The algorithms killed the platforms. They’ve become vapid, empty holes that only attract people addicted to them like junkies.

The internet can be fun, but you’re not going to find it on the platforms. You’re only going to find fun in places where people talk to each other. And even then, if you’re thin skinned you’re going to wind up in an outrage filled circlejerk. If you loosen up and go where the algorithms don’t exist you can have a good time.

While I’d say altruism is not a virtue the way it is defined in our culture, I will say that who we are is about 50% nature and 50% nurture, and inside we are very different beings for one reason or other. A born sociopath is only human the same as you in visible form, the being is nothing like you. A person who was badly abused and tattoos his face and perpetuates abuse on those around him is completely different from you both. A monk in a monestsry and an Instagram influencer are completely different beings inside, besides some basic neurology that makes them both human. If you could see the being inside every human they’d look as different as Pokémon. That’s my philosophical insight.

Does it mean black against black?

I drop usernames without a second thought if it suits me. I use different ones I think up on the fly most of the time. The only one that matters to me is one attached to my development activities in the FOSS community, and I might share opinions using it but primarily I use it to engage in discussion related to development so that people who know me in those circles know who they’re talking to.

How so?

But most of the people they’re going against are Nigerians, and they’re black south Africans. Xenophobic? Sure. Racist???

Removed by mod

Absolutely not.

He was a very high profile criminal.

Hot Tub Time Machine 2 is way better and super underrated.

Burn After Reading.

Yeah I understand that, but I don’t think it’s a good rule even generally speaking. It doesn’t actually prevent abuse, all it does is disempower people from being autonomous via social stigmatization as a mechanism rather than penalty of law.

Personally, I think the number is arbitrary and there are 20 year olds incapable of making responsible decisions, and 15 year olds that are. But that’s the world we live in, it’s a compromise we make with our community to prevent abuse of little kids, and a way to set expectations of people, “by this age you need to be capable of looking out for yourself or you’re going to have a hard time”. I’m OK with this particular compromise, arbitrary though it may be. I don’t know that there is a smarter alternative, and half your age plus seven is most definitely further from the goal than a set age when someone is expected to be able to navigate the world on their own. In older times (and in some less developed cultures even today), people were expected to be capable at puberty, in others it was when their fathers said they could, and we don’t do that anymore because those systems almost always lead to fathers selling their children. So I’m happy with the current rule.

I said food was made from carbon dioxide and water, and repeatedly explained the process I was referring to. I never once said carbon dioxide was “in” food, although even if I did I don’t think it is this easy to misunderstand what I’m saying.

100% OK with it, yes. We either respect someone’s decisions or we don’t. If we decide “someone is free to do what they want when they’re 18” then that’s that. If that’s what they choose to do then it’s none of my business.

There are plenty of abusive, coercive and controlling relationships between people of the same age range. There are plenty of 40 year old women getting mistreated in new relationships. If a 19 year old is with a 70 year old, I doubt there’s some power dynamic there, most likely the woman is selling herself in a situation like that for a big payday, which is her choice. There are way less 70 year olds controlling their 18 year old girlfriends than there are 32 year olds doing it to their 30 year old girlfriends. It would seem age is not a good heuristic when trying to determine whether abuse is occurring, when it comes to adults at least.

I’m perfectly happy with our societies coming to consensus on a general age where one is considered capable of making their own decisions, in this scenario particularly sexually and romantically. I think the age range between 16 and 18 that we have decided on in various western societies sounds reasonable. Our laws respect our autonomy from that point on, yet somehow society is starting to not do that and I don’t think that’s a good thing, or really very genuine either.

As far as perception, I have a philosophy of not giving a single fuck about perception. People that judge me aren’t going to live my life for me, they’re not going to come into my life and make me happy, so fuck their opinions. If I’m 40 and find love and happiness with an 18 year old and they don’t like it they can kiss my ass.

This is a stupid rule.

The good rule is to judge people as individuals and respect their autonomy.

No. Don’t be a clown.

Are you thick? The food is made into food by plants from it.

Yeah, so the plants turn carbon dioxide and water into cellulose and water mostly, herbivores digest the cellulose into protein and carbohydrates we can eat, we eat them and turn that protein and carbohydrates into our bodies and energy using oxygen, back into carbon dioxide and water and expel it. It’s the carbon cycle.