Speaking of proving the point lol

If their spam filter is “learning,” and if new signup verification emails are a consistent decades-old practice, how much longer should we wait before it’s okay to question whether Google’s filter could do better at learning?

The person who downvoted you for listening to someone else talk is a hilarious reminder of what kinds of mindsets are out there

Amazon promotes the shittiest, least honest reviews to the top of most products, though I guess if you know how to hunt for the rough 2-4* ratings you can technically find real reviews too.

“Objective worth” is a bit of an oxymoron, because worth is up to your value judgment.

If you’re questioning the “evolutionary imperative” that organisms want to pass on genes - one fairly human trait is that a lot of us can consciously diverge from that instinct, either fulfilling that need by passing on our legacies socially rather than genetically, or just not looking to pass anything on at all.

Something we have in common with other mammals is we prioritize whatever experience is in front of us. Anyone who’s directly affected by catastrophes and strife will have different beliefs than people who aren’t.

So if objective worth has no neat answer, what’s left?

I’d say it’s interesting to have so many different subjective experiences in one world, with a language-based society able to communicate and share many more varied experiences than most animals. Interesting isn’t inherently good or bad, but if nothing was good nor bad then nothing would be interesting.

So yea. Human life is entertaining. We’ve got that going for us!

P.S. If you’ve ever lived in a city whose infrastructure is strained by overpopulation, you don’t necessarily view declining/shifting populations as a bad thing.

who’s “we,” bub

I decided to Google that name to understand. First blog I clicked on has a paragraph that starts:

I think it’s especially absurd to place your trust in Mozilla FurryFox and their team of stereotypical SJWs and soydevs …

In 2020 this person was substituting coherent points with trite schoolyard namecalling from over a decade before. So that dude’s not only an incoherent idiot but also dangerous. Man.

For real, what idea was that actually meant to convey? OP seems confused about having been indoctrinated with cult language

(OP I’ve been there, good on you for reflecting on it, but there’s more unpacking to do)

Sorry to pick on your comment, but I have a question about a statement everyone seems to assert…

Is he charismatic? No.

(As a disclaimer I’m out of touch with people’s impressions on this)

I don’t understand this statement from everyone. Charismatic compared to what? He’s way more charismatic than most humans - he’s a career politician who manages thousands of relationships. He snaps off solid one-liners to shut down trolls. He leaned into the Dark Brandon thing. If he spent effort seeming even more charismatic, I’d be more concerned about his fitness for the job.

Put another way, I see him as having the right balance of charisma for voters aged 35+.

What are people wishing we had instead of that, in a presidential candidate?

You confused me for a sec, I’ve enjoyed Anodyne Coffee Roasting lots and thought their space is plenty comfortable lol

https://anodynecoffee.com/pages/walkers-point-roastery

Facts weren’t the answer for that group to begin with, so not much is changing for them.

I’m sure you haven’t

When your life is that short, you don’t perceive “short” the way humans do anyway

You can’t ask, because the OP is just part 1 of an ad

Nice try Rupert Murdoch

Did you know making fun can be friendly and fun

I’d say to learn to fucking read, but that’s not even the main problem with you. It’s not even the condescending smugness while being clearly wrong, though that does make you insufferable.

The real problem is how the only conversation you want to have is to undermine a valid news article for invalid reasons and to undermine the people responding with relevant lived experience, then intentionally miss the point and double down to attempt to convince yourself you didn’t say something stupid in the first place. Fuck off.

From your linked article that you don’t seem to have read beyond whatever quote you think vindicates the incorrect thing you typed:

However, Brody explains it’s essential to understand that the safety and tolerability of legalized prescription ADHD medications are miles apart compared with illegal meth.

“To emphasize this, I will compare it to the degree to which the distance to the moon dwarfs the distance to the local supermarket,” he states.

“Since Adderall is chemically meth” is not medical information, nor is it accurate, but is what you posted.

Literally the next sentence after your quoted line:

While these small differences are important in how they affect us, without a degree in chemistry, they can be difficult to discern.

Then, digging just ONE CENTIMETER FURTHER into either article, the OP is clearly about illegal meth, and the article you linked describes illegal meth as wildly, exponentially different from Desoxyn or Adderall.

Get your harmful bullshit out of here. “How is this news?” Idk try reading the article man.

Not only is this wrong, the prevalence of this weird comparison fuels more stigma and dismissal of people who already have to struggle to get Adderall without judgment from their own doctors and pharmacists, when it’s literally one of the only high percentage treatments for ADHD.