My cousin was fired from his job at Home Depot and the General Manager told him that it was beyond his control, that the company had implemented an AI to make those decisions.

It seems like they took the wrong message from this meme. “We can’t be held accountable? Yay!”

deleted by creator

You would think the fact that these policies led to 1% of the population controlling 99% of the wealth would prove its all bullshit, but people just can’t seem to get enough boot polish in their diets

And the other half is the literal slave labor they force prisoners to do

People should not have lawns of grass in areas where they have to water them to keep them green. Especially if there is a water shortage. Use Rocks, Use native plants, Get creative.

Grass is the most basic ass way to keep your lawn. If you are playing a sport on it, fine- but if not it’s boring af anyway.

“If you’re thirsty, they’re thirsty.”

Doesn’t this mean that if I’m not thirsty, they’re not thirsty? So I should drink enough water to make sure I’m not thirsty.

Sounds like a worse version of both Android and ChromeOS.

I wasn’t saying we are conditioned to find women sexy. I’m saying we have been conditioned to treat women as sex objects and not sexy people. There is a big difference.

The clue is in the name. Objectification is when you treat someone like a thing to be desired, and not like a whole human being with thoughts and desires of their own. When you act like getting you aroused is their sole purpose and/or the only value they possess.

It’s a learned behavior like racism or misogyny. And no, It won’t always happen, not once we evolve enough emotionally as a species to treat all human beings with love and respect.

I think people should be able to feel attractive if they want and not be objectified. I don’t think men objectify women because they look pretty, I think we do it because we have been conditioned to think of women that way.

I actually prefer when women don’t wear tons of makeup, most of the women I date wear very little or none at all. That being said if they ever decide to wear makeup I think it’s great because they are expressing themselves. Either way I look at them as people first, even if I think they are beautiful.

I also wear earrings and occasionally a simple necklace. I don’t think I’m objectifing myself, just that is how I like to look like. I think the same is true for a lot of women.

I know you don’t mean it this way, but it almost sounds like you a validating the viewpoint of certain gross people who ask SA victims what they were wearing.

I think even the most knockout drop dead gorgeous people deserve to not be objectified. And whether I find them to be typically has nothing to do with how much makeup they are wearing or how much jewelry they have on.

If the only reason someone isn’t objectifing you is because you dress plainly, that seems like they still aren’t good people. I know it is a super prevalent though.

To each their own though. I’m also the guy who thinks people should be able to walk around completely naked and not be harassed or objectified, so my viewpoint isn’t typical at all.

I’m not the one who down voted you by the way. I think it’s weird to do that to people just because you don’t agree with them.

Opinionated older white man here, I think people should do whatever they want.

Well, “Liberalism” is further left than say Monarchism or Feudalism, but it believes in “private property” (as opposed to Personal Property) as one of it’s core values- and as such is compatible with Capitalism, especially “Economic Liberalism” and Neoliberalism, which are right wing ideologies. It replaces ‘monarchs’ with ‘wealthy people’ as the ruling class. Anarchists such as myself tend to use “Private Property” as equivalent to the “Means of production”. In my view ‘Personal Property’ need not necessarily be ‘movable’ to count. For example your private domicile could be a permanent structure, but if it’s used to live in and not make things in- it’s Personal Property.

When Right wingers talk about being ‘anti-government’, they don’t mean it in the literal sense. They mean they don’t want the government telling THEM what to do, but are fine with the government telling everyone else what to do. They want unrestricted capitalism, and the ‘freedom’ to be hateful white supremacist and misogynistic bigots. But they also use the power of ‘The State’ to defend their “private property rights”. If there were no state- they wouldn’t be free to exploit people. Capitalism requires a state.

When it comes to small/“anti” government Republican politicians, it’s typically a misnomer and used to exploit the ‘anti-government’ sentiment in their base. For example George W. Bush ran as a “Small Government Republican” and then proceeded to grow the government bigger than any president in U.S. History.

I would put Liberalism and “Small Government” republicans further left than authoritarian “Socialist” regimes.

I think a rational “Left-Right Spectrum” would look something like (from left to right)

Anarchism, Communism, Socialism, Social Democracy, “Centrists”, Liberal Democracy, Neo-conservatism, Authoritarian “Socialism”, Monarchism/Feudalism/Imperialism, Fascism.

Gracias

I wish people would stop referring to Tankies and authoritarian regimes as leftists. If we stop entertaining the hallucination that they are- then maybe places like Wikipedia will start labeling them correctly as right wing.

From the very beginning of the terms “Left” and “Right” to describe the political spectrum, which originated in pre-revolutionary war France, the Left has always been about freedom from Tyranny and the Right has been pro-government (ruling class) control.

Maybe the USSR did start out as revolutions of the proletariat, but once they were controlled by increasingly authoritarian leadership, that should have flipped them from left to right on the political spectrum. In a sane world that’s exactly what would have happened. Guess who’s best interests it was to mislabel the USSR, the PRC and the DPRK as ‘Leftists’? Ill give you one guess. If you said capitalists and the right wing in Western democracies- That’s a bingo! And of course they are going to label themselves as ‘left wing’. To admit otherwise would be to expose the whole lie. So in a weird example of cold war cooperation between the East and West, that fiction has continued.

The only reason that Communism and Socialism were correctly labeled as ‘Left’ ideologies in the first place is because, implemented correctly, they both offer less control by the ‘ruling class’. Socialism was meant to return the power to the people, and communism was meant to abolish the state completely. Authoritarian regimes run counter to both those goals. You will NEVER abolish the state by strengthening the state. That makes about as much sense as ‘trickle down economics’. Hey maybe if we give the billionaires all the money, they’ll give us a little back in return. Spoiler alert, no they wont.

/rant

I’m seeing like 13 different .ml instances. Did you block them all or is there a specific one we are talking bout here? Sorry, I’m pretty new to Lemmy

Lol, that’s really cool. As a Fallout fan I couldn’t help making the connection.

Good luck in getting the timing right!

For sure. I just looked it up out of curiosity to see if the source it gave was real or not. As someone living in my own metaphorical root cellar, it was actually enlightening and something I really needed to hear right now.

The Potato Parable

It has nothing to do what the AI said ofc, nor was it written by Caitlin D’Arcy, who is a character on a TV show. lol

You trying to create ‘Tatos’? Lol

I don’t know but I love the fact that even AI is calling EA out on it’s bullshit!

I can confirm it works for DuckDuckGo as well.

I love how it even lists ‘sources’ (I checked, that phrase does not appear in either “source”)

Edit: To make this phenomenon even funnier, I just asked it the exact same question and it gave me a different answer this time. Still “playful” though :)