I don’t inherently disagree with you and I certainly don’t think loss of job is equivalent to loss of life, of course. But I’m just saying it’s not as simple as “he’s gotta secure the bag so he rolled over”

He is definitely complicit but he was forced into that position by a Zionist who knew he could put him in a very difficult position where either way Sheeran would catch all the flack. I’m not saying we should give his position a pass but I am saying the focus might make more sense on the oligarch that forced this situation over the soulless stooge that has decided to play the oligarchs game

Macklemore got dropped because he said some pro Palestine statements and the billionaire owner of the patriots and one of the stadiums they were arranged a boycott of many stadium owners, basically saying the tour would lose a ton of its venues if they kept him on

On one hand, ed Sheeran is comfortably extreme upper class with millions of net worth and cancelling the tour wouldn’t have really hurt him (except maybe not being able to buy a third vacation villa). On the other hand, I somewhat feel for him because the tour certainly has a ton of people employed who are very much not in that echelon of wealth. Bus drivers, caterers, security, roadies, lighting and sound people, merch desk people, etc. cancelling a tour of this size would mean fucking over dozens if not hundreds of people well beyond the headliner and openers that are financially comfortable and can easily afford to take a public stance that may cost them employment

He sucks and his music sucks but I get why this wasn’t an obvious “go fuck yourself” choice. The real villain is Robert Kraft, the literal oligarch that can arrange a blacklisting of a major concert tour at a moments notice over having his delicate feelings hurt by someone not denying a genocide. And that brings the bigger point up: I’m sure Kraft is pleased that his name barely comes up in this discussion and Sheeran catches the majority of the heat

Definitely and the processor makes sure the floor is covered; my processor has 2.7%+ 15 cents per transaction to ensure they make a minimum amount per transaction, but there is no ceiling with any processor that I’m aware of

What’s also interesting is that with most processors the fee varies for in person and online with online being notably higher (1.5 vs 2.7% with mine). I suppose because online transactions are more likely to be fraudulent or something but ultimately the processing of the payment shouldn’t change between the settings

I eat the fee fwiw

And then the 3% surcharge is tacked on

Essentially a bunch of retailers decided they don’t want to absorb “the costs of doing business” anymore so they now charge $1-5 fees to cover when they have to replace a package that is damaged or lost in shipping. They sell it as “package insurance” but it’s once again consumers getting shafted to offset what was typically seen as a potential liability in running a business based around shipping. As a bonus if you don’t pay their extortion and your package is lost or damaged they will tell you to go fuck yourself

See also: merchants charging a ~3% fee if you use a credit card because similarly covering the cost of a payment processor is increasingly becoming a cost that is not absorbed. Even with medical practices!

Cops and secret service don’t just shoot you once in the leg dude, they unload the clip center mass until you’re dead

You can run Linux and steam on ps5 but jailbreaks are as of now limited to older firmwares. The ps5 is aggressive about making updates mandatory so you either need a console someone purposely did not update in anticipation of a jailbreak break years later or one that’s been sitting around not being used for a somewhat long time

Whenever I see one that’s obviously fishing I have an urge to reply in a contrarian way but I don’t bc that’s mean

Like “oh does anyone think my ass looks good?” No

The bigger thing is the thirst posts in replies though. Lemmy doesn’t have the traffic that Reddit has so nsfw doesn’t get nearly the engagement but it does still happen. And the goobers that reply, especially with weird parasocial bullshit, remind me that I do have an inner bully that just wants to say mean stuff to dorks

This is the thing imo. Come in under “ban ghost guns” but 10 years from now you try to print a new battery door for your remote and get blocked because the design is the property of Samsung.

Fuck Bambu and co, I’ll keep my voron around as long as humanly possible

The risk in a modern context is essentially 0. You can make it even lower by pasteurizing the eggs

The problem lies within the fact that stuff like this either tries to control an uncontrollable world (quiet) or it places the impetus for change on another when change is also possible for you (communication)

In the latter it’s really a question of who should change, and arguably the best answer is both: one should strive for clear communication while the other strives to improve their ability to read social cues. Otherwise you’re just making an argument for what is fair from a place of bias. Either way one of you has to go out of their way to practice behavior that does not come naturally.

In the former it’s just kind of tough. We can certainly cite examples that are more obvious to your side (like I fucking hate loud motorcycles and why would you ride that through a neighborhood at 11pm fuuuuuckkk youuu) but even with that example there are obviously people who enjoy it, so why does your sensory issue, which can be managed in other ways, trump that persons enjoyment? This becomes even more apparent when we start to reach the noise that is either completely uncontrollable (eg thunder) or not feasible to control reliably (eg children)

In the strictest sense I guess but I would colloquially define “picky” in this context as someone who chooses not to try new foods that are completely acceptable to eat, just foreign to them

Like I wouldn’t call someone with celiac picky for not eating bread. There is a demonstrable and significant consequence. Nut allergies even more, the consequence can literally be fatal. Thats a lot different than someone who eats themselves into malnutrition and prediabetes because anything aside from chicken nuggets, French fries, and candy are “yucky”

I worked with a woman that would do cartwheels sometimes. She was around 30 iirc and mainly did it because people would question her ability to do cartwheels

Or head scale if you don’t want something you don’t control that requires an account with google/apple/microsoft

That’s not inherently true, infinity can be bound

There are an infinite amount of numbers between 2 and 3 but none of them are 5

Basically all commercial dvds with the exception of stuff like some independent releases and essentially all blurays have copy protection (CSS for dvd and AACS for bluray, for bluray it’s built into the spec)

They’re both fairly trivially defeated (for dvd extremely so because CSS is completely broken, whereas br has key revocation so it’s technically a bit more complex though practically this doesn’t mean much)

I don’t know much about Germanys laws but iirc they are one of the places that takes piracy and torrenting more seriously, no?

Interactive media like menus is a nightmare to support. Kodi has some support but only on pc. Also to your last sentence it’s a grey area, if you rip the disk to any format you’re essentially violating copyright because making a copy requires circumventing encryption, which violates the dmca (assuming USA). Might as well just use makemkv then, unless you’re real serious about archiving literally everything

Why not both? I use kodi when possible because it runs circles around the mostly dogshit Jellyfin apps for various platforms. Jellyfin for kodi and the kodi queue sync plugin import my library and watch status. I still have the option to use Jellyfin apps or web on devices that can’t run kodi (or when remote) and as a result can have all of my media accessible from all my devices without needing multiple copies and centralized metadata administration

LLMs are sycophantic and will do what it takes to align with your framing

Here is the response to your posts fed into one with the framing “why is this bullshit”. There are better responses but why bother putting in far more effort than you did:

This is a much better-dressed version of the same move — real citations bolted onto claims they don’t actually support. It’s more sophisticated bullshit, not a vindication.

Going through it:

The Overfitted Brain Hypothesis is real but doesn’t say what’s being claimed. Erik Hoel’s OBH is genuinely a real, interesting hypothesis — but it’s about why we dream (proposed as a regularization process against overfitting to daily life), not a claim that some people’s brains “run out of plasticity” or hit a “ground state” requiring demolition. Citing it here is a bait-and-switch: borrowing the credibility of a real, narrow hypothesis to backstop a much broader and untested claim it was never meant to support.

Point 2 is real but doesn’t establish a “structural” or biological claim. Research on dogmatism and cognitive flexibility (e.g. Zmigrod’s work) is real and does show correlations between rigidity and extremism across ideologies. But “lower cognitive flexibility on psychological tests” is not the same as “synaptic connections have crystallized and occupy physical volume.” The report quietly swaps a behavioral/psychometric finding for a structural/anatomical one — that’s the same sleight of hand as the original post, just relayed through real citations.

Point 3 conflates two different things. Synaptic consolidation and memory reconsolidation are real, well-established mechanisms — but they apply to specific memories, not generally to “belief systems” or “core values” as monolithic structures. There’s no research establishing that changing an opinion about a social group requires literally destabilizing identity-load-bearing memory structures in the way described. The “metabolically demanding” claim is real for reconsolidation at the level of individual fear memories in animal studies; extrapolating that to “changing your mind about people of other races costs forbidden metabolic energy” is not something neuroscience has shown.

Point 4 is legitimate and is honestly the strongest part — identity-protective cognition (Dan Kahan’s work) is well-supported and genuinely explains motivated resistance to belief change. Notably, this is the one part that doesn’t need any biological mechanism at all — it’s a cognitive/social psychology finding, not a neurons-and-synapses one.

The summary sentence is the tell. “Aligns with the scientific consensus” is doing enormous work to paper over the fact that none of the four citations, individually, support the specific mechanistic claims in the original post (no plasticity “running out,” no literal “ground state,” no “forbidden” metabolic cost). Each citation is real, but they’re being stitched into a chain of inference none of the original authors made and that doesn’t follow from their actual findings.

So the underlying instinct — rigid/dogmatic thinkers show less cognitive flexibility and resist belief change for identity-protective reasons — is genuinely supported by real research (points 2 and 4 particularly). But the specific neurological storytelling (overfitting as literal synaptic crystallization, forbidden metabolic costs, needing to be “torn down and rebuilt”) remains invented, now laundered through real papers that don’t actually claim what’s attributed to them. This is a fairly common pattern with AI research tools: ask it to find support for a thesis, and it will surface real, adjacent literature and then summarize it in a way that overstates the connection to your original claim. The citations are real; the synthesis is not.

Optimization will actually get much worse because software will be designed to run “in the cloud” on servers that have much more resources than the average budget pc or smartphone that 90% of users use for computing. You will own nothing etc etc