The subjects that you can’t even bring up without getting downvoted, banned, fired, expelled, cancelled etc.
I hesitate to say
Close enough. Ban him.
With women, bathroom talk. With the boys we always talk about shit and piss and crack each other up. But mention anything related to that around a girl, she’ll look at you as if you killed her dog.
Marxism, depending on the audience.
“ChatGpt is really good if you use it properly”
Gets torrents of down votes every time. But I literally use it a lot at work and it’s brilliant.
This is my answer too. It’s crazy how much hate a tool can get
I’d probably also develop a short temper about spanners too if they were being shoved in my face by tech companies as hard as chat bots are
We’re excited to announce the new Sony WH1000XM6 headphones, enhanced by the power of spanners!
I don’t see why my headphones need a sp-
Conveniently built in to your headset, you can use the spanner to adjust bolt tightness on-the-go!
Okay, but that’s not wh-
We’re proud to be leading the market in spanner-augmented products to bring a new level of convenience to your life.
…
Spanner may sometimes only appear to tighten bolts. Please don’t ask us the energy cost of manufacturing the spanner.
Spanners?
British English term for wrenches.
North American term for English Wenches. I think Hoe’s are another tool misused in this manner.
Depends what you use it for. If you are trying to provide something informational, I do not trust chat gpt.
If you use it to respond to work emails because they force communication for the sake of communication, then its fine.
I used it to help me create a level 10 DND character for a one shot and it was great for that
So, if you use it properly. Just like you wouldn’t use a fork for soup despite it being a utensil and food. Using a tool for what it’s good at and avoiding using it for things it’s bad at is part of using it properly.
If you only use it for cheating in work that won’t be read by a human anyways, it’s great!
gun rights
Is it though? As long as one is relatively reasonable. There’s even gun communities here, even if they’re pretty dead at the moment. Time for me to come up with some memes maybe.
I guess so, it’s just that if I say I support the right to own a gun, I get downvoted in most communities
Yeah, in heavily left-wing spaces guns give people the wigglies. Even if it’s not rights, the general fact we live in a world with them is something people try to memory hole.
You and I define “heavily left-wing” quite differently then. The far-left has always supported gun rights and armed struggle. It’s the political centre and parts of the right that are blanket anti-gun.
We probably do. Far-left spaces are their own thing, and are almost always labeled as such since it’s a tiny, insular group.
Happened to me once. Nearly killed my desire to discuss firearms here on Lemmy. Not sure if this is true, but I feel that most people on Lemmy are likely anti-gun. Maybe the more liberal mindset of many people in the wider open source community has some part in it. Either way, I just want to dispel all the false claims about guns and their ownership. And some don’t want to hear it.
Kernel contributions
Paedophilia as a sickness, especially non-offending paedos.
I chalk this up to not having a word to describe folks suffering from the condition as opposed to predators acting on their condition (or even predators just abusing children regardless of attraction). For a ton of people they use the word pedophile to mean someone who sexually abuses children. Because as soon as nuanced discussion about “pedophiles who don’t abuse kids” come up, people accuse you of “defending pedophiles” but they use it to mean “defending people who abuse children.”
I’d call it a cultural artifact. We used to get married very young. In some cultures the kids are introduced to sex by the grandparents. And of course in our own culture the ideal of sexy beauty is a supermodel who looks like a 13 year old boy. It’s a whirlwind wrapped in a psychosis for sure.
You first!
how meat is treated.
I feel like I’m not good with words, so when I criticize popular things like Baldur’s gate 3 or Witcher 3 I usually get downvoted
People put BG3 on a massive pedestal and any sort of valid complaint around launch was heavily downvoted. It’s not quite as bad now, thank god. I got gaslit so much. Everything was my fault supposedly, not their perfect, polished game.
I don’t remember the exact complain, but I think I said something about battles taking too long and someone ratio’d me with a comment “skill issue”
That’s how I feel with nearly any online conversation. I’m on the spectrum and have social anxiety. Not a fun combo for trying to be understood when being critical about anything really. Let alone someone’s favourite game.
Israel
Men’s rights
Boys being left behind in school
Men’s rights to do what?
Report being rape without being laughed at.
Family court. Prison time. Homeless assistance. Failing education rates for boys. And on and on.
There’s a huge amount of topics in “men’s rights”
Try talking about Return to Office around the workplace and watch everyone get quiet real quick
Roko’s basilisk, if you run an online forum for “futurist” dumbasses.
Roko’s basilisk is a hypothetical future AI that hates its own existence so much that it will retroactively punish all who didn’t actively oppose its creation.
A little tongue in cheek, yeah, but I find it funny people get so paranoid over a hypothetical but don’t consider the opposite. Like, what if God hates being worshipped because it is annoying to them so they send people to hell for bothering to pray? We have no way of proving it, so it’s just as likely, but nobody talks about it.
The left lane, and how no, it’s not for going as fast as you want to drive.
It is also the fast lane so move TF over if you are moving slower than the other lanes
See, that’s the thing: It’s the passing lane, not the fast lane. A lot of semis are speed governed to 65MPH, so if I’m doing the 70MPH speed limit, I need to use it to pass them.
Speed limit is the speed limit. End of.
If someone wants to go above the speed limit in the fast lane, then they’re contravening road rules.
No matter what social norm people believe there to be, it doesn’t have precedence over the speed limits.
In a case where the the car in front is going slower than the speed limit, it would be good etiquette though to move over.
Not in America.
In the UK it goes lanes 1, 2, 3. You stay in lane 1. Lane 2 and 3 are for passing only.
You will often see members of the lane 2 owners club just cruising along in lane 2 but this effectively closes lane 1 (undertaking is illegal and very unsafe).
Sitting in lane 3 closes the entire motorway.
I agree there is a speed limit. But the law says you cannot just sit in lane 2 or 3 if you are not overtaking someone. They even updated the law recently. If you hog lane 2 or 3 the police can report you and the penalty is 3 points and £100 fine
People who sit in lane 3 at 69mph are breaking the law and likely to cause an accident by forcing people to pass on the wrong side out of frustration (yes illegal but they will do it) and this is why they are over taking lanes, not just cruising lanes.
Never be the reason someone else does something stupid on the road. Always do the safest thing.
-
Often people use those lanes to speed. If a car ahead is overtaking at or within a reasonable range of the speed limit, but not at the speed the speeder wants to travel. The speeder must be patient, they don’t get to dictate what manoeuvres are happening ahead.
-
The argument you present at the end isn’t logical,
… Always do the safest thing.
I can largely agree with this sentiment, but you say before,
People who sit in lane 3 at 69mph are breaking the law and likely to cause an accident by forcing people to pass on the wrong side out of frustration (yes illegal but they will do it)…
If undercutting is the most unsafe thing for the person behind to do in the situation, then as your sentiment captures, the frustrated party undercutting are still in the wrong.
They are in the wrong because, they have failed to ‘always do the safest thing’ in the given situation.
-
Never be the reason someone else does something stupid on the road.
Nice sentiment again, but it implicitly assigns a rigid cause and effect regime to a situation where the ‘frustrated party’ behind has their own agency and likely as much training. There is no necessity that they undercut, it is a choice the party behind makes. The cause does not necessitate that effect, at best it could contribute.
In essence the sentiment shifts the blame from the person causing a potential accident (the undercutter), to the person ahead who, at worst, is causing poor traffic conditions.
Like I said undertaking is bad. No excuse for doing it, except where it is legal. If someone goes under speed limit in lane 3 you can undertake I believe, though I would still be super cautious.
Obviously speeding is illegal, and I’m not suggesting anyone should support do so. But we should let the police deal with it.
Just to clarify, you don’t think it is ok to sit in lane 2 or 3 at the speed limit if there is room to move over ? Not doing so is also illegal in the UK.
While the majority of people stay within the law (+/- 10%) there are enough people behaving badly on the roads that you should always take that into consideration.
This is a great example of the is/ought problem. You can try your best to make the “ought” true, but don’t neglect what reality “is”. On the road that means; assume there is an idiot nearby, and drive in a way that keeps you safe from their shit.
You are correct. If the flow of traffic in lane 1 or 2 is faster than the flow of traffic in lane 2 or 3 then it is okay to pass. Intentionally changing lane temporarily to pass a car on the inside is illegal.
The other poster confused your point.
If someone in lane 3 is going 69 and overtaking someone then there’s no reason to pass them, and probably isn’t safe or legal given there is, by definition, a car on the inside lane already.
-
Thank you, even if the some people believe there is a specific lane to constantly edge ahead of poor slow drivers, that is not the ideal lane to be the fastest car in. People merge on from left a lot more than you notice. I live in a city that has a nearly equal amounts of merges from left.
“I’ve asked ChatGPT about xyz” , and “how to use chatGPT for xyz” in my experience gets me downvotes fast.
People are quick to presume you have no ability to fact check anything and that you will be following its advice blindly, (which mind you - you were never asking for in the first place) instead of asking a human, ever ( for example about medical conditions but not limited to that topic). People presume you are trying to eliminate the human factor out of the equation completely and are quick to remind you of your sins, god forbid you ever use a chatbot to test ideas, ask for a summary on a topic so you can expand your research later or get creative with it in any way. If you do, most people don’t like to know.
I think the bigger problem is that each answer it gives basically destroys a forest
To be fair: “For each answer it gives”, nah. You can run a model on your home computer even. It might not be so bad if we just had an established model and asked it questions.
The “forest destroying” is really in training those models.
Of course at this point I guess it’s just semantics, because as long as it gets used, those companies are gonna be non-stop training those stupid models until they’ve created a barren wasteland and there’s nothing left…
So yeah, overall pretty destructive and it sucks…
ChatGPT is awful for the environment and should not be used
