🎓 Dr. Freemo 🇳🇱 @freemo@social.cleverlibre.org

@dichotomiker

I havent played enough with lemmy to have an opinion. Very disapointed in their leadership though for reasons related to peripheral projects I wont get into.

@til

@dichotomiker

Correct me if im wrong but this isnt a top level post but rather a comment on an existing post?

@til

Does anyone know where I can find the **full** "Trump made god" video? It looks like gold to mock Trump and im entirely on board for the entertainment.

I do find it odd though its so hard to find the full video, especially considering how much attention it is getting. Usually this would make me suspect it is taken out of context to make it seem more absurd, but frankly, based on what I already saw I am not sure how that is possible. Still, would really like to see the original so I can judge it properly.

@admitsWrongIfProven

> I see no proof of that, not even a hint.

This is a discussion of opinions, and our reasoning. This is not a formal scientific publication. I explained my opinions and reasoning.

As for the hint, yes that you got. Specifically I gave an example, that would qualify as "more than a hint". I could provide more examples to backup what i said as needed.

> So some, but not all? I wonder if you want all humans to live well or just some.

Yes only some rich people who inhereit, the ones who have the same mentality as your average poor person, will loose all their money. On the flip side only some of poor people will also be able to become rich on their own, and those are the people who have the same sort of mentality as the people in inherit their money and manage to keep it or grow it.

> Sleepytime now. Confused on how you mean to argue inheritance, i have not seen one reason why people that get one should, but others not. Sleep well.

Thats easy... they should get it because someone wanted to give something to them, and it was their propery.

@admitsWrongIfProven

> So what are you trying to say here? Because you made it despite the odds, others have to make it, too?

There you go making things random that arent random... What random generator are you talking about and when is the randomness injected into the system? It sounds like you are using "random" as an incorrect fillin for "complex". This are complex, but far from random.

What i am trying to say is that an individual success is largely determined by them and their actions. I am saying the reason it was so easy to me had no elements of randomness to it, it was the result of my choices. Other people should make the right choices, and we should help them do it. Telling them their spot in life is due to random choices and rhetoric about "why should they even try" is not helping them, it is why they are in the situation they are in in many cases.

> Aside those that inherit, it seems.

Nah people who inheret arent the exception. If they have the same mentality as the people who stay in poverty they will loose their inheritance in no time and be in poverty.

> You tout that inheritance was ok, but you give absolutely no explanation on why.

Something being OK is the default. I dont need to prove why its ok that the sun rises at a certain time or why a leaf happaned to be in the middle of the rode... I have no need to explain why its ok because its ok simply because you have put forward no argument as to why it shouldnt be ok

> Born to that mother, nothing to do. Oh, the random mother was a rich one, good. that is great. But if people born to poor mothers are salty, they have no right.

Why do you keep saying words like "random" even after that has been debunked. You know saying the same thing that is shown to be false over and over wont make it true. Ir will weaken your argument though.

> Why?

Your statement used previously debunked falsehoods like "random". I cant answer a question about a statement if the statement uses nonsensical words in the context.

@admitsWrongIfProven

> So you are saying what happens happens. No benefit in thinking about it. I am born to this mother, and father, and that is it.

Not saying that at all. By all means thing about what happens. Obviously you cant change (nor was there any random element of chance) determining who you were born to. But you can certainly think and talk about it and what that means.

> If i am born to little chances at success,

You mean like me? I was born to abject poverty and grew up in it my whole life on welfare.

> why do anything. Why struggle, when life is like it is?

Born to little chances.. have to understnad what that means.. it means the average person will have little chance. It does not mean you have little chance. The chance you have to survive will be determined far more by the choices you make, than the choices thrust on you.

Despite growing up with "little chances" it was quite trivial for me to become successful as early as the age of 15.

I've lived this and already proven its not just possible, its easy.

@admitsWrongIfProven Luck implies there is some element of chance,there isnt. You can only be born to one specific mother, you can never be born to any other mother through an act of chance (short of a few really weird obscure edge cases).

How can something that has no random element to it be luck?

> How would you determine who worked hard? Hard work is no realistic indicator for success. Randomness is involved.

It is of course possible they themselves didnt work hard for it, it very well may be someone else who worked hard who gave it to them somehow... who knows. Point is it wasnt random.

@admitsWrongIfProven Why shouldnt they? They werent lucky, their parents worked hard. They also couldnt have been born to any other person, if they were they wouldnt have been them. So its not lucky since you can only be born to exactly who you are born to.

@admitsWrongIfProven thats seem in-congruent. thats like saying "you know you favor this current color of carpet over women's rights".

You may be better served making your point with an example

@admitsWrongIfProven Inheretance isnt stealing, the person wanted you to have it. Taxes are stealing in the sense that you are taking money against someones will to get it to someoneone else.

That said I''m actually not against taxes, but only when it benefits the greater good (and base line welfare that keeps people froms starving does that)

@admitsWrongIfProven No I dont think people should work for their keep. I can think of plenty of examples (like inheretance) where they don't and I'm ok with it.

What I think is that people shouldnt be forced to let you steal from them so they dont have to work for their keep (communism for exmaple)

@admitsWrongIfProven you are probably just noticing i am more direct about things i disagree. It isnt that i find you more wrong than anyone else might. Im just more likely to tell you.

@olives any law that addresses deep fakes should not really in any way be related to AI... Either i have a right to use your likeness or I dont. Whether I use an AI to do it or not shouldnt be relevant.

What is a transplant?

@LLS

Most importantly if the three people who didnt like either option had voted third party instead of not voting then there would have been a tie and they wouldnt have drove off the cliff or had to deal with a unwanted choice.

@mastodonmigration @msbellows @TonyStark

@QasimRashid Jesus christ even when your right (that black people dont have the same oppertunity as white) your still wrong. Its not because of a single decision by the FHA 70 years ago. Hell that isnt even close to the most important reason for the disparity.