Again, if we read it as he literally said that, then sure I’d agree the behaviour is not okay. Given the context of the quote, I’d want more evidence to take that quote literally.
Again, if we read it as he literally said that, then sure I’d agree the behaviour is not okay. Given the context of the quote, I’d want more evidence to take that quote literally.
It just reeks to me of him being jealous of people who don’t have kids and/or him regretting being a parent?
Perhaps. I don’t think there’s much here to substantiate that reading though, even with the context. I’d want a bit more evidence if I were to incorporate that into my appraisal of him.
You can judge someone to be morally repugnant without interpreting everything they say/do as an extension of the things that make them repugnant. It doesn’t lessen the repugnance.
This has nothing to do with going easy on JD. It has to do with the things we chose to criticize on principle. It’s about who we choose to be. You gave two great examples of things we should judge him for. I’m happy to focus on those and the next oppressive thing he says. If you want to be someone who criticizes parents for getting exasperated by their kids, that’s your perogative, but that’s not me and I don’t think people should.
Might be an unpopular opinion While JD has said plenty of horrible things, this reads more like someone relating how they felt in the moment than reciting what was actually said. I’m sure most parents have felt this way at some point. We don’t need to make this mole hill into a mountain. There’s already a whole mountain range of his shit that’s actually egregious.
That’s a fair point on item selection. You get the major brands that are better about getting their supply chains. So the overall proportion is different, though still a significant problem.
My point was more about buying the same cheap jacket on Amazon as you’d find on Temu or AliExpress, which is what I see most of on Amazon.
Ah, I see. I haven’t paid much attention to Temu ads, my perception of it from the website was just AliExpress with fewer options but faster shipping.
I don’t get it, how is Temu a scam and AliExpress isn’t? They seem like the same thing, just an online marketplace for cheap shit with campy wild advertising. I actually prefer the shitty exaggerated product descriptions. It’s easier to gauge what I’ll be actually getting. It’s harder with better produced advertising coughRayconcough
Because the headline frames it as a purely Temu problem and with Temu-exclusive products, when all these other marketplaces should be included as they sell the same things. They should have compared them with other marketplaces as well to show whether or not it’s a broader “online marketplace” problem.
Wrong, this is about all the excess lives lost due to misinformation and the moral culpability of those responsible, not your country’s PR image. Russia getting Americans killed through anti-vax propaganda and the US getting Filipinos and others killed through anti-vax propaganda. Both are responsible for their actions. The US has proved untrustworthy long before this incident anyway.
You don’t need to be a therapist or psychologist to not shoot someone having a mental health crisis
Understanding and explaining how people may develop a perspective is not a defense of those people or their perspective. Simply saying “They’re morons, end of story” is unproductive. Denouncing a nuanced examination of the problem of distrust in healthcare is counterproductive. You can humanize without condoning. And clearly the intention was to address the problem in a meaningful way.
Or maybe I’m mistaken and the solution is “Stop being morons. End of story.” /s
You forgot, corporations are people too. And who are the most important people in the world??
If they set a 10 year goal it may take 20 years to hit 80% of goals, if they set a 20 year goal it’ll take 40 years to hit 50%, if they set a 50 year goal…
Nobody thinks this is a realistic goal, but the target gives a concrete number to set a mandate on which actually pragmatic policies, funding projects, and incentives can hang their hat on to keep the ball rolling.
With big infrastructure developments, nobody wants to buy into realistic goals, it’s too costly, and there’s never enough political will. You set overly ambitious goals so you can get people to buy in and then the project is too big to fail, so you end up paying what it actually costs, and you try to mitigate waste, unanticipated problems, corruption, and poor management along the way.
Imagine there was a group of people in your school, in your workplace, in your city who for some reason feel that Kazakhspy should not exist. They’re not allowed to kill you, that’s against the law, but they would if they could. Instead, they say fuck Kazakhspy, go kill yourself Kazakhspy, I can’t stand you Kazakhspy. Hearing that kind of thing on a regular basis might be a little hurtful. Now imagine some game studio heard about this and thought hey, let’s include Kazakhspy in our game. And then that group in your community was like “what the fuck is this! I hate Kazakhspy and now they’re shoving Kazakhspy down my throat in a videogame? I will not stand for this.” And goes through the effort of making a mod to remove you from the game and puts it on the website. You hear about this and see that it’s up there with a few downloads. You might be a little hurt to know some people hate you so much they’ll mod a game to spite you just because they don’t like your existence. Then the website owner is like, “Wow, this is weirdly hateful and doesn’t belong on my website. Let’s not perpetuate hate against Kazakhspy.”
That’s why. In context it’s hurtful to people because the intention of creating it was to hurt people through hate.
What’s wrong with having a mod that removes the skin color selector? I get people care about race and stuff, but is it really necessary to force everyone to have a skin colour selection option if they don’t want a skin colour selection option? You’re not going to make a racist see clearer by forcing them to do something that only affects them.
You have it in your own question. It is hateful. It was made by the hateful for the hateful to perpetuate a hateful idea. You might even call it a kind of hate speech, which probably means it violate Nexus’s terms. Even if it doesn’t, it’s icky af. And Nexus is entirely in their right to refuse hosting it. The nod creator is still free to use their own mod and share it in other ways, but Nexus should not be forced to host it.
You could curve the proportion to income to scale impact to something more equitable. How you decide what’s equitable would be another problem to solve, but I imagine it would involve benchmarking around the middle class and poverty line. Right now fine rates are okay for the middle class, so keep the proportion similar, fine rates really fuck up poor people, and fine rates mean nothing to the upper class. So imagine you you feel would be a fair impact for a fine and scale it accordingly.