make you feel good, from childhood to adulthood.

And since people dislike change, being confronted with the fact that something that feels good is actually bad results in cognitive dissonance. Eating chocolate daily something they're used to, and even if an ethical option exists, if they can only afford it once in every 3 days, they are unwilling to change even if they must support slavery.

When people do boycotts what tends to happen is that they find out that they don't in fact, need something that is basically a luxury to that degree. It was just something they are used to.

People can dislike boomers and privileged people for the same thing. I mean, if you think you are allowed to criticise them, don't you think the ones below you also have the right to criticise you? Because unfortunately, I am one of the people whose suffering westerners find acceptable as long as it brings them convenience. Like CEOs with their employees, now that I think of it.

Same thing with clothes, phones and cars. There are people who make fun of others for being diligent with the 20-80 rule because apparently normal people should replace phones every 2 years. Seeing comments like that really shocked me because I am not used to seeing such an attitude of luxury. Since I don't edit videos or play demanding games, when my battery fails me every 3 years I would replace my battery. Hearing people buy clothes every month for a total of 12 per year also somewhat shocked me, because in 5 years that's already 60 pieces of clothing. And it is shocking to see American traffic because their cars are big AF.

[–] lime@feddit.nu 1 points 7 hours ago

not must. i mean that we should not judge people for acting how the system wants them to. being a conscious consumer is good, but you're not automatically a bad person if you splurge occasionally.

what i take issue with is the "double standards" comment, which essentially says "if you don't use llms but you own a phone/commute by car/eat meat/whatever, you're a hypocrite". it ignores the context in which people exist.

i will absolutely call people out for replacing their phone every two years or shopping on shein, but i will not judge them for simply owning a car. some places have shitty infrastructure.

likewise, i will not judge someone who just wants a taste of luxury now and then, like taking a fancy vacation once in a while. but i will judge the hell out of them if the destination is dubai.

point being, people need to be able to treat themselves occasionally without being shamed. shame is reserved for those who do it all the time, especially when knowing the cost.

llms are a new luxury. i will not judge people for trying them out. i will, however, explain the real cost. if they persist after that, they will be shamed.