Aceticon

joined 1 year ago
MODERATOR OF
[–] Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 19 hours ago

Being older than 18 means Maduro is way too old for Trump to do that to him.

[–] Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 46 points 1 day ago

Most people in the smaller EU countries are very keenly aware that without the power of the group to face the World's large countries they would be nothing more than footballs for the big powers, same as before the EU.

It's not by chance that the only country to ever leave was big-sized (in Europe terms, but mid-sized in World terms) one with nationalistic delusions of grandeur leftover from the time when they headed an Empire.

[–] Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

A fucking rock would be better.

Or just leaving the post unoccupied.

A good woman would be better, but so would a good man. It's the "good" (person) part that guarantees it would better, not the gender.

[–] Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 23 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

Two words: "Margaret Thatcher"

The idea that a woman president is bound to be better just because of being a female is ridiculous.

[–] Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I reckon it's just them doing cold calculating analyses towards the objective of "keeping on suckling from the golden tit" - shame is something that detracts from personal upside maximization when saying something shamelessly self-serving will support one's own continued opportunities to make money, even if just a little bit: if claiming their work is really, truly, visionary stuff rather than the inept, uncoordinated actions of the incompetent might get them a few more months and a few more millions whilst saying no such things is certain to deliver no such gains, then the cold calculating analysis yields the logical conclusion than doubling down on bullshit is a better option than not doing so.

(I mean, this is the whole culture of both Politics and Tech "Entrepreneurship" nowadays: Keep on spewing self-serving bullshit until by some lucky happenstance something purely by chance goes right for you and you make it, or fail, either way cashing in for as long as you can keep the whole building of smoke & mirrors standing)

I expect this applies just as much when they're being checked out for possible hiring into such well paid positions (i.e. their version of "job interview") as it does in claiming that piss is in fact gold whilst defending their own actions as CEOs in order to keep on getting paid millions for what they themselves know is competence in producing a grand show of smoke and mirrors rather than of the managerial kind, so it's a natural process that keeps on delivering such people to such positions where they do such a shitty job whilst claiming that what they really are is misunderstood visionaries.

[–] Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

The Guardian has been massively pro-Israel for most of their Genocide in Gaza and even now that they toned down the very overt support for it, still uses two-tiered language when it comes to Israel and Palestinians, such as using "says" or "states" for statements from the former whilst for the latter using "claims", reporting on deaths by saying that Israelis "were killed" whilst Palestinians merely "died", describing attacks on civilians as "terrorism" if done by Hamas but not if done by Israel and, more generally, using the kind of language towards Israel that produces the impression of them being "righteous" and "one of us" whilst for Palestinians languages that dehumanizes them and/or produces the impression of them being "criminals" and "not one of us".

Further, The Guardian is pretty much "The Voice Of The English Upper and Upper Middle Class", who are definitely people siding with American fatcats same as they side with their own fatcats and with pretty much the entire elite privilege-preserving infrastructure over there (their coverage of The Royals is the very definition of "fawning").

They're basically the British equivalent of the New York Times.

So yeah, it's absolutely logical to suspect that The Guardian are purposefully "amplifying their messages" because that's something entirely consistent with how they've always treated Israel.

[–] Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I disagree.

In terms of Moral guidance their opinion is pretty much a perfect compass pointing exactly in the opposite direction of the one people should be aiming for.

When Evil rages about somebody, you know that person is on the side of Good.

[–] Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 day ago

Not bending over fast enough to lick the boots of Zionists/Neue-Nazis is antisemitic!

[–] Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 18 points 1 day ago

Peak Irony: The nation that has very purposefully done the most to spread the impression that Genocide and Mass Murdering of Children is a Jewish trait and thus has endangered countless innocent Jews all over the World, claims that somebody who is against the kind of action that nation commits is against the Jewish People.

[–] Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

AAA games from around the 00s and 10s with heavy DRM are also often a problem, with the official version of a game not at all running in Linux no matter what you do, whilst a pirate version of the same game will work just fine.

[–] Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Because my games library is much bigger in GoG than Steam, I've been using Lutris alongside the Steam App from the start (for over a year now) and the rate of no-hassle success I've had is just as good as with Steam and the whole process of installing a game from GoG and running it is just as slick in Lutris as doing so for Steam games in the Steam App.

Further, Lutris is much more open and flexible than Steam, so for example I've configured it to by default run my games inside a firejail sandbox with localhost-only networking, I can install games from many sources and formats rather than just digital distribution from a specific game store and it's even perfectly possible to run pirated games with it (one of my Steam games won't at all run in Linux, but a pirated version of it works just fine from Lutris), none of which is possible with Steam.

The actual gaming is just as seamless with Steam as with Lutris, but Steam is purposefully a closed solution highly integrated with a single games store, so it's way more restrictive about what you can do with your games than Lutris (which follows the open source ethos, up to and including having a ton of obscure configuration options)

[–] Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 day ago

The funny bit is that in this specific case proper application of a guillotine would actually yield more shareholder value in the mid and long term than letting things be as they are.

 

So apparently for lemmy.world mods pointing out that the word "anti-semite" is far more used than "antigypsyism, anti-Romanyism, antiziganism, ziganophobia, or Romaphobia” even though the Nazis targetted both Jews and Roma in the Holocaust, is, somehow, "Criticizing Jewish people as a whole".

Or maybe it's the whole "I don't care about any one specific race, I care about people and think it's always unjusct when people are treated differently based on things they were born with, such as race" that was deemed "Criticizing Jewish people as a whole".

Good old lemmy.world: they were called on it repeatedly so eventually walked back on the whole "criticizing Israel is anti-semitic" but apparently if you don't go along with the view that racism against a very specific group is much worse than racism against people from other groups, then you must be against that specific ethnic group.

My comment in text for reference:

All clearly as frequently used as "anti-semitism" /s

And yeah, I don't care about race, any race, I care about people, which includes that they're not unjustly treated for things that were not their choice, such as the race they were born into.

It's Racists who feel the need to care about a race or races, defending things for some races which they do noit defend for others, doing little performances about how others must care about those races too and that those who don't "are against those races" - for them race comes first, defining a person and dictating how they should be treated.

For Humanists race is something that should be of as little importance to how somebody is treated as the color of their eyes or how tall they are, and yet they see again and again race weponized by Racists to treat people differently even though those people haven't actually earned such treatment through their actions: in other words race fro Humanists is something that should be irrelevant yet has been turned by others into a pivot for injustice.

It's pretty obvious from your little performance which one you are

view more: next ›