I mean I was just giving a simple refute to the guy that said all is good if “no one” is harmed, not really debating perfect systems in society. Basically this

Almost always something “bad” happens though, someone is harmed… Someone rapes, you jail that person -> the rapist is harmed. Is it a bad process? Of course not.

It’s not about not harming anyone, it’s about harming the right people. Who we harm in what case is what almost all political discourse is about.

If you use it in the web version, I have LULs, a script which makes all Lemmy links that point to a different instance which you encounter while browsing, to point to your instance.

In the context of cold random approaches, women almost never do that. They don’t need to, because so many men are approaching them that they simply don’t have to do the work. Why would you risk rejection when you can just chill and be approached and thus get guaranteed interest? They just mostly pick out of the approaches they get. Gender roles might be theoretically dead, but practically, they’re very much alive.

One of the indirect ways is simply looking at you and looking friendly. That is them indirectly approaching you by showing you that you can approach them. How to make sure that is their intention is almost impossible because different people have different mannerisms and you don’t know what the person you’re looking at’s mannerisms are. They might just generally look at people and look friendly. For someone else, they might look but look bored and that’s their face for them wanting you to approach them. Or someone looking at you but quickly looking away when you look may be wanting you to approach (they were just embarrassed for staring), but they might also just think you look weird and that’s why they stared.

Approaching someone is not wrong, but it’s almost impossible to know if someone wants to be approached unless you approach them. It’s a paradox without a proper solution.

If you don’t initiate, you rely on others to give you what you want. If you approach yourself, you’re making what you want happen.

There is no “role that never needs to initiate”. Women have always been initiating, just less than men and maybe in a more indirect way. If women want something, they also make sure to try and get it.

In the end, the only thing you’re doing is not taking responsibility about your own happiness.

I see, that’s probably something only Americans would generally understand :D

What do the numbers mean?

Setup an autocorrect phrase :D

I think what people mean when they say this is that they are looking for the same price point as the equivalent Windows device… I don’t know all these companies but every time I looked for a Linux PC/laptop it was 25-30% more expensive than the equivalent Windows thing.

Ideas are incredibly cheap. It’s absolutely unlikely that no one ever had your idea. It’s even likely that someone had your idea and it failed, and you don’t/can’t even know about it because no one bothered to record the failure.

Other people have mentioned all kinds of ambitious/proper ways to do this. I’ve got a different view: if you truly think this will work, do a basic version yourself.

Learn basic blender, design 3D printed parts yourself and let someone print them. Use some app builder and tutorials, or hire a programmer for a very rudimentary prototype work. Buy generic electronics. Just get it working once. Then show it to people, let them use it, ask if they would buy it, preferably let them sign a slip of paper not to talk about this product or compete with it (there are standard NDA/non-compete contract clauses online available) or talk to people you can trust.

If you do all this and get positive feedback, then you can start doing this properly and get more people on it, like the other commenters mentioned.

No. Just no. You’re talking about perfectionism basically. Who cares about continuing maintenance? If you get the product out there and working enough to last the 2 years warranty, you’re completely fine. One programmer is perfectly capable of learning the most basic things about the disciplines you mentioned, it doesn’t need to be good, it just needs to do its job mostly.

You have no clue about the scope of what this guy’s idea is since he gave no info. Maybe it’s so simple not even one programmer would have to work on it for very long.

Of course, what you say is perfectly possible to be “correct”, but you just have no way of knowing.

I don’t necessarily think people can be evil.

I know of some of my abusers that they were abused themselves. They knew what they were doing to me wasn’t right but it gave them feelings of power in a world where they otherwise felt powerless.

For others, bullying me was a social sport, just something you did to “belong” to a certain group.

I think what they did was evil, but I don’t think they were evil people. They were normal people with inadequate upbringing put into painful situations that resulted in bullying/abusing me being the only perceived “good” outcome for them. For almost all people who do evil things, this is the case.

I think we all possess the ability to do evil acts in response to certain stimuli, many are just lucky enough never to receive the set of stimuli that causes them to be evil, so they can allow themselves to think they are different, i.e. “good”, and start labeling other people a certain way, i.e. “evil”.

Conversely, I also think all the people who do evil acts are also able to do good acts in certain situations.

What we then call a “good” or an “evil person” is just a person where we perceive a larger share of behaviors attributed to that adjective. But are they evil or good people, is that a quality inherent to them? Or is the environment they grew up in evil or good? Or are humans in general evil or good? Is our perception of the share of each set of behaviors even right?

I think no one deserves for their whole self to be called evil. I think you can call actions evil, and some people may have a lot of these actions, and they’re worthy of being avoided because of that, but I believe they’re the same kind of person than everyone else, just put into terrible situations. So no, I don’t think people can be evil.

Interesting. Thanks for sharing. How did those encounters affect you?

What’s stopping you? No money? :D

Of course they are kidding. People change, you can be a POS earlier and change to not be one now.

For what it’s worth, I would have appreciated as a victim if my bullies seeked me out and truly apologized to me. It would’ve restored a little faith in humanity. I don’t care now anymore, but there was a time.

Of course, any feeling that the apology was fake or forced would have ruined the whole thing and had the opposite effect.

You were lucky to grow up in an environment not triggering your natural human evil.

The only reason I didn’t bully anyone was because I was bullied myself.

I’m 35 and when I grow up I want to be psychotherapist. However, I hate university. Fun!

That doesn’t work, you can’t train models on another model’s output without degrading the quality. At least not currently.