• 1 Post
  • 165 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 11th, 2023

help-circle

  • But it may be something to work towards to, isn’t it? Or at least get rid of these societal taboos?

    Where I live and grew up (Germany), there isn’t that much of a taboo on nudity. I liked showering in my gym for example where there is only a shared (gendered) shower. Since starting my transition I wouldn’t feel welcome in any gendered shared public shower however. I would really like to stop hiding my body but instead feel more included among cis people. One day I hope…

    I still prefer going swimming naked (if there are not too many people around) because it avoids gendered swim wear. At most lakes in Germany you can find people going swimming naked or with swim wear. Just coexisting :)









  • Thanks for all the informative sources. First of all, I think you are probably right that it is a political or rather economic problem, not necessarily a scientific one. Capitalism doesn’t give any incentive to care for the environment or to recycle anything if it isn’t profitable. And politics are heavily influenced if not driven by capitalism.

    But then, seeing the various articles you provided about nuclear waste storage, I didn’t really get the impression that it is a solved problem. Sabine Hossenfelder spends a very long time talking about what nuclear waste is but only mentions problems with storage for hundreds of thousands of years for a very short time. And also Elina Charatidsou doesn’t even mention potential problems of geological changes etc. And the facility she is presenting is still in the research stage. So where are the solutions for a long-term storage that guarantees safety? Nuclear waste may not be as problematic as it is made out, but real solutions look different to me.

    Very interesting also the point about recycling nuclear waste. I haven’t even heard of it and it sounds like a really good thing to do. We’d still have very high costs handling and storing it, but only for a few hundreds of years at least. Although it seems like actually applying this is still not really planned by most countries and even then the problem of nuclear waste doesn’t go away fully.





  • Hm, on the one hand this could be survivorship bias, i.e. only a lucky few scripts in stone have made it through. If you left enough of these glass discs or other modern media in very specific conditions they might also withstand thousands/millions of years maybe?

    On the other hand, I think the amount of data and the corresponding resolution is important, too. If you’d try to store petabytes (or more) worth of data you’d have to carve really really tiny scriptures into stone unless you want mountains of stones just to save some bits of data. But the moment you scale your resolution up and your data engraving gets much smaller, you’ll also get a much more error prone, susceptible system. So even stones with tiny scriptures would certainly not be able to survive millions of years (at least the vast majority of them).




  • Fair points, you’re certainly right about the lack in quality of the article. And I totally get why you feel offended by something with a sexual or even bdsm connotation immediately being considered derogatory or scary. I think this is really a counterproductive statement for someone to make if they wanted to talk about offensive language. Shaming sexual deviancies is offensive in of itself.


  • As far as the article goes, the word gimp isn’t necessarily seen as problematic because of its sexual reference but rather as a derogatory term for disabled people. And just because many people agree that they don’t care, doesn’t mean we shouldn’t care. Democratic decisions fall flat when they deal with issues of minorities. The large majority of people doesn’t care about disabled people. So basing ethical considerations on the majority’s opinion is really no good idea. Same goes for other discriminatory language and slurs where always the same arguments are presented. I think the article does a great job of portraying the gatekeeping biases of such discussions.



  • I get your point. But isn’t it in the interest of large tech companies that their users stay as unknowing and uninformed as possible? They don’t want you to know how to actually tinker with their systems, how to change stuff yourself or have any control over technology at all. The more docile people are, the better they can sell their products (both the actual product to the people and the people’s data to their consumers). And so there are those people who are not OK with being on a dumbed-down system because they want to know how it works and have control over it, so they go over to Linux.

    This is not too different from modern cars that no one can really repair on their own. Consumers are totally dependent on the company producing the car. And planned obsolescence can be implemented even better in a system that is out of the control of the user.

    Another point is that huge tech companies often have the most comfort and ease in their products. Yeah sure, they have the means to make it so. But this automatically makes leaving these platforms/products so much more uncomfortable. Consumers are already so uninformed but dependent on tech that they would obviously stir towards the more comfortable situation.

    Using tools (be it digital or manual) you can actually control sure is more work and has a certain learning curve. No one denies this. But from a political standpoint I think it is important for people to have control over the tools they use, over their own life. Let’s not allow capitalism to take away even more freedom and control from us as it already took.