rah @ rah @feddit.uk

Posts

56

Comments

1,585

Joined

2 yr. ago

Moderating

---

Are detrans discussions prohibited?

If you want to have these discussions, then you need to do it in an appropriate context. The comment section under a trans article isn’t really the best place as this comes across as trollish and like you’re trying to sneak in transphobia under the guise of philosophy.

And so following from your other comments, the appropriate contexts you're referring to are outside of the feddit.uk instance entirely? The instance is never an appropriate context and any such discussion whatsoever is prohibited?

Instance-level rules and guidelines are going to be general purpose.

So if someone created a linguistic philosophy community on feddit.uk and in that community members held a discussion on 'a trans person’s “I’m a man” as less than a cis person’s “I’m a man”', is that prohibited or not?

That seems a bit presumptuous? What if someone creates some !linguistic_philosophy@feddit.uk community?

Why dictate the purposes to which feddit.uk can be put? Why declare any purpose, "social discussion" or otherwise?

This is pretty categorically not a conservative forum

What is not?

This is a social discussion forum not a linguist philosophy one

What is? Feddit.uk?

As if defederation were ever a suggestion? As if it were even possibility?

I believe one instance already has defederated from feddit.uk because of a perceived tolerance of transphobia.

4K/UHD discs need to phone home in order to get decryption keys on a per disc basis

Is that true for hardware players? I've only seen people talking about software players like Power DVD having to get keys from the Internet.

4k players

Are you talking about software players or 4k decks?

there is simply too much at stake

OUR MONAYS!1!!!!

They are both perfectly fine editors but they don't hold a candle to a proper IDE

I'm not sure what you mean by "proper" in this context. Every IDE I've ever used has seemed like a child's toy compared to Emacs. An annoying child's toy with cracks and sharp edges.

I also want to play some games that go beyond the production values of SuperTuxKart and Battle for Wesnoth.

Try 0 A.D. or FreeOrion.

Have you considered using GNU Emacs? Or even shudder vim?

There are plenty of free software games available: https://libregamewiki.org/

Why would JP Morgan Chase -- or any bank -- leaving the UK, be bad?

I want closed source apps

Ewww

ego death

I think perhaps ego death isn't what you think it might be. It isn't relevant to living with others, it's an experience where there are no others and no self which could relate to each other:

'Leary et al.: "The first period (Chikhai Bardo) is that of complete transcendence − beyond words, beyond spacetime, beyond self. There are no visions, no sense of self, no thoughts. There are only pure awareness and ecstatic freedom from all game (and biological) involvements."' -- quoted in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ego_death

Buddha ... taught unity, with ... others

Umm.. I don't think the Buddha taught that?

Asking to reference a lack of ambiguity

I haven't asked to reference a lack of ambiguity, I've asked for a reference to some source showing "the rest of the media and even fararge" see things the way you do, as you claim.

You haven't provided any reference to back up anything whatsoever you've said in this thread.

After I have posted multiple explanations

As I said, your explanations are irrelevant to me. They're full of holes. From my perspective, you're not a rigorous thinker. The only thing that will convince me is some other source which clearly shows that the agreement is referring to domestic sales. Without that, all I see is noise.

I ment you are seeing ambiguity that is not there.

I disagree.

The rest of the media and even fararge in another news article last night.

I haven't seen any of that. Other people haven't experienced the same things you have. Other people don't have the same knowledge you do. That's why it's on you to back up what you're saying by showing others what you experienced (read, watched, whatever) so that they can verify that what you're saying is true. It isn't on other people to experience their life the way you experience yours and you can't assume that they do.

They see no abniguity in this meaning

Reference?

And you you did suggest a meaning, when you openly interpreted the article as a good benefit of Brexit.

I initially interpreted the article differently to you but I didn't make any explicit suggestion of what "dynamic alignment on EU food standards" means. You did and continue to.

So you invested that meaning to make your rather pathetic point about the deal matching some Brexit benefit.

I don't even understand what you're claiming here. I haven't made any point about the deal "matching" some brexit benefit, whatever that means.

I made a very clear pretty close to ELI5 maybe 10.

I'm not asking for you to explain anything. I'm expecting you to back up what you're saying with references to information elsewhere. This is how rigorous debate and communication works. This is basic stuff. If you can't back up what you're saying then don't bother saying anything, you're just making noise.

Unless you have some source which clearly states that "dynamic alignment on EU food standards" relates to domestic sales then to me, what you're saying is just an unverified guess. An opinion. Of no value. Noise.