Obinice

Boomers are all bigoted, sexist, climate change denying pieces of shit?

… kinda a shitty take there mate. Lots of them are terrible, but so aye lots of people from other generations too, and tarring them all with the same brush is only going to alienate the good ones and make them quite reasonably dislike you.

How is it gonna nag me to upgrade to Windows 11 when I don’t have a TPM?

I’d love to upgrade, the system is completely capable of running it, but because it doesn’t have a useless bit of hardware I can’t. Fuck em.

You’re all on some kind of… Star Trek?

They’re not encrypted? What? That’s a gigantic security hole.

Damn, are these guys up on modern tech or living in the 90s?

I wouldn’t say everyone, at least. The vote was actually very close, which I think is something most of us forget at this point.

They used the wrong kind of referendum given the seriousness of the question, it should have required a significant majority consensus, instead it was just a “who got more votes even if it just one more”.

The results showed a deeply divided nation, and we still are. Some brexiters do regret their terrible decision, but I don’t forgive them. There was ample information, experts, everything showing what a terrible disastrous idea Brexit was, and they voted for it anyway.

This wasn’t some shades of grey issue, it was surprisingly black and white for once, haha. Which makes it all the more strange that so many people still voted to deeply damage the nation and their own futures.

Oh, and one other point just because I think we often forget, the referendum wasn’t at all binding. The government could have simply said “We’ve taken your thoughts into consideration but decided to do what’s best for the country and stay in the EU, even if this will hurt our political careers. Our duty is to the nation, above even our own careers”.

They…did not say that :-( Instead they got theirs, at all our expenses.

I wonder why they keep their platform so closed off. It’ll never ever go anywhere if people can’t even use it.

All it has to do is copy Twitter when it was good some years ago, and do it very reliably. That’s it.

What the hell is “percent”? Convert that to Imperial Horsehooves or get out

I would say you’re just in the wrong communities, as that’s not the consensus where I browse.

But yes, every extremely large open community has people of all beliefs and all walks of life in significant numbers, and some are more obvious than others.

If you think that 19 is a lot of news articles for the whole planet in a single day, enough that it counts as spam, then my friend have I got news for you :-(

which is really only a useful technology in places that are short on arible landq

So, everywhere within the next 60 years?

:-(

You’re talking about God (such as the god of Islam and Catholicism, which is the same god) and gods, as in the concept of a god, which encompasses sun gods, Aztec gods, etc etc.

Usually I find how you capitalise matters here. God with a capital is a name, and talking about the “God” most people talk about.

A god, on the other hand, well you get the idea.

Anyway in this case we’re talking about the god of Islam, Christianity, Catholicism, etc. This god is the same god, and in English we would call that god “God”. Allah is that god’s name in another language. But it’s the same deity.

Damn, I didn’t realise Putin was a Tory, their rule for over a decade has been a very significant driver of our woes.

Though it’s important to note that what the other user said is very true, this is a multifaceted issue.

Still, from where I’m sat, we can start improving things by freeing ourselves from the Tories, and if possible burying their evil “Let’s just make the rich richer” political party for good.

Damn, I don’t even weigh 21 stone, he lost more than I weigh! That’s wild.

I don’t understand why people believe them.

When Russia bombed civilian churches, apartments, hospitals, and said they were being used as military command centers and such, nobody believed them, it was an obvious lie.

But when Israel says it the whole world just says “Wow makes perfect sense, good job!”

Good. Hopefully this helps the working class to finally own their own homes en masse for the first time in a generation.

I’m not holding my breath though. Capitalists will find a way to crush the workers under their boot as always.

Funny way of saying locked up for life.

Is this guy actually a danger to society to the extent that he needs to be in a padded room forever?

They mention him getting violent with them, but if you’re being locked up like this against your will, won’t you fight back with every ounce of fortitude you have? Don’t ever let your captors beat your spirit.

I wonder if some of this is about the money. This guy is costing very rich powerful people a lot of money, it would be a sound investment to pay a largeish sum to the right people to have him removed from society forever, to save money down the line.

I have no idea what’s true and what isn’t, this just seems a little fishy is all. Who knows.

If someone is unable to comprehend/recognize valid from invalid/biased sources/information, “doing their own research” is very dangerous in fueling further extreme/conspiratorial beliefs.

People should learn how to effectively scrutinize sources before they attempt to “research” something themselves.

Okay, but how do I recognise valid from invalid, bias from unbiased?

Take that sketchy blog you linked me to, it’s just some thing some guy wrote. Can that be trusted? Must I spend significant free time to do in-depth research on all of his references to ascertain if he’s valid and unbiased? How will I know if the sources are valid and unbiased? Will I have to do in-depth research on all of their references too? When does it end?

At some point you just have to trust someone, you can’t unravel the complete truths of anything to their very core. Most of us don’t even have the free time to unravel things more than a little bit.

I see the point you’re making and don’t entirely disagree, critical thinking is something that’s taught and learned, and it’s what makes the difference here. But this idea that we can ever actually know that what we’re reading is reliable or unbiased? I don’t buy it.

I think it’s impossible to actually know if a source is reliable without directly confirming its assertions with your own eyeballs.

And, I think it’s impossible to actually know if a source is endeavouring to actually be unbiased, or if they have an agenda or plan, without literally reading the minds of those involved to ascertain their motives and potential schemes.

At the end of the day, people who place their bets on one side of the fence or the other when it comes to who to trust aren’t so different. Critical thinking and the ability to ask questions constantly and never take anything you hear as truth just on the face of things is what’s most important, I think. That way, you’re at least a little more prepared to spot lies when they crop up.

I guess that’s my point, haha.

Unfortunately after coming to this realisation I don’t know who to trust any more :-( Obviously I can’t trust the media, they’re owned by the rich ruling class and even when they report truths, they do so via a thick veil of bias that makes it difficult to know if I’m getting all the facts, or if I’m missing out on huge important chunks of information entirely.

Take all the reporting on our recent UK strikes, all the reporting was there, but it was all about how disruptive and terrible the strikes were for everyone else, painting a picture of selfish, greedy workers making things worse for everyone else because they only care about themselves. The whole article would barely if at all mention in any depth why they’re striking, why they felt they had no other choice, how this is a symptom of a larger problem with late stage capitalism, etc.

The media is owned by the rich, obviously they’re going to paint the picture they want. And that news source I’m talking about isn’t even privately owned, it’s our tax funded government news organisation.

The government itself is also owned by the rich, our PM is just a few million short of being a literal billionaire, he’s a business capitalist. They can’t be trusted either. They all have their own agendas and reasons to skew facts and trick people.

Take Brexit as a well known example of both private interests AND the government itself tricking millions of people with lies and deception and exploitation to make an absolutely terrible decision that damaged this country irreparably. Everything people saw on TV, websites, social media, newspapers, radio, leaflets, etc, was chock full of disinformation, emotional trickery, etc.

Even the people saying Brexit was a bad idea had their own agendas and clear bias, and while I side with them, can I truly, honestly say that what they said is unbias and definitely reliable with no hidden ulterior motives? Alas, no.

So where do I get my reliable, unbias information even if I have my critical thinking hat on? I’ve come to the conclusion that I can’t believe anything, not fully, unless I see it with my own eyes. Everything, and I mean EVERYTHING that comes to me through other channels is twisted along the way by bias and agendas.

I’m not happy about it, it makes me very sad :-( But yeah, that’s kinda where I’m at these days.

YouTube is fantastic but it’s a video platform, all you’re going to find there are videos.

If I need to find a business or product page, I’m not going to look on YouTube. Same if I need to find a driver download, or a PDF manual, or the local weather, or information on a historical event, or…we’ll, you get the idea. They just do videos.

Similarly Reddit has a lot but it’s mainly centered around discussions of things. I use it as a very valuable resource, but similar to the above, it’s not where I go when I’m not looking for the one thing they do very well - discussion.

It sounds as if the main thrust of this idea isn’t that Google (or a search engine in general) is any less vital in daily web life, but rather that for some things you can go straight to the more centralised source and search there. E.g. if I want a video I’ll search on YouTube, rather than searching Google for aggregated results from many video hosts.

In that sense Google is slightly less relevant sure I agree, but only a little bit, and only for very specific things.

Honestly people keep saying this but I just don’t find it to be true. Google is a vital daily resource for me, and usually the best way for me to find most things.

Is this because I don’t use social networks? Are people somehow using Instagram or TikTok as search engines to find what they’re looking for? It feels like people just use social networks these days and nothing else, so maybe that’s it?

Usually it’s the Americans who think they’re the entire world, calling them out on it sometimes feels like I’m just targeting them. But this is a good example of the same thing from a different country, and I’m pointing it out in fairness :-P

The country the article is about should be in the title, because otherwise it’s just confusing clickbait. Without actually tapping the thumbnail and seeing what comes up, just going from the title, how do I know if this news is about the UK, or what?

How we share news must be informative from the get go. Sharing world news is vital, keeping abreast of the important goings on around the globe, but we need up front context provided to at least narrow it down by country.

Anyway, this is good news! Electronic cigarettes should never be sold to kids, that’s wild :-(