One time I saw NK Jemisen , author of the broken earth trilogy give a talk. Someone asked about climate change and she said something like “there’s only a small number of people responsible for most of this problem, and we know where they live”
The audience cheered and clapped. The guy moderating the talk got real flustered.
Not the building super, nor my friend when she came by with a drain snake that one time.
Or, to use an example that’s not trying so hard to be a pun: you go down to the local rec center to find a pickup game of basketball or whatever. No one’s paying anyone. You go, find a game, have a good time, and leave. Maybe see each other again. Maybe not. Is that sociopathy?
There’s a wide range of options between utterly repulsive and loved. That’s a huge excluded middle. Do you think people don’t fuck on the first date?
You deleted your other reply I already replied to, so I’m pasting what I wrote here:
You’re shifting the topic. You said,
No, I’m pretty sure that people who use each other for solely selfish purposes is a primary symptom of sociopathy
Note this claim isn’t about sex. It’s a broad claim that any circumstances where one party uses another for selfish purpose is sociopathy.
Since getting someone to fix a clogged toilet is using someone for selfish purposes, your claim would make that sociopathy. I think that’s absurd, and thus your claim is false.
I hate to break it to you but people who like to have sex with each other on a regular basis without exchanging money or other favors, they probably love each other but they’re so scared of the word love because for some reason in recent decades the word love has been become taboo.
Citations needed. You just made this up and I see no reason to take your word for it that people are scared of the word love, nor that love has become taboo. Furthermore, many people have regular sex without feeling love.
You’re taking your world view and beliefs and claiming they’re far more universal than they are.
You’re shifting the topic. You said,
No, I’m pretty sure that people who use each other for solely selfish purposes is a primary symptom of sociopathy
Note this claim isn’t about sex. It’s a broad claim that any circumstances where one party uses another for selfish purpose is sociopathy.
Since getting someone to fix a clogged toilet is using someone for selfish purposes, your claim would make that sociopathy. I think that’s absurd, and thus your claim is false.
Edit: person I replied to deleted their message, so I reposted this where they reposted.
I tell people about lemmy and send them links. Mostly people don’t care about anything. Abstract or remote things like “should a platform be owned by one asshole?” just doesn’t even enter their brain.
I don’t let the problem get that bad in the first place.
On my computer, I close the browser end of day and all the tabs go away. On my phone, it auto archives tabs I haven’t looked at in a week. I close those periodically, but a few I use as off brand bookmarks (eg: a recipe I like)
Thus hiring someone to fix your plumbing or do your yard work is sociopathy?
Also two people can have mutually enjoyable sex without “love”.
You’ve got a weird take.
That’s why I did it too, but let’s be fair, dice are supposed to be random.
Yeah, I realized in my older age that I don’t actually like a lot of random. I liked new Vegas where you either had the skill or you didn’t. In tabletop games I like dice pools to make the results less evenly distributed among all possible outcomes, and then options like fate points and “succeed at a cost” on top of that.
Some people I guess really like the random dice effects, but usually it just makes me grumpy. To each their own.
I’ve thought about switching. I do like the password saving and syncing between Android and desktop that Firefox does, and I’m not sure if the forks do that.
No regrets on switching to Linux here. Almost all of the time I just use the GUI to launch steam or Firefox. No AI nagging me (aside from whatever nonsense Firefox is up to)
Most of my save scumming comes from being annoyed at the random factor. Like I have a +8 on Skill and it rolled me a 3, failing? Nah that’s stupid. Reload.
Less random, less save scumming. You can have good systems with low random factors.
Inspiration helped in bg3, but it’s a pretty limited resource and can still fail.
I did save scum once in a fight where I rolled four natural 1s in a row. The odds of that are too low for me to believe that was legitimately random.
I didn’t get one because it’s too expensive.
Steam deck was a little pricey but it has a backlog of games going back like 50 years, and I already have a large library. Plus the games are cheaper.
I feel like online spaces like lemmy over represent some behaviors.
Uh… What?
Game A has 100 recommends, 300 not-recommend
Game B has 90 recommends, 10 not-recommends.
Is A more highly recommended? In a meaningful way?
I guess I’m lucky almost no one I know is trying to side hustle slop their way into money. I don’t think I would put up with that happily.
Mark is a good, kind person
No he’s not.
He has done tremendous, incalculable, harm to countless people. All of our lives are worse because Zuckerberg is an asshole.
I’m not sure what you’re trying to ask but maybe this comic will be interesting anyway
Microsoft 365 is a worse name than Microsoft Office.
Broadly, where the optimal path is the boring or tedious path.
Imagine an action game where you fight monsters and get coins for defeating them. Coins can be exchanged to buy new moves, advance the plot, and so on. Basic game loop.
Now imagine that you get triple coins if you wear the red shirt when fighting red monsters. Every time you see a red monster, you could go into the menu, into equipment, into body armor, swap on the red shirt, exit all the menus, and kill the monster. Then repeat all that for blue shirt and blue monsters.
This is a made up example but some games do shit like that, where you have to do something tedious for a big payoff.