Skip Navigation
InitialsDiceBear„Initials” ( by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (
Posts 5
Comments 257
How do I make enough money to live?
  • Look into switching jobs. Unemployment is on the low end. People who switch jobs tend to make more money, and it's easier to get a high-paying job when you have a job already because employers can't help but think more highly of you if someone else is wiling to employ you.

    Depending on what you do a recruiter or staffing agency may help. What's worked best for me is posting an updated linkedin profile with keywords that recuriters will look for that relate to buzzwords for your job. Remember recruiters are typically trained as salespeople and may not know much about your actual job, they just look for words. Put in that you're looking for work (but only show it to recruiters) and see if anyone bites.

  • Why is my Twitter feed full of right-wing content when I don't consume political content?
  • Nothing on social media is neutral. Every site uses a ranking algorithm of some sort.

    Elon promised to open-source Twitter's version of this. He didn't. He released some snippets of selected code that was largely enums and clearly irrelevant to ranking. So we don't actually know how twitter performs its ranking.

    So if you're seeing right wing content, that's the only data point we have, and it's reasonable to assume that Twitter's algorithm promotes right wing users. There's a few ways that this could happen, my guess is that the ranking algorithm promotes what Elon himself follows/likes. Alternatively it's possible that blue check likes are given extra weight. Finally given the evisceration of moderation/removal of fake accounts it's likely that interested and well-funded actors outside of twitter are able to promote content they would like to see on more front pages.

  • Trump Fumbles Repeatedly in Terrifying Speech at Florida Rally
  • “We will take over the horribly run capital of our nation in Washington, D.C."

    Can't disenfranchise us, we're already disenfranchised. Give us 2 senators and a representative, then you'll have something to take away.

  • GOP party convention says quiet part out loud: "We do not want to be a democracy.”
  • No, that's a system without rights. A democracy can have rights. In fact, it's hard to have rights without a democracy, because when power isn't shared equally, those with power tend to remove rights from those without or fail to enforce them.

  • AOC Backs Biden Amid Growing Calls for Him to Drop Out: ‘He Is in This Race and I Support Him’
  • Yes. There's partisans who vote Trump no matter what, but there's also a pretty large number of "low information voters". Rather than being necessarily dumb, many of these are people from all kinds of different walks of life who just don't follow politics that closely and prefer to follow things like dating reality shows or sports instead. These people are not really aware of what happened on Jan 6 other than that there was some sort of riot at the Capitol. They know Trump was charged with a bunch of crimes, but don't know if they were real crimes or just politics. And when these people see Trump lying confidently and Joe Biden being barely intelligible in response, they like Trump better.

    It sucks, yes. But it's reality. Democrats need someone who can answer Trump forcefully. Or they will lose.

  • AOC Backs Biden Amid Growing Calls for Him to Drop Out: ‘He Is in This Race and I Support Him’
  • I disagree. My logic is as follows:
    Premise 1. Joe Biden cannot beat Trump
    Premise 2: Virtually any other democrat can beat Trump
    Conclusion: If we want to beat Trump, Biden should step down and be replaced by virtually any other Democrat

  • Guys, there's a solution that we haven't considered.
  • He would probably do better than Biden at debating Trump too.

    Trump: "And what I did is I put three great Supreme Court justices on the court, and they happened to vote in favor of killing Roe v. Wade and moving it back to the states. This is something that everybody wanted. "
    Carter: "Eh....cought...wheeze"
    Audience: "Yup Carter won that round"

  • Why is the pundit class so desperate to push Biden out of the race?
  • Yes, Biden had a bad debate – but so did Trump.

    "Bad" is not nearly as descriptive of a word as is necessary here. Biden had very low expectations and somehow fell short of them. Even worse, he fell short in the exact, perfect way to feed into Republican talking points about him having dementia, in by far the worst way he or any other president has ever done, at the most important moment, with literally years to prepare for that moment.

    I think it's not an exaggeration to say that 2024 Joe Biden is the single worst major party candidate at winning an election in the history of the US. Name someone worse - I know some people have been totally crushed in elections, but you gotta judge those results relative to the competition. Look at all that's happened with Trump during and since the 2016 election. In 2016, there was no Stormy Daniels, no sexual assault verdict, no fraud verdict, no tragicomic failed attempt to steal the election from the very voters who he's asking to vote for him again. Forget 1980 Jimmy Carter, I think current, 99-year-old hospice patient Jimmy Carter would have no problem beating Trump. The fact that Biden is behind proves he's the worst politician in history, and by far.

  • CMV - Expensive purses are a red flag
  • Ok fine, I don't know if we do deltas here but if so you get one. I guess even if I'm judgey about expensive accessories, I should wait until I understand the context more before holding it against them. Ironically I'd have absolutely no problem with someone who bought a fake expensive brand name bag, and that's always a possibility...

  • change my view rsuri

    CMV - Expensive purses are a red flag

    So a bit about me, I'm a very practical-oriented, some might say cheap person. I look at excessive luxury as a moral failing at any wealth level, either because you should be giving that money to charity, or because you should be saving it so you don't end up needing charity yourself someday.

    However, finding a woman with a compatible mindset has always been a challenge, and it seems to be getting harder every year. I've been dating mostly online for a good while, and prior to the pandemic I pretty much never ran into a woman with a lot of luxuries in her life. Now it seems like almost every profile features a woman showing off a LV/YSL/Gucci purse that cost 4 figures or more. These luxury brand purchases are the hardest thing for me to relate to, because it's just the brand - it's purely to signal that you could afford to send some corporation your hard-earned money for virtually no reason. And you don't have to take my word for it, luxury goods are booming, especially among gen Y and Z.

    Problem is, I'm finding it harder and harder to cut this massive chunk of the population out of my dating pool. I'm also attracted to the look of feminine accessories like jewelry and heels (isn't everyone?). And while I don't care if it's cheap accessories, there seems to be basically a 100% overlap between women who wear feminine accessories and those who like spending lots of money on brand names. I kinda hit rock bottom recently when I went on a date with a low-wage worker which made me excited that maybe I finally found someone down to earth enough, and then even she showed up with a $1200 purse (yes I looked it up).

    So it's time to pause and seek alternative perspectives. I want to keep looking for the cheap-yet-feminine woman. But at the same time, I feel increasingly like I'm being an extremist. Is there some way I can understand the need for luxury brand purchases differently so I can find it more acceptable in a long term partner?

    What's your plan if Trump wins in November?
  • To be honest, I don't think Trump has the attention span to do any more than hold a bunch of gloating rallies. Ironically his own immunity may end up working against his desire for revenge, as some justice department lawyers will push back until Trump gets distracted by a squirrel or a coloring book or something.

    That being said, I kinda dream of moving to Canada. Fun fact: the median Canadian wealth per capita is higher than in the US, meaning it may have a better claim to "land of opportunity" if we're talking about ordinary people instead of the richest few. Plus the people really do seem to be nicer. The mosquitoes though...Canadian mosquitoes are no joke.

  • Project 2025 Architect Signals Bloodshed If Left Opposes Trump-Led 'Revolution'
  • Yeah the thing I really can't understand is why did the voters pick Biden in 2016? Even on the moderate side of the party there were much better choices. The democratic voters who just seem to pick the name they're most familiar with - Clinton, Biden - those are the people who made Trump happen.

    I think the majority of Democratic voters just assume the most familiar name is the most electable in the general, but as we've seen that's simply not the case. Ironically, if it feels like Democrats run the worst candidates against Trump, that's probably not an accident. Trump makes Democratic voters pick the "safest" candidate, who turns out to be the least electable.

  • why isn't anyone calling for Trump to drop out.
  • Anybody but Biden. Kamala seems to be the expected replacement, that works. If not her, pretty much anyone else. Trump is a terrible candidate. While he has experience in show business, he's way past his prime and pretty much any person should be able to beat him in a debate at this point.

    I was actually recently thinking through people I've known and whether they could've done a better job debating Trump than Biden did. Generally any adult with a functioning mind would do better. Adults I've known with a HS education could've crushed Trump in that debate. I'm actually not sure if a homeless guy I once debated on the street regarding the meaning of pi would do better or worse than Biden, he seemed to be at about Trump's level of sanity and if Trump won this last debate, well yeah even he'd do better than Biden. I can also think of some older teenage jocks I once knew, and while they were dumb as rocks their teenager swagger would've been more convincing than Biden's rambling failed attempts to remember rote speeches.

    If I try to think of who is actually about at Biden's level, I think of myself at the age of 13, when I had a presentation in front of the class on an issue and for some reason I was struck by that early teenager nervousness, and haltingly tried to give a presentation as the class tried failingly to hide their laughter at how terribly it was going. It was probably the most embarrassing day of my life. That's Biden's level right there, because he sounded just like me back then giving that presentation. So any person in their late teens or older with a full grasp on sanity should be a much better candidate than Biden.

  • Why are fuel perks at grocery stores so ubiquitous?

    This seems insane to me. I live in a city where maybe 50-60% of people have cars, and most don't drive them that much. Yet every grocery store I'm aware of with the sole exception of the expensive Whole Foods has a fuel rewards points program. Reasons this should be controversial enough to enable a low-cost alternative:

    1. Many people don't drive and therefore pay a little more for groceries because it includes a perk they don't use
    2. It seems like a very ardent pro-fossil fuel move that you'd think would cause some sort of negative attention from environment activists.
    3. The subsidy typically applies as an amount off per gallon, so you end up really subsidizing big vehicles with big gas tanks. Again, really makes some customers subsidize others and you'd think people (other than me) would be annoyed at this.

    But yet, virtually every grocery store does this. Anyone know why? Does the fossil fuel industry somehow encourage this?


    Blocking users is easy

    Being a mod carries great powers and pretty much no responsibility.

    New rule: multiple rule violations results in a ban. Applies ex post facto.


    Is it dumb to create a wiki in this day and age?

    I have a vague idea to create a wiki for politics-related data. Basically, I'm annoyed with how low-effort, entirely un-researched content dominates modern politics. I think a big part of the problem is that modern political figures use social media platforms that are hostile to context and citing sources.

    So my idea for a solution is to create a wiki where original research is not just allowed but encouraged. For example, you could have an article that's a breakdown of the relative costs to society of private vs public transportation, with calculations and sources and tables and whatnot. It wouldn't exactly be an argument, but all the data you'd need to make one. And like wikipedia, anyone can edit it, allowing otherwise massive research tasks to be broken up.

    The problem is - who creates a wiki nowadays? It feels like getting such a site and community up and running would be hopeless in a landscape dominated by social media. Will this be a pointless waste of time? Is there a more modern way to do this? All thoughts welcome.