scratchee

That might be a reasonable take in some places, but much of the world distinguishes illegal prostitution from entirely legal sharing of explicit material for money. If painting was declared illegal but the technical definition of the law required canvas to be involved, then it wouldn’t take long for someone to invent a separate term for “painting without using canvas” just so we could discuss the not-illegal art without constantly having to clarify every other sentence that we aren’t talking about the illegal art.

Well in that case I will stop trying to tell you the effects of military service, my ruminating can’t compete with actual knowledge

Throw a bunch of barely adults with guns into a country where they trust nobody, get bombed by plain clothes enemies, and can barely communicate with the civilians… and you’ll always get war crimes I think.

Respectable military isn’t quite an oxymoron, but it’s close once you give them so few chances to stay grounded.

The problem is you need to depict their actions as evil and monstrous, or fascism might appear to be a reasonable solution. Isolating the evil of fascism from the ordinary people pushing for it is subtle and complicated. Especially when some fascists really do cross the line into evil behaviour.

Basically humans are often bad at sharing subtle messages widely. Regardless of how much nuance you add to begin with, the message will always devolve for most people into either “hitler evil” or “hitler wasn’t that bad, he was nice to animals”, so given the options, most people prefer to lean into the evil side and avoid normalising fascism, with the inevitable consequence that it appears you have to start wearing skulls and torturing people in order to be a fascist and people forget that for the vast majority of everyday fascists it was “just politics” right up until they lost the war and had to start rethinking things.

I offer no solutions, but I don’t think you can blame just the bourgeoisie, but rather the human condition in general, us vs them, and the difficulty in sharing detailed concepts to a wide audience. There will always be “bad guys” who are so bad that we can’t possibly become them. I do think we’ve gotten better at telling stories with complex evil, but the flip side is that seems to just reduce people’s resolve to act. Almost like the 2 options built into our brains are “us vs them, kill the evils ones” and “meh, corruption is inevitable, just ignore it”.

Nobody will ever make a better car because the world has ended?

It’s not, the lack of wolves caused the elk to become a problem. Returning the wolves is (according to the infographic) fixing the elk problems.

So it’s more like the wolves are policing the elk, it’s the wolves “fault” that the elk are not a problem.

Wow, so it’s lose-lose for the kids?!

I play multiplayer, I have a baby, I have a friend with a baby, I have another who’s a borderline alcoholic, it’s a miracle we all turn up for a scheduled game as often as we do.

Which I was the justification used when my work decided to use 2025-May-01.

It’s close enough to the iso date that nobody will be confused but with that 1 extra layer of security blanket to separate months and days.

Of course, that does ruin sorting, so I think it was a bit silly, nobody has ever used yyyyddmm so it’s all a bit theoretical to me.

Carbon capture is a niche technology that is probably worth exploring for a handful of genuinely useful scenarios, but suggesting it be the primary solution over renewables is full clown shoes and makeup, renewables are cheap and working and scalable, carbon capture is a dodgy halfarsed hack that might help us scrape over the line by solving the last few percent we can’t fix properly.

Subnautica devs: write that down!

Wow, that might be the dumbest take I’ve ever seen.

“Humanity, a species that once contained individuals that once did something bad, lecturing anyone about not doing bad things is laughable.”