Separately from that, it drives me mad how warped the idea of “consent” is in Windows (and in tech in general). “Later” is not the opposite of “Yes” goddammit!
Imagine sexual consent was similarly warped: Hey Becky, you wanna have sex? You can only answer “Yes, right now!” or “Maybe later,” and I’ll keep asking you FOREVER. So, what will it be?
Windows does give off the vibes of the type of person who does that tbh. See: “I see you’ve been interacting with me in the ways you generally have to, have you considered interacting with me in these ways? Oh you know that competitor isn’t nearly as good as I am, look at all the ways I copied them”
Google photos and apple have been doing it for years too, they’re like we found this person 50 times in your photo collection, why don’t you name them?
Amazon asked me to use their photos app to get a $20 gift certificate last week. I uploaded one photo, got the bonus money, deleted the app and used it to help buy a new monitor.
Quick guess from me would be permission to use the camera(s) and if they have some kind of file picker or gallery, permission to access all media files from your phone (and older versions of Android did not have this "media"distinction, so they would give access to all user files (excluding sandboxed paths)
You have to manually approve of giving each permission on Android, and camera and files/images are separate permissions (so giving access to the camera doesn’t require giving access to your files). And you can make it so they only have access to it while you use the app. If you take a random picture and then uninstall, they get nothing except that random picture.
It even has the same kind of AI object and face recognition as in Google Photos, but it’s your own cloud setup and self-hosted software, so all of the data is entirely yours and nobody else’s. It’s downright strange to think of those things as actual features and not privacy violations.
Yeah it really bothers me that they’re not asking you to compromise only your data, they want you to give them info on your friends/family too (who obviously didn’t agree to the terms and conditions). Thanks for shouting out an alternative.
I don’t. Corps gonna corp, if they can. But I’ve checked this using all the development, networking, and energy monitoring tools at my disposal and apple’s e2e and on-device guarantee does appear to hold. For now.
Still, those who can should audit periodically, even if they’re only doing it for the settlement.
No like actually though. I do not have the energy to do that (for many reasons that both are and are not my own fault). Thank you for spending your energy on something that is also helpful to me that I don’t have the energy for.
They’ve been doing ML locally on devices for like a decade. Since way before all the AI hype. They’ve had dedicated ML inference cores in their chips for a long time too which helps the battery life situation.
What the fuck? Who wants to be competing in sex and romance? I mean that’s the dating scene and a LOT of people hate that shit. Once you get into a relationship, who still wants to do that? Especially in a polyamory relationship: I thought one of the points of polyamory was that each individual was free to love each member in their own way and there wasn’t any real competition and struggle for affection (or as little as possible).
Someone clearly thinks they are going to be at the “top” of their polycule and wants to lord it over people for some pathetic amount of power.
I have no idea who that woman is or anything about her blog. But if I read that comment alone I would asume it’s facetious. It sounds like a joke and not serious. If they were serious then… wow that’s fucked up.
She was the one running the actual books for FTX cryptocurrency exchange. All the crimes that Sam Bankman-Fried did, she was the one who made sure they actually happened.
She was openly into sexism and meritocracy. Kinda stunned because she probably would have blended right into any LARP event until she opened her mouth.
I mean like generally yes but some poly dynamics have (consensual) rules. You might have a triad that’s closed off to other members for example, who would all consider it cheating if any one member had a relationship they kept secret from the other two. It’s not always “free love” all the time like it’s the 60s again.
You also do have hierarchal poly dynamics. People with “primary” partners and such. But it’s not really a competition. I personally don’t vibe with that, but it can be done in a healthy way if everyone is up front about their expectations.
I was poly for years and my ex and I designated each other as primary just to help ensure our priorities matched. We’d seen couples that just “free loved” it and it frequently led to a lot of drama and hurt feelings.
One person “demoted” her fiance to just a side relationship because she was encouraging her boyfriends to be competitive. It was gross. The idea of making love or sexuality a competition is just gross. These people are gross.
Yeah. I loved the idea of non hierarchical poly early on, but there’s a resounding practicality in my relationship hierarchy. My wife comes first. We live together and are married, of course she does.
It’s so disgusting to make this a competition when it should just be a cooperative pursuit of happiness
I have had times where people treat “non-hierarchical” as “you should immediately consider me equal to your other partners”. When no, trust takes time and effort to grow. In that sense, the partner that I live with does have some level of primacy over my other partners, because I trust her enough to build a home together. However we don’t share a room, we have our own spaces, and we schedule sleepovers just the same as I would with any other partner.
One person “demoted” her fiance to just a side relationship because she was encouraging her boyfriends to be competitive. It was gross. The idea of making love or sexuality a competition is just gross. These people are gross.
That is indeed ridiculously gross. She completely missed the memo on the “ethical” part of “ethical non-monogamy”. I think I would agonise for weeks if I was thinking about making the decision to no longer live with my nestmate. Months if I was planning on moving straight in with a different partner. I would need to figure out how to communicate that it wasn’t due to any transgressions on their part, that it wasn’t a punishment. That I just, didn’t feel that living together was right for our relationship or either of us as individuals. Especially if the end goal was to continue to be together. I can’t imagine being so careless with someone’s emotions like that.
This is one of those things where I’m in agreement but I’m also fucking tired of hearing the “lesser of two evils” bullshit (in general). The country is going to continue to drag right because that’s what benefits the ruling class. That’s the reality. Both parties and both candidates are playing their roles in this continued push. Thinking we actually have a say in the end is the first mistake, like voting in federal elections in the US is some massive action. It’s the whole ratchet effect in politics. You can either vote for the far right candidate, or you can vote for the center right one. That’s it. Those are the choices. We can sit here and make these absolutely garbage people the focus of our entire discussion and move the needle nowhere, despite knowing exactly how this is going to play out, or we can make it moot and focus on organizing while not wasting time talking about filling a circle in on a piece of paper while patting ourselves on the back. In the scheme of things the working class can do, that is the bare minimum.
I don’t give a shit about any of these candidates. All I know is that one is committing genocide and the other is a boomer criminal that employs a bunch of family members and other sycophants, who would also commit the same genocide if given the chance. Because thats what the ruling class beast demands and nothing stops it. People make voting into a bigger thing than they do organizing and educating. Bide your time. Vote if you want or don’t. Scolding people is a waste of time and it’s divisive. It continues the divide that the ruling class wants because they know it’s one of the key factors that prevent the working class from uniting as one. We have the numbers. The fucking Ants movie tried to tell us.
The reality is that if we want real, actual change, it’s going to require us to get out of that comfort zone where we fill in a little circle with a pen and then act like we moved mountains. That right there is privileged lib shit. Your vote isn’t going to mean fuck all when we’ve witnessed the candidates change for years, while war and genocide continued under all of them; while the police state thrived under all of them; while trans and women’s reproductive rights were taken away or hindered under all of them.
These are the times when I wish Fred Hampton was still alive.
Always happy to contribute. I hope I don’t sound combative either. It’s never from that kind of place, and more from a frustration and anger point of view that stems from US politics and western aggression. I know some of my opinions aren’t the most popular. It’s a weird battle against apathy when trying to keep your head up in a system that strives to turn us all into subservient worker drones.
What kills me about posts like this is that they paint leftist activism in a way that’s indistinguishable from christian evangelicalism.
Serves the poor by working at homeless shelters
protests un-threateningly against opposition
participates in book clubs and peer groups
otherwise fully participates in a system that’s hostile toward their existence
Libs like this forget that the civil rights leaders they model themselves after were intentionally inflammatory -sometimes violently so- so that the people who were refusing to negotiate with them would be forced to do so at risk of material harm to their interests. All these people downvoting you would rather protests be silent and non-invasive than be loud or -god forbid- threaten the power structure they comfortably benefit from.
MLK and Fred Hampton are looked at so favorably in hindsight because they forced the liberal structures at the time to concede some minimum amount of liberty to those who were actively under threat. They weren’t targeting conservative fascists with their protests (they knew better than to think they would ever change their minds), they were targeting those centrists who thought themselves allys but stopped short of action because they themselves were not materially threatened by the systemic injustices being faced by the black community at the time, and they didn’t want to risk harm to their own position in order to solve it. Protests were a way to hold hostage their interest in exchange for addressing the interests of black americans.
To quote MLK from his letter from birmingham:
You may well ask: “Why direct action? Why sit ins, marches and so forth? Isn’t negotiation a better path?” You are quite right in calling for negotiation. Indeed, this is the very purpose of direct action. Nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue. It seeks so to dramatize the issue that it can no longer be ignored. My citing the creation of tension as part of the work of the nonviolent resister may sound rather shocking. But I must confess that I am not afraid of the word “tension.” I have earnestly opposed violent tension, but there is a type of constructive, nonviolent tension which is necessary for growth. Just as Socrates felt that it was necessary to create a tension in the mind so that individuals could rise from the bondage of myths and half truths to the unfettered realm of creative analysis and objective appraisal, so must we see the need for nonviolent gadflies to create the kind of tension in society that will help men rise from the dark depths of prejudice and racism to the majestic heights of understanding and brotherhood.
The purpose of our direct action program is to create a situation so crisis packed that it will inevitably open the door to negotiation. I therefore concur with you in your call for negotiation. Too long has our beloved Southland been bogged down in a tragic effort to live in monologue rather than dialogue.
One of the basic points in your statement is that the action that I and my associates have taken in Birmingham is untimely. Some have asked: “Why didn’t you give the new city administration time to act?” The only answer that I can give to this query is that the new Birmingham administration must be prodded about as much as the outgoing one, before it will act. We are sadly mistaken if we feel that the election of Albert Boutwell as mayor will bring the millennium to Birmingham. While Mr. Boutwell is a much more gentle person than Mr. Connor, they are both segregationists, dedicated to maintenance of the status quo. I have hope that Mr. Boutwell will be reasonable enough to see the futility of massive resistance to desegregation. But he will not see this without pressure from devotees of civil rights. My friends, I must say to you that we have not made a single gain in civil rights without determined legal and nonviolent pressure. Lamentably, it is an historical fact that privileged groups seldom give up their privileges voluntarily. Individuals may see the moral light and voluntarily give up their unjust posture; but, as Reinhold Niebuhr has reminded us, groups tend to be more immoral than individuals.
MLK might as well have been comparing Biden and Trump with regards to their shared zionism. Biden deserves no less pressure to negotiate just because he is a “more gentle” person.
And the other classic MLK quote about “the white moderate”:
I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro’s great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen’s Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to ‘order’ than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice […]
Right. And this quote and his frustration is in direct response to criticisms from white moderates that his (peaceful) methods are too loud and inconvenient and his timing too inopportune, rather than responding to the movement’s plea for basic human liberty.
I’m happy to do it. I know I have some unpopular opinions, but part of breaking the cycle is getting uncomfortable.
We need to collectively realize that the ruling class will never let things deviate too far out of their control. I’m definitely not saying one shouldn’t vote (you should; it’s easy and the least you can do), but we need to stop hinging so much on it. We’ve been doing the “lesser of two evils” thing for what feels like an eternity. It’s tired and we need to move beyond it because it’s a divisive key set piece in the arsenal of the ruling class. The division is the intent. If we keep arguing over which old white guy in a suit is worse, we’re spinning our wheels in the mud.
We’re talking about a government that has been swaying people’s minds and overthrowing governments in other countries for decades. They absolutely do use the same exact tactics on the working class in the US and it would be naive to think they don’t. Everyone is affected by propaganda. That’s a big reason the TikTok ban immediately received 81% approval, when other things like basic human rights get little to no traction. And it’s not some thing that happens in the span of 5 years; it’s a long, arduous process that requires a ton of moving pieces and has multiple benefits for the ruling class.
Vote or don’t vote. All that matters is remembering that the working class collective is stronger as one unit. That kind of unification and the numbers behind it are what truly strike fear into a fascist government.
Can you please start a newsletter or something? I want to subscribe. You’re saying the same frustrating things I’ve been saying for ages. We need more of this voice presented. It’s critical that we start breaking away all of the apathy.
I actually write once in a while, but these days it’s been random articles for sites or friends. I’m flattered and I’m glad it resonates with others. The key is a unified working class. I sink into apathy like I’m sure a lot do, but I always try to stay connected to what’s happening and provide a voice where I can (even if it’s anonymous).
They’re saying voting won’t accomplish any substantial changes because you can’t vote power out of the hands of those who wield it. Change requires more than simply voting.
I think voting can absolutely take power out of the hands of those who wield it, just like courts can rule against those in power…. but these things tend to only happen when the ruling class is terrified of what will happen if they don’t appease the masses through giving concessions within the traditional power structures of society.
In other words we need people to vote to codify the concessions given by the ruling class, but unless the ruling class thinks giving concessions through voting and making courts adhere to some form of reality is a less scary option than continuing to fuck around and find out what happens when you push the masses to a breaking point… than voting is next to useless.
We need people who consider voting pointless and people who consider voting to be necessary damage control, both ideologies are mandatory in an effective progressive movement.
if deceptichum said not to vote, that’s their mistake. please let me correct them by saying VOTE BLUE NO MATTER WHO, as you stockpile ammo and expand your local alliance. we have to use every tool in the box to fix this mess before it turns into the forever dystopia. i still believe in democracy, i’m just not sure it alone can save us.
the post clearly outlines voting as the last minute harm reduction option after all other avenues have been exhausted. do (violent perhaps) praxis and organizing, yea, but why tf would you throw away your option to vote when things haven’t changed yet and you have the opportunity to do 0.01% good for your neighbor?
This kind of take isn’t “necessarily wrong”, i.e. we have never seen fascism beaten by peaceful means and all, but talking about it openly on someone’s platform is a bad move for several reasons. Put up and shut up, is my advice. Get with your local antifa group, or start one with guidance from one you trust. Keep your mouth shut, protect yourself and others for real.
but we need to get more people on board, which means advocating for violence in public places. a tiny fraction of people in a super secret space is a recipe for getting charged as conspirators and co-conspirators. we need people across the entire fucking planet rattling their chains in unison. we need a movement that’s too big to be jailed.
We’re staring down the barrel of over a century of sly upward wealth transfer and increasing state power at the cusp of a fully automated boring dystopia and a general collapse of biodiversity. If the whole world was going to mobilise as an insurgency like you’re describing, it would have happened by now.
It’s not “too late”, but it’s not early. Shit has to start happening.
yeah, i honestly don’t have much faith in people. i’m 50 and i’ve been pretty radical left since i was in my early 20’s. each new generation comes in thinking they’re on the cusp of some great enlightenment that will change the world. they get complacent with that mindset until propaganda slowly erodes their morals and they accept the ever-approaching dystopia.
if you all had the perspective i have, you’d be planting bombs at every trump rally.
there is no dark cabal of illuminati engineering our dystopia. it’s just shitty, greedy, unenlightened masses that love their shitty, greedy, unenlightened overlords, and until we cull those people nothing will ever change. they’re not dying out. they’re making new ones every day. we could have been living in a utopia by now. every problem in our society has a solution. we’re just stuck in a left-right tug of war where no significant change happens except for more government/corporate overreach and degradation of the environment.
The diffrence is commenting violence rhetoric isn’t organising. I want to hear people saying “this is where you can reach me, this is what I’m about, let’s talk about what to do”
Once people are openly talking about resistance, they can start looking into getting involved in the movement, and finding local groups to connect with.
I did say protect yourself. Why are you acting like I’m telling you to make a mistake? I’m telling you to do what you think you got to do, but do it without getting caught or fucking over a small time platform. Violent rhetoric is a liability. You’re already radical, so organise. Stand on business.
you really don’t get it. the sociopaths have conditioned you with goose and gander rhetoric. they use these types of arguments as their sheep’s skin to blend into society.
So you concede that our opponents are being violent, but only take issue with said violence when it's those they oppress who use it in self defence.. Curious.. 🤔
I tolerate intolerance, I don’t tolerate violence, it’s very simple.
The same tolerance I afford you, openly advocating violence in an open forum, i afford nazis.
You should be happy that this tolerance is in place, since you benefit from it.
The paradox of intolerance you are so daftly hinting at explicitly draws the line at circumventing debate and resorting to violence and intimidation.
That is the intolerance that shall not be tolerated, but since you never actually read the text and are ““educated”” through memes you wouldn’t know that, because of that idiotic fucking comic you knuckledraggers love reposting to bolster your off-brand “can’t be a fascist if I’m antifa” bullshit.
I tolerate intolerance, I don’t tolerate violence, it’s very simple.
Imagine being privileged enough to not only not be personally impacted by the violence inflicted by the ruling class, but to not see it at all even when those impacted are screaming at the top of their lungs..
Yes I know you tolerate intolerance, that is entirely the issue.
You will sit back and do nothing to fight against those who wish to end tolerance. You’re the equivalent of a pacifist staring at the gates of Auschwitz, you disgust me.
I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be most unwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols. We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant.
Nowhere does the paradox of intolerance call out not using force if necessary to preserve tolerance.
The Estonian Union for the Protection of Animals (EUPA) said the wolf had low blood pressure when it arrived at the veterinarian’s office, which may have explained its docile nature after the men carried it to their car to warm it up.
Aww
“He was calm, slept on my legs. When I wanted to stretch them, he raised his head for a moment,” he added.
I mean, I guess I kind of married a cougar, and I do try to pet and play with her every day. Different kind of cougar than I meant in the other comment, though.
I think keeping a bear, even a very well trained and “domesticated” one is cruel and horrible. I also think that Russians make it look super fun and awesome on youtube.
But eventually the bear is probably going to maul me and my last thought will be the Chris Rock quote on Siegfried and Roy… “That tiger didnt go crazy, THAT TIGER WENT TIGER!”
There is a guy in my area that runs a wolf refuge and therefore has a zoo license. Local police took possession of an illegally owned black bear cub and came to him because it was too domesticated to release and they couldn’t find a zoo that would take it. He refused but then relented because the next option was euthanasia. Now his wolf sanctuary has a black bear that he raised by hand and does “wrestling” shows with. He and the bear pretend to wrestle in a bunch of different poses. The bear could snap him like a twig, but is clearly very affectionate towards him.
My partner and I went to a nature preserve the other day and had the exact same thought about buffalo. Still furry and warm, still friend shaped even if it has forehead spears. What if your furry snuggle buddy was an entire alive couch?
Apparently, dropping them into ice water until their blood pressure drops could work. But it would be a cold wet cuddle, until it becomes a cozy warm deadly wrassle!
Find someone with a wolf-dog, preferably mid to high content, hang out with it for a bit
I owned a halfer (she-wolf and husky parents) and it was basically wolf default behaviours with begrudging love for his humans. Looked like a slightly (maybe 80% size) small wolf and had the body power and intelligence to match.
It’s not exactly the same as being near a full wolf (which I have done) but it’s the experience you’re imagining for “friendly wolf”, and quite awesome
My favorite part is that the person took issue with the wojack but was cool with being told “anyone who diagrees with me is automatically considered mentally ill” lol
No, they read the meme and interpreted it correctly, that the pathologization of not wanting to be opposed is bad (You know, as displayed by the obviously evil look on the doctor wojak and the giant syringe), thus they wouldn’t need to raise that objection.
I’m old enough to have been an adult when the internet was first opened up to the general public. I remember guides to writing email that stressed that you should be careful using irony or sarcasm, that the tone was very difficult to convey. I don’t know what it could be, but there seems to be something about online communication that makes it next to impossible to use such devices.
Sure, but for some reason there doesn't seem to be the same difficulty in print. I don't recall any warnings about the use of sarcasm or irony in style guides before the internet era, and no one seemed to feel the need for anything like "/s".
That’s a really good point. I would guess that this has to do with how the medium of the internet makes it more difficult to detect the author’s intent. Pre-internet, most writing was read from books, newspapers, and magazines. With each of these, the reader usually has a good idea of the author’s tone. Going in, the reader is usually familiar with the subject, and I’m guessing that longer texts give the reader more time and context to detect the tone.
This is all pretty different on the internet, where shorter, user-generated content (mostly written by people who aren’t amazing writers) reigns supreme. When reading comments in a thread or flipping through posts, the reader switches between different authors with their different tones much quicker than in earlier mediums. It makes sense that people would get tripped up more often.
That’s all just ideas, though. I’d love to see some scientific study on this kind of stuff.
Lack of nonverbal queues/tone and lack of context. It’s easier to convey sarcasm through text if you’re chatting with someone you know well. But online, you’re often talking to near strangers, and you don’t know if they’re the type to find this kind of thing hilarious among other beliefs.
The fuck? This is completely messed up. I cannot agree with the bullshit “facts” stated in this article. 8 billion only netted 8 million terminated unborn lives? Almost $1000 per is definitely not “efficient.”
However, CO2 emissions are a bitch. Even if tomorrow we stop dead on our tracks, no more extra CO2 emissions, were still fucked for centuries to come.
Even if tomorrow we stop, and spend ALL the global energy output (now magically generated by nuclear, aoloar and wind) on filtering out all extra CO2, we’d still be fucked for decades to about a century.
That is if tomorrow we would start.
Reality is that we’re still actually INCREASING CO2 output because hydrocarbons are (truthfully) a great energy source and converting our entire infrastructure to alternative sources is expensive and hey, we have an economy to uphold and we have shareholders to keep happy, and governments still have so much money to give to gas and oil companies to sponsor their world destruction, even though they have proven lied to use for decades about the problem!
Also we’re so happy spending billions of dollars on green washed projects or on scam products that will just push more CO2 in the atmosphere, like Hyperloop and more and more electric cars!
So here is a very cold dose of reality for you.
Global temperatures will rise, and keepmtisijg faster and faster every year. Humanity won’t do shit until people start dying by the millions which, given current trends, I’d say will happen in about a decade from now.
Then we’ll finally really start trying to do something more beyond the bullshit were pulling now.
The CO2 in our atmosphere is there because we burned hydrocarbons. There is no way around it, there is no free lunch, we’ll have to pull that CO2 out. Filtering that out will cost roughly the same energy as we gemot by burning it. Then you need to store it somehow. But where? Because uouri talking about cubic kilometers worth of CO2 every. Single. Year. For decades to come. You can convert it to plastics, easier to store, but costs roughly twice the amount of energy we got for burning it.
So we’ll need to spend around three times the amount of energy we got from burning fossil fuels for the past two centuries
So to get there, For the next century or so, 30-50% of our entire energy production will have to go into CO2 scrubbing.
So expect energy prices to go nuts.
That is only on the cleaning up isle.
Then we’re in the “were currently fucked” isle. Weather patterns are changing rapidly which will affect food production. Expect food prices to rise to crazy levels, expect food shortages. Maybe even wars, when resources get really thin.
Expect loads of people to die during the summers due to high heat. Eh, that already had been happening multiple times, so expect it to be worse. Much, much worse
We’ll have to resolve to atmospheric engineering (which, technically, we’ve been doing already for the past centuries by dumping so much CO2 in it) and start pushing sulfuric compounds into the atmosphere to block out some of the solar radiation, temporarily at least. If we don’t, things will get fucked even worse.
Our generation is the last to enjoy the damn near free energy. The next generations will be paying through the nose for our partying, you’re welcome!
Oh yeah, and don’t expect politicians to do anything about it. They don’t understand the issues, they don’t understand the severity and they don’t give a shit as they need to please the rich, and theyl.rich only cares about being rich, they’ll by extra airconditioning or something.
TL;DR: We’re fucked, and millions, if not billions will die in the next decades over the results of climate change and there is nothing you cand do about it.
All the reasons of why its pointles to do something about it are tied to the economic system, so i say fuck the system and its oligarchic lizard people, lets take them out of the ecuation.
There would be glimmers of hoor if I just didn’t have such a low view of humanity. From top to bottom it’s filled with assholes who just don’t care. Just now in the rainforest a successful tree replanting project has been burned to the ground by land grabbers.
Because I’m right? Because I am. Climate change is a slow moving train and were all tied in a chair right in front of it and still most of us are “there is no train lalalalala”
Hard disagree. The world would be a much better place if more people had this conversation more frequently. Covering your eyes and la-la-laing the problem away solves nothing, and in fact is the very reason why we are so screwed now.
We can act now, and maybe preserve humanity beyond the next 250 years. Or we can do nothing and guarantee the death of everyone. Make your choice.
I mean, what exactly is the point of trying to “preserve” humanity? We are possibly just obsolete and unable to adapt. Instead we change and manipulate our environment and that’s what it gets us… we can’t just stop doing what we are doing. What’s the purpose of lingering on? Putting new humans who never consented to exist and suffer the consequences of their parents’ actions through literal hell? If you knew you’d be born to experience a horrifying gauntlet in which survival meant a lifetime of hardship and pain? Lol no. Nobody would. Not existing was fucking amazing. It was literal bliss. Dying on the other hand is horrifying. We aren’t contributing anything important to the universe with our existence. It’s fine if we die out. We had an interesting run.
What about the children who are going to live through a worsening world? You can start your suicide cult if you want to but many will carry on. The suffering is just beginning.
From Wiki: “In 1819, at the age of 72, Goya moved into a two-story house outside Madrid that was called Quinta del Sordo (Deaf Man’s Villa). Although the house had been named after the previous owner, who was deaf, Goya too was nearly deaf at the time as a result of an unknown illness he had suffered when he was 46.”
I’ve seen these paintings and had no idea about any of this. I also want more weird art history facts.
curatedtumblr
Hot
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.