luxinnocte

guyrocket, 3 months ago

That is doubleplus ungood!

SpaceNoodle, 3 months ago

Openly

InEnduringGrowStrong, 4 months ago

Why not put wood in the wood stove though?

derbis, 5 months ago

If it’s a third person game, I’d rather be looking at her ass throughout the playthrough than his.

TheAlbatross, 6 months ago

Dude forgot about stairs

Nibodhika, 6 months ago

When it comes to abortion however, I do believe that it’s a tricky situation ethically. I’m pro-choice, but I say that with difficulty, because considering both sides it’s not an easy position and I see it as much more ethically complex than the issue of unnecessary animal exploitation. That’s because I think you can make the argument that either forcing a person to undergo pregnancy, or terminating the life of an (admittedly unconscious, undeveloped) fetus, are in both cases breaching a sentient (or would-be sentient) individual’s negative (protective) right.

I’m going to answer this, because if we remove the ethical dilemma you have everything else is meaningless.

The right to bodily autonomy is essentially absolute in most people’s moral compass, let’s give an example: imagine a fully grown adult was in a car accident, completely out of his control, he lost a lot of blood and his kidneys were damaged, you are a match to him, and he will 100% die unless you donate blood and one kidney, in that scenario: should the government be able to force you to donate your kidney and blood?

There is no question that the person will die if you don’t, there is no doubt the person is a human being, there’s no doubt you’ll survive the procedure and live a normal life afterwards, yet the vast majority of people would agree that the government should not be able to force you, because we recognise that a person’s right to their own body triumphs over other people’s right to that person’s body. Applying the same logic to a Fetus is straightforward, even if it was a person, it wouldn’t have a higher right to your body than you do, there’s no moral dilemma there just like there isn’t one in the kidney situation.

In the unlikely event that you think the government should in fact be able to force you to donate your kidney, it means you value life above bodily autonomy, the logical next step is that as long as it saves more than one life it’s okay for the government to kill you, e.g. if your heart and lungs are compatible with two people who will die without them, then it should kill you to get them because obviously saving two lives is better than saving one.

Wander, 7 months ago

Yes. If your country is authoritarian use cryptocurrency such as Monero. Even Bitcoin can be much better.

The bank would know the amount, the merchant and other details even if it’s a merchant from abroad. The bank might have a duty to report certain transactions or could be forced to give out a record. Other international payment process or foreign banks will generally not refuse a request if it comes from a country government you are a citizen of.

You can use crypto to buy gift cards to shop at regular retailers. This is your safest bet if you’re concerned about a state surveillance of your transactions.

sik0fewl, 7 months ago

Source?

I hope this community does not become a place for memes without any source to back them up.

d3Xt3r, 8 months ago (edited 8 months ago)

Why don’t laptops have proper low power states

Actually, they do, it’s called the “S0” low power state, and it’s part of the ACPI standard. Microsoft calls this “Modern Standby” in Windows (and “suspend to idle” in Linux) , and it’s pitched to do exactly what you’ve described.

The only problem is, the implementation sucks. Most users actually hate the S0 state because it consumes so much power - on some laptops, even the fans may continue to run on S0, and your laptop may overheat if you’ve closed the lid and chucked it in a bag, and it’s in the S0 state.

Also, because Microsoft and Intel have been pushing this so much, the “standby” mode now defaults to S0 instead of S3 (which is full suspend-to-RAM). So many users actually actively seek to disable S0 and go back to proper S3 standby, via registry hacks etc.

So why is S0 so bad? Part of this is due to the limitations, long history and the variable nature of the x86 platform. All the power-saving stuff was implemented as an after-thought - both at the hardware and software levels. Whereas ARM, at least the modern ARM ecosystem, was developed with mobile usage and power saving from ground up. An x86 PC is also made up of components from disjointed manufacturers, and we need all those components to implement the same standards so that it all works well as expected. So for instance, if a particular component isn’t capable of entering a low-power or active standby state, then it won’t - and you can’t do much about that, unless you’re Apple and have a tight control over the ecosystem.

The second half of the problem comes with the software. All applications must be modern standby / S0 aware, if not, one of two things will happen: that app will keep the system awake, or the app will get suspended by the Desktop Activity Moderator (DAM). Either way, the app must be capable of running in the DRIPS phase (deepest idle runtime platform state), which rules out most Win32 apps (basically almost every app that’s not on the Microsoft Store).

Finally, the reality is that most PC users don’t care about modern standby regardless - and why should they, when they’ve all got smartphones, which handles notifications well? Also, hardly anyone does large file downloads these days, and the people who do still download, wouldn’t care about doing it while on battery (and if they do, they can take manual actions to lower the power consumption, such as switching to a power saving plan and turning off the display etc).

Ultimately, most people would expect a laptop to go into a fully suspended state when the lid so closed and they’re on battery, because if they’re on battery the #1 concern for them would be the battery life. So most people actively seek to disable S0 and see it as a hindrance.

TheBananaKing, 8 months ago

It’s whinge, pronounced winj.

UK / Australian English thing. It has a slightly different connotation.

Whine is what a dog does when it wants to go out.

Whinge is what a 14yo does when they don’t get their way. It’s salty whining.

Not_Alec_Baldwin, 8 months ago

Obviously, in any discussion about groups as diverse as men/women, it’s important to recognize that these are sweeping generalizations and that individuals can vary wildly.

It’s not being “sensitive” or “emotional” that most dudes have trouble with.

Most women probably don’t consider it a sign of strength, either. Not the sensitivity or emotionality.

In my experience, most men are focused on something that is happening. A sport or activity, a task, whatever. Your sharing is most likely out of rapport and just isn’t how they want to interact.

I have close male friendships that are very emotionally open, and others where it just doesn’t feel right.

In my experience, women are different. Male/female relationships are already complicated and getting into preferences and other dynamics is pointless. It could be anything.

Assuming you’re attractive/confident/wealthy/etc, there would be many women who would comfort you just to keep you in their orbit.

Assuming you aren’t, there are many women who would comfort you out of a sense of maternal care and empathy.

Assuming you’re usually friendly, funny, safe, etc, women broadly seem to be kinder and more interested in interacting in that emotional space.

Does any of it matter? Probably not. Before insulting all men you know, it might be better to consider that you might just not like to have typical male friends. Just because people don’t like doing what you do, it doesn’t make them dumb.