Stoneykins

joined 1 year ago
[–] Stoneykins@mander.xyz 1 points 7 months ago

Oh absolutely.

You just seemed like you were trying to provide info, so I added the last bit to... Add more info.

[–] Stoneykins@mander.xyz 2 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (2 children)

Hey so the cosmic ray thing was a really popular meme but the glitch was probably just a crooked cartidge. It's funny to imagine a cosmic ray doing this but the odds are so low as to be functionally impossible, and this kind of glitch can happen with dirty or loose connections.

https://discuss.tchncs.de/comment/8767558

Someone else already linked this video so here is a link to their comment

[–] Stoneykins@mander.xyz 4 points 7 months ago

"than I thought you were"? I'm not the person you were talking to before.

What is your actual point? Why do you think it is important for you to argue that "actually gambling isn't pure luck"? And what, in your estimation, is "pure luck"?

The way I see it people are talking about specific phenomenon, and how they have entirely luck based outcomes (ex like the lottery), and you are trying to increase the scope of the context of the discussion to, in this example, include people who do not participate in the lottery, to try and argue that phenomenon does not have entirely luck based outcomes. But you haven't proven your point, you've been socially obtuse and attempted to derail the conversation from where it was because you have a bizarre point you want to make.

[–] Stoneykins@mander.xyz 5 points 7 months ago (2 children)

This is a silly distinction you are trying to make and it serves no purpose. And I don't even agree it is a real distinction... The act of deciding to gamble doesn't in any way mean the payoff or losses are anything but luck.

[–] Stoneykins@mander.xyz 2 points 7 months ago

Honestly that last paragraph just doesn't mesh with everything else you said. What on earth are your beliefs?

[–] Stoneykins@mander.xyz -1 points 7 months ago (2 children)

The idea that humans are inherently predisposed to subjugate those different from themselves is a fascist belief that fascists say to justify fascism. So.... Not a fan of that line of thought, thanks

[–] Stoneykins@mander.xyz 5 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (4 children)

If this is your main argument then:

...it’s obvious that any human being tends to prefer people who they consider similar to themselves.

Doesn't your paper you linked imply it isn't so obvious? I still stand by that it's not really relevant so I'll just say that I fully disagree with your argument or the implication that you have somehow proven anything.

I'll repeat something I said in another comment:

It is intentionally, intellectually dishonest and obtuse to pretend that condemnation of systemic problems resulting from unfair biases for/from certain demographics is as bad as the systemic problems in question.

You just pretend you are unaware of massive swaths of history in order to act offended that anyone would make generic statements about an infamously problematic demographic. And you falsely equate any attempt to talk generically about the problematic behaviour to the same issue, as a transparent tactic to suppress discussion of the problematic behaviour entirely.

I'm sure you will have some bullshit response that will annoy me again but I'm gunna try to let it go because I find talking to you unpleasant.

[–] Stoneykins@mander.xyz 6 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

It is intentionally, intellectually dishonest and obtuse to pretend that condemnation of systemic problems resulting from unfair biases for/from certain demographics is as bad as the systemic problems in question.

[–] Stoneykins@mander.xyz -1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (10 children)

Your barely-in-context paper is not support for your main argument :

However, this arguably applies less to white men than any other demographic, because such behavior is so consistently condemned and shamed when exhibited by white men.

Do you have any citations that actually support your claim? Because it sounds like vibes "please don't say mean things about my group" bullshit.

[–] Stoneykins@mander.xyz 47 points 8 months ago

Ew you got some politicalcompassmemes on your post.

Otherwise good tho

[–] Stoneykins@mander.xyz 53 points 8 months ago (11 children)

Solution is simple, community should turn any suspiciously product focused thread into an advertisers nightmare of filth

Then the ads will just be the ones with the comment sections turned off

[–] Stoneykins@mander.xyz 4 points 8 months ago (4 children)

You and people who hold beliefs like yours should just pick a new name for yourselves, I've tried to convince family members of this for years. Let the jerks have the name they tainted, pick a better name for your beliefs, and get out of the way for people to condemn the institution of Christianity for it's actions.

You shouldn't feel responsible for them. You should just let them suffer the consequences of their actions and get outta the way.

view more: ‹ prev next ›