loobkoob

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If everyone's super(rich), no-one is.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

People can be angry or upset about more than one thing at a time. And you've no idea whether the person you responded to has been outraged about the US' strikes or not. Just because a society as a whole has a viewpoint that trends a certain way doesn't mean you can assume each and every individual you talk to has that exact viewpoint.

By all means, criticise society as a whole - it's a very valid thing to be critical of. But making assumptions about individuals - and being rude to / critical of them based on those assumptions - isn't the way to win anyone over.

[–] [email protected] 75 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Well I'm just glad Harry Mack managed to release his 100th episode of "Omegle Bars" this week. He decided to take a break from doing Omegle-based content at the right time, it seems.

For anyone who doesn't know, Harry Mack's a freestyle rapper. He has (had) a series where he'd ask strangers on Omegle to give him a handful of words and then create a full song out of them on the fly. And not just saying those words then immediately moving on like most freestyle rappers do; he actually creates entire verses on the topics he's given and really raps around them. Plus he'd be calling out things the people were doing as they react to him, responding to things they say, mentioning things he can see in the room, etc, as he raps.

Here's one of his freestyles that's really stuck with me ever since I first saw it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ehcA4zCeaPI

He takes what are some fairly negative, "cry for help" words from the girls and turns them into a really beautiful, positive rap overall. He's a very positive guy in general, and I've watched him consistently since I discovered him. Binging his videos got me through a breakup, in fact.


My own experiences with Omegle have either been penises or just bland, and it's not something I've used for many years as a result. But videos like Harry Mack's show what wonderful things could come from it and I do think it's a huge shame it's gone. It feels like another part of the old internet's gone, and that we're moving even closer to the sanitised, heavily-monetised internet run by megacorporations. I hate that.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

Even if Starmer and the Labour party were pretty much the same except they kept the mask on, that would still be a step in the right direction. Normalising the racism, bigotry, corruption and general inhumaneness that fuels the Tory party is absolutely something we should try to avoid.

However, I don't think Labour is like this. I don't think they're perfect, but I think they're much, much better. They're not going to fix everything overnight, but I do think them getting into power would be an important first stepping stone in moving the country and politics towards being a better place in in 10-15 years. They may not be your ideal party but, if you're pragmatic and have any kind of long-term vision, you'll likely vote for them (or the Liib Dems, depending on which constituency you're in) to make sure the Tories are eliminated.

The Overton window is far too far to the right at the moment and Labour getting into power is important for helping to gradually shift it leftwards. People simply aren't going to vote in a "radical" socialist in the current political or economic climate; they want someone they can see as a safe pair of hands who can work on stabilising things somewhat. Right now, that's Starmer - the boring man who's politically central (by current standards) with a fairly clean record and an air of competence. When, in most constituencies, the options are Labour and Tory, you working to put everyone off Labour is just going to benefit the Tories.

Stop letting perfect be the enemy of good.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago

That and "Suella de Ville". And she's fully deserving of either title. I mentioned elsewhere in the thread, but where other politicians I dislike feel like they're either doing the wrong things for the right reasons, or they're selfish, corrupt or incompetent, Braverman feels like she gets off on the cruelty and is a genuinely evil person.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think calling her the "second coming of Maggie" really undersells Braverman's cruelty and capacity for evil. I think Thatcher really fucked up this country, and we're still feeling the effects of some of her policies to this day. But Thatcher did genuinely think she was doing things for the right reasons - that she was making tough but necessary decisions.

Braverman seems to get off on the cruelty. A lot of her policies and ideas seem cruel for the sake of cruelty. There are plenty of politicians I've disagreed with and disliked, but they've all tended to feel like it's either because they were doing what I'd consider to be the wrong things for the right reasons (ie, they thought it would help, different approaches to what I'd want but with positive outcomes in mind, etc) or they've just been selfish, corrupt or idiotic. Braverman is a whole different thing entirely. The purpose of her policies is often the cruelty, with no tangible benefits that even she can list. She's a genuinely evil person.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago

Dark really sucks me into a dark damp place

Very few places are darker or damper than Winden!

[–] [email protected] 35 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They're not asking for it to be banned from the instance, or from Lemmy entirely; they just want it to be moderated out of this community.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Plus Edge has support for vertical tabs built in natively. It's wild to me that horizontal tabs are still the default, using up valuable vertical screen space and having illegible names when you've got a certain number of tabs open, when vertical tabs are an option. So props to Edge for offering that.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

It's not just beneficial for Twitch, it can be easier for users, too. Right now, if I want to get updates from all of my favourite Twitch streamers, because it can't be done through Twitch itself, I need to have accounts on Twitter, Discord, Instagram, YouTube, Mastodon and Reddit. And I maybe don't even care about their networking, memes, politics, random food photos, or whatever, I might just want to see them saying, "hey, I'm doing a special stream at this date/time" so I know to tune in.

Over a decade ago, I wanted SoundCloud to implement basic text statuses so musicians I followed could just announce things like upcoming releases, that they were working on an album, that they had a tour coming up, etc. They never did, and it still feels like a missed opportunity to me. I want a way to get useful announcements from creators I'm interested in without having to sift through all the noise and without having to use 15 different platforms.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's necessary for the client computer to know where other players are, though. Like, if someone is walking in the other side of a wall to me, or shooting their gun around a corner from me, it's important for me to get audio cues, for instance.

As for server-side input monitoring, that can only take you so far. It's easy enough to add a random element to a script so things don't happen at fixed intervals, for example. Most of these games do use server-side input monitoring on top of client-side anti-cheat.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

This is where it gets tricky and a lot of nuance is lost, I think. There reaches a certain point where it stops being zero-sum because two or more parties can each have an entirely independent and valid claim.

In your example, if you pass the money to your children, they reach 40 years old, spending the money they believe is theirs, and then suddenly they're told they owe $2M they don't have for something they didn't do, that's not fair on them. Have they benefitted from the $2M? Absolutely. Is it fair that they benefitted while the person/people you stole it from suffered? Absolutely not. But your children didn't do anything to deserve punishment.

Now I'm generally fairly anti-Israel, and have been for years, so don't take this as me being an apologist for colonisers. But for someone who has lived all their life in Israel - whose great-grandparents were colonisers - Israel is home and they feel they have just as much right to it as the people it was stolen from 80 years ago. The longer these conflicts go on, the more difficult it is to come up with a fair solution on a human level.

Israel is definitely in the wrong, though. It's very clearly not fair from a Palestinian perspective. But no matter how you try to divide up the land now, there will be innocent people who suffer for it. There's no easy solution to it, unfortunately. It's more complex than just "give it back".

view more: ‹ prev next ›