I think this is from a survey, so keep in mind that its people reading and answering questions. Some number of people always interpret it a different way or misread.
This is an interesting look into your mind. Do you really think they'll be the same? Trump will accelerate hit since he doesn't even pretend to care, is that the same? He'll also attack more minorities domestically, killing many more people, is that the same?
I guess in a black and white worldview those are basically the same, but 'cmon, we can have some nuance here.
"This follows the French gambit archetype, a story that's been in our culture for hundreds of generations, where women are depicted as subjects who assert their need for fortification from external threats... and that's why women should be subservient to men."
Fake quote, but it does sound like the kind of thing he'd say. Unfortunately, he's pretty bad at making his reasoning sound, and he likes to cite stories as if they imply anything about what anyone should do.
Don't worry, they're also hostile to humans under the age of 70
Tropical climate:
That's what I get for guessing what 😔
"Incorrect! You have 2 more guesses for which search engine I used."
If we were living in the 1930s they'd be the same people complaining we're being unfair to Hitler and we need to hear his perspective too.
Hell, he used the same political strategy as modern day fascist politicians: simply lying. "I'm gonna make everything better! How? Don't worry about that, just trust me and also let me reassert Germany's national pride!" I'm reminded of Trump's ACA "plan" (that he doesn't have one).
And we just let them say that, unchallenged! Maybe someone asks how they'll do it, but viewers just hear a strong man telling a story of future prosperity and ignore any small details a journalist might counter with. In the name of "balance", we let them spread their info hazards and pretend silly things like facts will let people come to the right conclusion.
I believe the old technique was gradient ascent starting with a random image and optimizing for the classifier's dogginess score, but now we train image denoisers then give them pure noise and tell them it's a noisy image of a dog. Basically, we lie to models to make them make stuff for us, and we've gotten better at what lying scheme we use.
How is that delusional? Blocking out stressors is perfectly reasonable. Yeah you miss out on some relevant news, but lower stress might be worth it.
A logo's very different from what I would consider an "ad". I don't mind logos existing, but anything pushed in my face is horrible and I hate it.
I've seen many people take absolutists stances and throw accusations or insults at others who don't. While I applaud that they recognized serious problems, I want everyone to understand why I might take actions that seem to ignore or even worsen those problems: I only have so much power and so many options, none of which are ideal, so I do the best I can with what I have. I might prioritize stopping one bad thing over stopping another; that's not me excusing the other bad thing, that's me playing the cards I have to get the least bad outcome.
Personally, I base my moral decisions on expected outcomes. I would pull the lever in the trolley problem. I understand some people think me a monster for that, and I certainly wouldn't feel good pulling it, but I see it as me net saving people. I disagree with people that wouldn't pull it, but I see where they're coming from and I'm not mad at them (disappointed, maybe). Of course, as well as pulling the lever, there may be options to try helping the one person on the tracks, and we should definitely attempt such a rescue.
This whole topic can be applied to the do-i-vote-for-biden thing that this community seems divided over, but it's much more broadly applicable too.
Anyway, this is just me saying that I don't think the absolutist all-or-nothing approach some people take is a good idea, and I also don't like when some of them call me a bad person for not doing the same.
A diagram of a "bottom meson" (composed of an unknown quark "q" and an antibottom quark) with an arrow labeled ":3" pointing to a "double bottom Baryon" (composed of an unknown quark "q" and 2 bottom quarks).
Image taken from figure 1 of this article
Two (presumably) girls lying in bed holding hands and looking at each other. The one on the left, labeled "Me" has shoulder-length hair, an uncomfortable :| expression, and is wearing a black hoodie, grey jeans, and sneakers. The one on the right, labeled "Also me" has longer hair, a subtle smile, a blush, and is wearing a dress and high heels.
Edited from this post, on which I commented "I wanna be both".
Hope is what kept me alive long enough to finally fix my life.