133arc585

joined 2 years ago
[–] 133arc585@lemmy.ml -4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

I don't think you know what "fascist" means.

Moreover, people will happily complain that Chinese/Russian "propaganda" is allowed to exist, especially on the internet. They will demand that Chinese/Russian "propaganda" is removed from social spaces. And, then they somehow they have a problem with other countries (esp. China/Russia) wanting to do the exact same thing. The premise is that the propaganda being put out is misrepresenting the truth to influence public thought: when it comes from China/Russia, people want it blocked and removed; when it comes from the West, blocking and removing it is some sort of "free speech" issue (or, as you wrongly claim here, "fascism").

In this particular case, I don't personally know hardly anything about the movie, and I do strongly disagree with using "promoting homosexuality" as an excuse to ban something. But in general, countries wanting to put a damper on other countries' propaganda is near universal.

[–] 133arc585@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Read my edited footnote. I do not fully agree with the claim itself either.

[–] 133arc585@lemmy.ml 9 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (3 children)

Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.

I hate this saying. It's not explicit, and logical consequence isn't bidirectional, but it implies that those who do remember the past somehow won't repeat it. Which is blatantly false. Many people, even those who intimately know history, want to repeat it. Either because they think material conditions are just different enough to lead to a different result this time, or that the precise way the actions in the past was carried out was subpar and with tiny tweaks it would lead to a different result, etc. I do generally agree with the explicit statement[^1], but I strongly disagree with the implicit statement.

[^1]: And even on the explicit statement I still have reservations. Sometimes material conditions are different enough, or the precise manner in which actions are carried out are different enough that those who know nothing about the past aren't condemned to repeat it: what those who know nothing about the past do is only superficially similar to the past, and can have radically different outcomes.

[–] 133arc585@lemmy.ml 32 points 2 years ago (5 children)
  1. Strong nuclear force: holds the nucleus of an atom together
  2. Weak nuclear force: responsible for radioactive decay
  3. Electromagnetic force: of charged particles
  4. Gravitational force: attractive force between objects with mass
[–] 133arc585@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I understand that. I don't use any of it anymore but when I did I used the refillable ones.

It's just insanity to me that every single one of those has: a PCB, with chips (they have usb charging, and timing chips to auto-turn off, and a draw sensor), and a battery. Then the metal casing it's all in. And that all gets thrown out. A reasonable sized battery and all its lithium[^1], thrown out. Fully functional chips, thrown out. A PCB with a nonzero amount of gold, thrown out. And people go through them at a rate that's just absurd.

[^1]: Each vape battery has somewhere between 0.25 and 0.5 grams of metallic lithium.

[–] 133arc585@lemmy.ml 5 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (3 children)

Tangential, but there are refillable versions of those vapes that cut down on waste almost entirely (and cost less). You buy the device once, and then a bottle of nicotine salts, and the refillable cartridge. The only waste you're producing is the cartridge every once in a while when you replace it (no extra cardboard, plastic, etc) and the plastic nicotine salt bottle when it's empty. You aren't throwing away a battery, electronics, or the bulky device. And I mean the same form factor as what you're probably buying too, I'm not talking about the old fashion cloud-blowing box vapes.

[–] 133arc585@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 years ago

I am not joking.

You might not be joking but you are assuming. Do you have a link to a statement by a site admin that says explicitly that is what it stands for? Otherwise you're just speculating, and there are other reasons someone would have chosen .ml besides it standing for that.

[–] 133arc585@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

You're not just looking for conversation.

Unless you get a response from the site admins, anyone's answer is pure speculation. No one is going to be able to say, definitively, why .ml was chosen, except the site admins.

My theory is: .ml domains used to be offered for free. So they made lemmy.ml for free, as it was just a toy project. Then, they upgraded to the paid .ml domain (which is how they managed to avoid the recent free .ml purge).

The "its Marxism-Leninism" could be true, but unless you get an answer from a site admin, everyone asserting that it's true is talking out of their ass. They don't know any more than you or I know.

[–] 133arc585@lemmy.ml 10 points 2 years ago (1 children)

That's funny. I literally searched because I couldn't remember which was the root vegetable and which was the card thing. And somehow I still got it wrong.

[–] 133arc585@lemmy.ml 30 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (9 children)

It's literally just a charlatan scam, like homeopathy, tarot card readings, psychics and mediums, etc. The people who perform that are some of the lowest of the low: they admit that people who come to them are at a bad point in their life and very in need of help, and they prey on that because it's an opportunity for quick money. Vulnerable people who don't question your bullshit, that's an easy mark.

(Edit: tarot, not taro)

[–] 133arc585@lemmy.ml 7 points 2 years ago

And there's my morning dose of racism! I figured it would show up within a few minutes of checking this site.

[–] 133arc585@lemmy.ml 13 points 2 years ago (1 children)

It could be a genuine mistake by the original writer, but I expect a textbook to have higher proofreading standards. Especially if this is a grade-school textbook (it looks like one), where you can't reasonably expect the student to reference other sources to verify the contents, then I would expect the textbook publisher to put a lot more effort in to catching this sort of thing. And I don't mean someone reading over it for typos, I mean someone who knows the field the book is written about, who can proofread for accuracy not just grammar. Genuine mistake or not, this is completely inexcusable.

view more: ‹ prev next ›