Tartas1995

joined 1 year ago
[–] Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de 20 points 9 months ago (7 children)

Yes but what about this whataboutism? And honestly I am fairly certain it ain't as much as Bitcoin. People usually focus on 1 thing to get it done because moving to the next. I bet you try to do that at work too.

[–] Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Could you show me that assumption? I don't see that assumption present in my comment. Please help me to understand your perspective. Thanks.

[–] Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

You typed so much and understood so little.

I don't think pascal's wager works. Which is why I said, I said he is right about one thing which is the infinites reward fucking up everything. IF!!! there is a god, and he rewards and punishes you like pascal believed, then everything becomes irrelevant compared to it. Failing to follow god would be an extremist action. Unacceptable due to the unmeasurable damage it would cause. Think about it, in an atheistic world, a Terror Attack is bad, like really bad, but the damage is finite. In pascal's world, disbelief has worse consequences. The harm is bigger, to a literally infinite amount. For pascal, your disbelief should be worse than bombing a Christian church while there is a service.

[–] Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de 8 points 9 months ago

Which misses the point of my argument.

I don't say you are wrong. But my point is strictly about what people believe and how these beliefs should be quite important and turn "moderation" to "extermism" from their pov.

[–] Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de 28 points 9 months ago (9 children)

I think the argument for moderation is the worst in the religious context.

Pascal was right about his Wager in one way. If god exists, it should change everything for you. Especially the christian one. Eternity in pain or pleasure outweighs everything.

If that is your reality, how is failing god moderation?

Seriously if you don't want people to die from cancer at all, how is that not extermist?

Are reference point defines "moderation"? Look at us vs eu politics.

Even if you want to define moderation as the average or median position in a society, then Nazism can be moderation if you get enough Nazi together.

Wake up, my fellow extremist.

[–] Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de 17 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I think there is a difference between being exposed to evidence of the contrary and sitting on it for a while. I don't think you can change someone's mind in a conversation. Rarely so. But if the person is "forced" to think about the topic and the evidence, eventually they will change their mind.

[–] Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 10 months ago

I am not an anarchist and I won't make their case, but there is a difference between what is and what ought to be. What people have done is a statement about what is. Anarchy, like any other idealogy like it, is about what ought to be.

[–] Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de 133 points 10 months ago (1 children)

He thinks saying, I am cisgendered, is hate speech.

He literally wrote other- isms ... Criticism, I guess. He is an idiot.

[–] Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 10 months ago

Honestly humans are stupid and it is so interesting what we learned to do for sometimes awful reasons that turned out to be pretty good for us. I mean a lot of medicine was "getting the devil out of you" for a long time and it sometimes happened to work because people would just do random shit.

[–] Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 10 months ago

To be fair, if you would own it, they would have a very different legal framework to be working in. Would they be legally allowed to shut down their servers? Or would they have to run the company until bankruptcy, so maybe decades after steam stopped being profitable? Their product is a service based on. They want the service to be able to be ended. If you buy the games like you do on steam and you own them, can they end it?

[–] Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 10 months ago

What is your point?

Like why I care about whether or not it is the one in the bible?

What are you trying to get at?

It seems a bit "fun fact that is kinda related to the post but not really at the same time". I mean obviously Israel is a Zionist state. It is literally the movement that made the state. How does it relate to apartheid? Now colonistic idealogy has a link to apartheid. But then again, Jews didn't had the best experience with colonism within Europe which is what Hilter did. So you could easily argue against the sentiment, while I personally won't argue either way as I don't believe that I know or understand enough.

In short, I might agree with you if I would understand what you want to tell us. But I don't, care to help me?

[–] Tartas1995@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 10 months ago

I think people in this section of the comments are a bit unreasonable. Jobst made 2 videos about Open Hands Foundation and the reason to publish the first one doesn't have to be "drama". The second... Maybe... But then again, people like "updates" which is also the reason by billy Mitchell videos are coming and they are updates. In both cases, there is a strong relationship between the core theme video games and the "drama". Open Hands Foundation's event was about showcasing games and Billy is the best video gamer of all time. God bless billy.

So I don't think Jobst videos are so... Offtopic. Especially as he talked about Speedrun drama before.

view more: ‹ prev next ›