LurkingLuddite

joined 9 months ago
[–] LurkingLuddite@piefed.social 1 points 3 months ago

Way to excuse yourself from handing money to more than problematic people...

[–] LurkingLuddite@piefed.social 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

You do not need the manual. At all.

Just because they went through the effort to put a bunch of info into a place does not mean you NEED that info to do anything. Similarly, just because it can be useful does not make it required.

Now, stop being pedantic and start trying to think of games where you NEED the manual, hence making it, a "main gameplay aspect".

[–] LurkingLuddite@piefed.social 0 points 3 months ago (3 children)

Our loss of hair is caused by the EXACT same process that defines the rest of our bodies, so it's absolutely stupid to say we haven't "caught up" with losing hair...

[–] LurkingLuddite@piefed.social 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Nah, not necessarily imperative. An individual can still be a eugenicist without external support. The only reason the old beliefs that often get credited as "eugenics" were mostly wrong is because they were mostly just ignorance and masked racism, not actual genetic analysis.

All it takes to be a eugenicist is to believe that certain people shouldn't have children because you believe their genes are bad. That's it. It's literally just:

Eu: Prefix meaning "good" Gene: Relating to genes ecist: Believer (not totally sure on this one as search results to verify my beliefs mostly returned "-ition" results, with no explicit statements for -ecist or similar)

It's just a silly thing for a common fool to believe in, since genetics is complicated! Many confirmed genetic disorders are not inheritable. Many health issues are latent. You can have two totally healthy people birth genetic defects nigh 100% of the time. On the other end, someone with certain genetic disorders can absolutely have totally fine children with little extra worry. It completely depends on what genes are messed up and why.

Someone unfamiliar with the INSANE complexity of biology even in the basics of reproduction have zero right to hold a strong opinion on eugenics, IMO. (which of course immediately excludes 99% of conservative fuckwits who would happily call themselves eugenicists)

[–] LurkingLuddite@piefed.social 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Oh absolutely, she would've still had a rough time of it even fully agreeing with the cops, which is why it's so stupid when they act like pigs.

Hank really screwed the pooch with his chance at getting Skyler over by being a cop before a family friend. After that, it was obviously a choice between two evils for her.

The choice was pretty obvious, IMO... Go with Hank, destroy the family, destroy Walt, walk into a HUGE court case, everything explodes and goes public, you get little to no money from the DEA/gov... absolute nightmare with no clear payoff. Or ... go with Walt, hope his plans that've worked out thus far under your nose continue to work out, and get millions of dollars and a life you get to define.

Definitely an obvious choice. It's a good example of why making cops such authoritarian shitstains will never, ever produce a more peaceful society.

[–] LurkingLuddite@piefed.social 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Nope. Carbs when used to refer to food is referencing complex carbs, since simple sugars are called sugars... Carbs are not empty calories, but they can of course contribute to excessive calories.

I'd recommend you do a basic biology course to understand how important carbs are to your body. They ARE NOT just energy, and are in every single cell wall of your body. They are far more important than an energy source.

[–] LurkingLuddite@piefed.social 3 points 3 months ago

Magic sky daddy and your local bishop/priest/etc that definitely can be trusted with children alone behind closed doors... By the way, pay your tithes!!

Again, it amazes me that anyone gives such clowns the light of day.

[–] LurkingLuddite@piefed.social 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

That's still a legal requirement, not a technical one. A legal requirement that is exactly in the middle of the trademark couch and in no way whatsoever a technicality.

[–] LurkingLuddite@piefed.social 1 points 3 months ago (2 children)

lol have fun paying megacorps into perpetuity over five minutes of effort... your attitude is exactly why mega corps get to shit on everyone and get away with it.

[–] LurkingLuddite@piefed.social 1 points 3 months ago

That... is never a justification of anything.

Morons feel persecuted all the time. It doesn't make it true.

[–] LurkingLuddite@piefed.social 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

Yes there are many kinds of resealable containers for commercially sold pastes. Syringes with caps are very common. I've also definitely used pastes older than that and they worked great, but they were also expensive after-market pastes stored at room temp.

[–] LurkingLuddite@piefed.social 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Ehhhhh... The question isn't if such people exist, but in what proportion. They're saying, by reference to other sexual behaviors being legalized/illegalized, that it appears that the majority is relief valve.

OFC we cannot say for certainty without multiple studies, but they're saying it seems like the proportions skew in favor of relief valve, even across cultures.

I agree with them. The intuition seems to be relief valve, whether or not there would be a reduction in offenses.

However, I do not think normalizing the sexualization of children would help society in the long run. Sure, pedos should not be made completely taboo, or else there won't be help available. Sure, if you thought lgbtq people were similarly 'bad', you would say the same things about them...

... BUT kids will never, practically by definition, NEVER be intellectually or emotionally mature enough to justify pedo, whereas informed, consenting adults doing what they want in private is perfectly fine.

view more: ‹ prev next ›