I just want to say, you’ll be much better off if you forget about the points and try to ignore them. Taking all this to heart with such intensity will only stress you, since you can’t decide how others perceive you and your takes.

Just chill, participate and enjoy. Otherwise, what’s the point?

Now that the election is out of the way, maybe I can continue talking about this. I held my tongue during the past months, but I think now is a good time to think about this result.

While the result is unfortunate and disappointing, there are sides to it that aren’t all that bad. They pushed towards the right, pandering, and now the voters told them that this isn’t a winning strategy. I think it helps setting them straight for the future.

I think you put it very aptly. Of course it would’ve been best if Harris had won, but at least now we can think about it from a neutral perspective: Had she won despite all the right-pandering and genocide-enabling stances, it would either send the message that pandering to the right works, and the progressives are, indeed, either too small a group to listen to in the future too, or too much of pussies to listen to in the future, too — they’ll toe the line no matter what kind of shitty positions you take.

At least now they know that a change is needed. It’s almost unthinkable to lose to such a weird fascist populist that barely behaves cohesively. They did, by ignoring the progressives. That means something. At least it ought to.

Things don’t often change unless things hurt. If doing shitty things keeps working, nothing changes. But when things hurt, it opens some eyes at least. Forces re-evaluation on everyone’s part.

But that being said, this fucking sucks. Despite all the reasoning we can do to make it feel a bit better, this really should not have happened.

This is funnily something actually taught at (at least some) Russian troll farms. Confuse the conversations and revert to thin, barely applicable accusations of logical fallacies or other kinds of “rules” of supposedly civil discussion. But this certain sense of “civil discussion” where some misguided sense of self-perceived (and sadly, almost always unfounded) logical superiority prompts one to be as confusing as this comment here, claiming to have a point, which the other supposedly does not, while elevating the fact that they themselves already claimed not to have found a source for their outlandish and confusing prior claim, to be some sort of bonus point to “win” the argument with. All this, without a hint of self-consciousness or admittance that their very original comment was equally or more pointless, if this is how points would be decided according to their view. And the importance put in virtual brownie points that prompts them to go to the trouble of amending their initial, ill-received comment to with an edit explicitly stating that they laugh at the downvoters, while being obviously hurt and unnecessarily heavily affected by it…

It’s so weirdly confusing and recognizable that this must be a cultural thing. A long time ago I knew some academics/students from Russia, and they all seemed similarly interested in some logical “winning” even in just normal discussions, in this certain way that is just uncanny. Self-importance and the persistence with misguided logical superiority despite having clearly themselves made an oopsie in the first place, seems to be something of a cultural difference in this specific flavor.

Of course this is done everywhere, the whole self-importance and all (as demonstrated by yours truly!), but not in this one specific uncanny way.

Well, you actually begin with a good example of another outlandish claim. They are right? I don’t suppose you can back that up? If not, that’s just an unbacked claim. Outlandish, of course, is subjective, but I’d say it sure is just that.

The one you claim is outlandish, is, indeed, outlandish. I agree with your point that this is what the ruling class would do, if we remove this thought experiment from any context and real-life bounds. They 100% would. If they knew they’d get away with it.

I don’t believe they would, in reality, though, get away with it.

So while that point is logical in a detached sense, it still is as outlandish as everything else.

Edit: What’s up with this .ee instance by the way? Has anyone else noticed that a lot of commenters and comments like this happen to be from there? Contrarians, completely weird takes, oddly common “I’m a leftist, BUT…” comments, and a lot of third party voters and enthusiasts. I’ve noted it earlier but this finally made it hit. Does anyone know some context that they’d have time and energy to share?

Anecdotal, and not a woman personally, but I’ve had a similar experience from days long gone; ultimately we ended up trying out different toys and the sucking sort of vibrator with lower settings was what got her past the “block”, but it was via masturbation. We’d only move it to our together time after she got comfortable with the sensation and desensitized, as she described it. In our part of the world the main brand name for this kind of toy was “satisfyer”, not sure if that is global though.

After a while it all just clicked and it became something more familiar to me too, with fingers and tongue (though she did still prefer sucking over licking, which for me as a young man back then was new, but very much a priceless enlightenment and a much appreciated skill I later had time to hone more) ultimately joining in and it all becoming something more familiar to my less experienced younger self.

What I’ve learnt since though, is that everyone is so wildly different, that just simply masturbating together, or learning to, if the other party/parties aren’t experienced there, has been key to lasting mutual satisfaction. And people and their needs/wants change over time, that’s also important to keep in mind. And masturbation is the thing that naturally reflects that. Just talk, talk, talk, and then experiment. Try and keep an open mind, and try to be accommodating. Change and new things take time. Try your best not to get frustrated or load too much expectations into the process. And try and understand the other party/parties are the ones having a harder time coming to terms with the fact that they could not meet your initial expectations. They have a lot of pressure due to this, though it’ll ultimately be mutually beneficial.

Also I’ve noted that it’s so easy to fall prey to thinking that you’re the one giving or somehow “improving” their life here, but this is, in fact, your need that needs to get satisfied. You want her to feel things she does not currently. It’s not a bad thing, this is how life is when you share it with someone, but do not think you are being the giving party here. This is your need, which she either chooses to accommodate and figure out together, or not. And you might best start accepting that this experiment might not lead anywhere, and that you might have to change your expectations accordingly.

Chill, friend. People die naturally and fade from memory, this is how we move on and progress. There are way too many issues at the same level of importance as the nipples in social media, and way too many ought to be terminated if we placed the line there.

In place of termination, I’d love to see education, practical activism and just good old time.

We’ll get there. The weirdos opposing mundane shit like nipples will die and fade naturally, and our efforts spent in education and activism will shift the larger tides such that new ones like them will get fewer and fewer each generation.

And since we are humans, new issues will arise, and we’ll fight them the same. They are, and always have been, doomed to die out with the rest of the ass-backwards ideas, this is what progress is.

And you can’t speed up progress with blood. That is how you slow it down. The ideas will root in the blood and refuse to fade like they should and as they eventually unavoidably will, with the temporal resistance brought up by the rushed show of force.

Let the fuckers fade out and be forgotten, as much as possible, as fast as possible, and help the process by being active. Be loud, be persistent, but be not violent.

Any and all violence has always been, and always will be, resisted eventually by a larger force. If the nipple-opposers (I.e conservatives) choose violence, that’ll only serve to speed up the progress for us, by the way of rising more forceful resistance, and after overcoming the oppression, having the majority to instantly implement changes with popular support.

Oppressors will never be popular in the long run, and the oppressor’s ideas are bound to die with them. Not for good, as we’ve seen with the rise of neo-nazism, but they’ll never again be as popular so as to rise into power without blood, and with blood, they’ll repeat the cycle of ultimately weakening themselves and their ideas out of existence for good. But in the short-term, the polar opposites of the oppressor’s ideas will gain flash popularity and those ideas will get rapidly implemented, thus speeding up the progress.

It’s complex and unintuitive, perhaps, but the history has shown that any and all attempts to speed up any ideological progresses by way of violence or oppression, has ultimately ended in those very ideas being in ruin, and the opposing ideas getting stronger, more persistent in their standing.

Though for a short while, those ideas will be in power, and a lot of bad stuff will happen. Even if the ideas should be good from our point of view. But that is just a temporary state, which will always end in resistance winning, and opposing ideas gaining standing and popularity.

This became a very tangential and random outburst, of which I’m not very proud, but I think it best to leave it up if not for anything else but to show everyone my unfounded idea of self-importance and a rambling, cringeworthy brain. Yikes. I’m fucking ashamed. But this is how I think, I suppose, maybe someone will set me straight.

In addition, there have been these studies released (not so sure how well established, so take this with a grain of salt) lately, indicating a correlation with increased perceived efficiency/productivity, but also a strongly linked decrease in actual efficiency/productivity, when using LLMs for dev work.

After some initial excitement, I’ve dialed back using them to zero, and my contributions have been on the increase. I think it just feels good to spitball, which translates to heightened sense of excitement while working. But it’s really just much faster and convenient to do the boring stuff with snippets and templates etc, if not as exciting. We’ve been doing pair programming lately with humans, and while that’s slower and less efficient too, seems to contribute towards rise in quality and less problems in code review later, while also providing the spitballing side. In a much better format, I think, too, though I guess that’s subjective.

As a young(er), morbidly curious and then still fairly naive dumbass, I went and clicked on some questionable link on a Reddit thread, and was introduced to something known as “Funky Town”.

That shit set me straight pretty well, been avoiding everything even remotely suspiciously feeling it might be or explicitly is gore-related, but the imagery alone still haunts me to this day, not to mention all the other stuff like imagining how any of the people involved must feel, both emotionally and physically.

I debated mentioning this by name for a fair bit, but I think this thread is specifically for this kind of thing, so I’ll leave it. Anyone clicking here is expecting horrifying things, so it won’t catch anyone off guard. But I STRONGLY RECOMMEND NOBODY GOES LOOKING FOR THIS SPECIFIC THING. You will not get it out from behind your eyes. Seriously.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, though. You can assume them stupid, but nobody would use these forms of media if they viewed them the same. It’s just world moving on and leaving us greybeards behind, muttering about how stupid the new things are. Like the generation of our parents did for our interests, and theirs before them, and theirs before them, and so on.

Was replying more in the general, not specifically to you, but yeah. I’m a musician too myself, and have a wide range of other creatives in my inner circle, and this whole copyright topic is extremely hard. But I think we mostly can ignore that aspect when we consider the moral side as-is. A lot less complicated that way. Again, more in the general sense for all the comments in this post, sorry to drop it all here.

It’s one thing to just do a similar melody by accident, and entirely another to ask the artist if you could use the melody, get explicitly denied, then go on and use that melody anyway, changing a single less relevant note in there.

I think everyone gets this distinction innately, we just get caught up in the copyright law aspect of this, which I’m not claiming isn’t relevant. It’s just Musk being a clear scumbag, whichever way you lean on the lawfulness side of it.

Edit: What I mean to say is, it’s fairly clearly morally corrupted and wrong, but it’s not so immediately clear to accept as such in this reality, where declaring so might have consequences beyond this instance.

Just answering your question. No matter how dystopian, it is the reality we live in.

I can’t see the benefit, what am I missing?

I would assume that since this whole thing is more or less a result of left-ish policy, and the opponent in the scenario is the far-right platform formerly known as Twitter, lead by the aspiring far-right icon Musk, the right-wingers would more likely opt to complain, cry several rivers and eventually turn to alternatives catered specifically for them (not even sure which ones are still alive after former tweetyplace took the crown) instead.

Haven’t done a vibe check on bluesky, but I assume it almost has to be more tolerant and potentially more progressive-ish than the old nazibirdhouse. If you lean towards the far right, why choose that, if alternatives exist?

Probably for the same reasons a lot of us humans are drinking alcohol and smoking tobacco. And eating intense amounts of sugar.

This seems like the most sane take.

A computer can do a lot. But if you give the computer to a regular fish instead of a regular human, that’s just a regular fish next to a computer. Not very useful.

I’m boosting this and the screenshots too, but just thought I’d point out for quick scrollers that it does not seem as dramatic as this comment initially lets you believe.

I mean it’s awkward, but just seems more like your usual social awkwardness/incompetence than malicious behavior as such.

Sure. But it might be useful for someone to know this before dedicating time responding genuinely. If it’s still irrelevant, great. If it might change someone’s mind about spending their time, then also great.

Only giving context here. Might be relevant to some.

My reading comprehension is just fine, your lack of capability to understand context and tendency to deal in absolutes and binaries in a world made of wide spectrums, shades of gray and unpredictability, on the other hand, does not seem to pass the smell test.

Either you argue in bad faith, are intentionally a shifting contrarian or just not competent enough to either understand the world or at the very least discuss it with others in a way that makes sense.

Just to throw my two cents in: This user isn’t a genuinely curious ponderer, rather they are a Russian troll trying to fish for arguments they could further use in bad faith to lick Putin’s boot.

Just read through their comment history and make your own mind. This is not genuine and most everyone is just feeding the troll.

The question itself is worth asking though. A lot of good points here, but they’d be better given in good faith for someone genuine.