Mice and scissors that can be used in both left and right hands are oppression by the woke communists!!!!!1! All part of the WEF plan (sponsored by Soros) to make everyone ambidextrous and to destroy our right-hand supremacy! Bill Gates put secret nanobots in the vaccines to make us more left-handed. Wake up, don't believe what the fake news media tells you!

(/s, though I hope that was clear)

Honestly, however much I want to pretend to be better than that, I think it does work on me. Obviously not on a conscious level, I know how numbers work, but some part of my monkey brain sees the 1 instead of the 2 and therefore concludes that it must be way cheaper. It's a feeling that no amount of facts is going to disable. And in the end many purchasing decisions aren't based on a full analysis but on feelings.

I used to at lemmy.world, but my current instance doesn't seem to accept donations.

I disagree. The margins seem thin enough that people fed up with either party can absolutely ruin them in the swing states. If you were to disagree with one of the parties, you could absolutely give them a signal by not voting. Preferably such a person would also make very clear why they refuse to vote for a party, because otherwise it's indeed just lazy and empty.

Again, I think that people who do so are shooting themselves (and everyone else) in the foot. But I can see their motivation.

Reading the other comments, this seems to be more of a cultural thing than something based on facts. Ibuprofen seems to be taken in more serious situations. Personally I've never had it so I'm not sure. Paracetamol is more of a casual thing here. Many people, like me, would only take it when very ill. But I've definitely had a few classmates or colleagues who just take paracetamol whenever they have a slight headache or something.

Not sure. I've never used it but it always seems to be used as such, so I just assumed that was the case

I'm Dutch and I only take paracetamol when I cannot sleep or function due to pain/illness. I've never taken something stronger like Ibuprofen in my life. When I'm ill I usually just lie in bed and wait for it to blow over

Same. At some point I became friends with pretty religious people who were also some of the most intelligent and nice people I had met. My beliefs that religious people are just dumb people who cannot understand the complexity of the real world kinda fell apart then.

I returned back to my pre-teen opinion, still an atheist but with compassion for other people's beliefs. No need to constantly force my opinion into it or needlessly be a dick because we disagree. I've had many interesting discussions since then with very religious people. I still don't fully get it, and to me it still reeks of indoctrination, but I've accepted that it's fine to disagree.

Yeah this. Nowadays I can usually stop it or at least make it way lighter by just moving my foot in the right position again. It has almost become a reflex at this point

I agree that people should've voted, but I disagree with this one-dimensional line of thinking. I can see the argument that by voting for the democrats their current behaviour and this fucked up system as a whole is warranted. It's not as simple as "why not vote, it costs you nothing". By voting this horrible "democracy" is legitimised and the democrats and the system will not change their approach. The US deserves a democracy that actually allows for representation instead of this duopoly of garbage and more garbage

I'm not American, and I don't agree with these people either, but I don't think that calling them lazy and ignorant makes any sense. In the fucked up democracy of the US it's clear that the only way to get what you want for the coming 4 years is to vote for the least bad candidate. At the same time I can definitely understand that if you view both candidates was horrible, though one way more horrible than the other, you would feel conflicted about voting for either of them.

Let's do a thought experiment. Assuming both candidates are still roughly equally "popular". If both candidates wanted to start a genocide, but one would want to kill only 50% of the amount of innocents that the other would kill, how would you vote? Would you vote for the one who is overall the less bad option, which will in turn make you give your vote for something horrible. Or would you abstain and signal that the democracy as it currently stands has lost your confidence entirely, even if it means that on the short term the consequences might be way worse?

Not voting actually costs the democrats something, and should (if they want to win next time) force them to think how to better represent you next time.

It's fucked up that your democracy came to this. It has become an annoying game theory dilemma instead of voting for the candidate that you actually believe in. Our system here in the Netherlands is certainly also not perfect, since we have too many parties and too long coalition negotiations, but at least I feel like it represents people way better. Anyone can start a party and capture seat if they represent a large enough niche.

Yeah but we can estimate how much it may or may not happen

Using Haskell you can write it way more concise:

iseven :: Int -> Bool
iseven 0 = True
iseven 1 = False
iseven 2 = True
iseven 3 = False
iseven 4 = True
iseven 5 = False
iseven 6 = True
iseven 7 = False
iseven 8 = True
...

However, we can be way smarter by only defining the 2 base cases and then a recursive definition for all other numbers:

iseven :: Int -> Bool
iseven 0 = True
iseven 1 = False
iseven n = iseven (n-2)

It's having a hard time with negative numbers, but honestly that's quite a mood

Me, trying to sound cool as an aromantic asexual atheist:

Actually I'm alingual as well

Yeah this is kinda a point. People like this colleague seem to have gotten stuck in a highschool bully mindset ans never moved on. All of their jokes are about people who are different, their whole status seems to be based on their "masculinity". In my experience this is the largest portion of homo/transphobes here in the Netherlands. People who aren't violent or outright hateful, but rather just pushing outdated jokes and viewpoints and then getting annoyed by all the "woke bullshit" when they get called out.

My tactic so far is to not fully attack back, but rather staying friendly while showing my disappointment with this behaviour unless it goes too far. Most of these people are otherwise decent, and in my opinion may be swayed by someone "woke" who doesn't go "full crazy sjw" but does call them out. Making a joke about minorities is way easier of you don't know anyone well from those groups. They're not crazy Trump voters, so they may still be steered in the right direction

I've had a colleague say that tea is "homo water". I'm aro/ace, but most of my colleagues don't know that. Similarly a straight colleague of mine got mocked for wearing pink (but not feminine) shoes. After some of these incidents we've kinda started pushing back against this nonsense by deliberately triggering these people and calling them out, which has worked so far.

Oh yeah absolutely. I'm a programmer and I see so many companies and recruiters etc use Cyber instead of Cybersecurity. It drives me absolutely mad, but these type of people drive me mad anyways. It's probably the same crowd who ruined AI by overhyping it into its grave, the same crowd who were hyped by web 3.0 and the whole Blockchain craze, and probably all those other dumb crazes before it.

Still, this cyber thing seems to permeate everything, and I've heard people using the term who I otherwise respect. For me it's a quick way to instantly become very sceptical of whatever follows the term

Idk, ik heb redelijk de tegenovergestelde ervaring. Bedrijven deden allemaal hun best om onze aandacht te krijgen op de studie, en het moment dat ik een paar maanden ervaring had ging het LinkedIn spam kanon helemaal aan. Zowel waar ik werk als bij de bedrijven waar vrienden werken lijken ze het liefst zoveel mogelijk programmeurs de seconde na het afronden van hun HBO of universiteits studie op te willen pakken.

I update whenever it is convenient or pushed. On Android it's not really a decision that I make, it just updates whenever it feels like it and so far I haven't disagreed very often. On my desktop I update Arch pretty much weekly, and Windows as little as possible because it wants to restart during the updating process and will probably just pull in more spyware. My Ubuntu laptop isn't used often, so it doesn't get updated often either. I also sometimes use some Fedora machines, which I also don't update too regularly.

Ubuntu and the multiple Fedora machines under my control also like to start unattended updates at the worst possible moments, which regularly interrupts my attempts to update or install stuff. I prefer to turn that shit off at every opportunity. I'd rather just get a notification that it wants me to update in the DE or terminal

I use it for sim racing sometimes and it's amazing to feel like I'm in an F1 car or something. Until I get nauseous after 15 minutes or something. It's also a bit of a hassle to set up. That being said, maybe it would be cooler if I got into beat saber or something.

Was it over hyped? Maybe. But it's still a cool technology and I'd be sad to see it fall into nothingness. I don't see a future where everyone is wearing VR glasses, but it's still a very neat thing to enjoy every now and then.