I don’t think auto pilot works how you seem to think it does…

Sounds like more should have been done to prevent trump even getting on the ballot while his opposition was still in power. Oh wait, but then they couldn’t run on “trump bad” and would actually have to champion something for the people to get their votes. Oh well!

I’m sorry, do you have a magical alternate reality viewer that shows Kamala not doing the same exact thing except whinging along the way about “working tirelessly” to avoid the thing that is currently happening with zero repercussions for the aggressor state… ? Come on, don’t forget the president that kept warning about non-existent red lines as Palestinians were being (and still are!) slaughtered by the thousands, and literally bypassed congress to send munitions to Israel despite this. Y’know, the thing that will now be super bad when Trump does it?

At least we & our government officials don’t have to pretend this is fucking normal just because the president is super duper apologetic about it and pinky promises that they care about all the lives involved but conspicuously only mentioning the ones belonging to the aggressor nation!!!1!

The rearview mirror (the one that hangs off the windshield) is for seeing directly behind you. Your side mirrors are for seeing things to the right and left of you. If the driver directly behind you can see your face in your side mirrors, or you can see their front windshield, and your rearview mirror both exists and is unobstructed, then you are driving around unreasonably blind to vehicles overtaking you. This blind spot can be almost completely eliminated.

The side mirrors should be positioned thus that you have a clear view of the lanes next to you, with the door handle or body of the vehicle just slightly out of view. You can lean and tilt your head if for some reason you prefer a view of what’s going on behind you that is half obstructed by the vehicle you are currently driving.

The goal is to maximize the area covered by the mirrors so you can see more things, not to have redundant views of the same thing.

The OOP reads like all social interactions are equally bad, so I’m not really sure why you’re disagreeing with me for disagreeing with the original post. I did not say anything to the contrary of what you are saying.

Did we read the same post? The one I read said it was good to not interact with another human being for days on end.

Thanks for letting me know your anecdotal experience though. Mine does not at all look like that but it sure sounds nice. congratulations I guess?

Yeah, I have, and I think being fearful and avoidant of each other is more destructive than it is helpful. Have you looked at the up and coming generations, taken seriously the loneliness they are expressing, and acknowledged how that might affect their views on the world and how they treat others?

I agree that WFH is far more efficient and a better situation for most office-based workers, but I wouldn’t call going “multiple days without speaking to another human being” an upside. My issue with office work is I have to get up early and get myself ready and fight through traffic, not that I have to interact with other people even if I don’t like some of them.

I think that’s a regressive point of view. I’m skeptical of anyone with a platform that pushes it, and somewhat repulsed by the normal people that repeat it. Naturally, I think. You don’t like people? Well, I’m a people… You’re a people too. All of us are people. Good people, whatever your idea of a bad person is, we all are people and we people are social creatures.

In a healthy society we should want to be around other people and, in fact, as a group we become more accepting of individual differences by encountering and interacting with numerous and diverse groups of people and accepting them into our norm, seeing first-hand that we are all just normal people going through life and striving for what we believe is good. We people add so much more than we threaten, we are capable of great and profound things when we work together to achieve them.

It’s not normal to turn your nose up at that and I hate that it is being normalized.

Have you considered that that might be difficult with antisocial attitudes like the one expressed by OOP becoming the norm?

Well they’re also an anticholinergic, which means they block the neurotransmitter acetylcholine. Acetylcholine is the chief chemical messenger controlling functions of the parasympathetic nervous system. It’s really important in brain and muscle function.

What are the effects of anticholinergics? Effects can include dry mouth and sore throat, resulting from the impaired secretion by exocrine glands. Another side effect is tachycardia, or a higher than usual heart rate, that occurs when anticholinergics interfere with receptors that typically slow the heart rate. Anticholinergics can also cause urinary retention (i.e., the inability to empty the bladder) and obstipation (i.e., the inability to pass stools or gas) due to decreased smooth muscle motility and tone. Additional anticholinergic effects include blurred vision and light sensitivity. Rarely, anticholinergics can cross the blood brain barrier and enter the central nervous systems, causing mood changes, hallucinations, confusion, or disorientation.

What is anticholinergic toxicity? Anticholinergic toxicity occurs when anticholinergic agents accumulate in the body and may lead to anticholinergic syndrome, which can cause dry mouth, flushed skin, hyperthermia, and tachycardia. It may also lead to anticholinergic delirium, which is characterized by confusion, hallucinations, and psychomotor symptoms. With lower doses, acute anticholinergic syndrome can resolve on its own after the anticholinergic medication has been stopped and fully excreted. On the other hand, higher doses can be life-threatening, so individuals should be medically reviewed and acetylcholinesterase inhibitors, such as donepezil and rivastigmine, can be prescribed as an antidote.

Fyi. Anticholinergics are a class of drugs which have been linked to dementia when used regularly by those 65 and older. Imbalances in acetylcholine are linked with chronic conditions, such as Alzheimer’s disease and Parkinson’s disease.

What Benadryl are you talking about, I’ve never heard of it being anything but diphenhydramine? People definitely abuse this form, it’s a deliriant in high doses and can cause hallucinations. I can’t recall its name but I distinctly remember there being a community about it on the other site.

Edit: perhaps you’re thinking of Sudafed PE, in which the main ingredient, pseudoephedrine, was switched for phenylephrine? The latter drug was recently found to be ineffective like you’re talking about. Though, the reason they made pseudoephedrine prescription only in the first place was because people were using it to make meth, not because it was a fun drug to abuse.

We really are not beating the dead internet allegations with this one

I think it just takes quite a few moral failings to even achieve that level of wealth in the first place in the vast majority of cases.

Here specifically, these people are authors and IP holders in a society that places a lot of value in ignorance and in very chauvinist and racist ideas. By hook or by crook, they’ve made something original. They have some merit, and you would expect them of all people to see those societal failings for what they are. To not comment on them, or to uphold them, or to mask them, (arguably all the same thing) is a decision they made in their work. I think we vastly overestimate how easy it is to do that across an entire body of independent work if it doesn’t align with your beliefs.

It makes sense that a person who has the merits and will to do something like that, again, entirely without challenging such obvious failures (as most in their position would), would be chosen to win the broad favor of a society that desperately does not want to be challenged or its failings acknowledged (esp ruling class, the ones with something to lose and wealth to spare to push these things), and would gain a lot of its wealth. Especially in ye old early-internet world when people weren’t discovered as easily. Then, when their platform is secure, the mask slips.

It’s not a conspiracy or an aberration, it’s survivorship bias. These people are a product of our society. We have to reckon with that.

edit: I realized I could expand on what I meant in a few places so I sprinkled a bit more in.

Do I not understand or am I being deliberately obtuse? Get your story straight.

In that case though thanks for proving my point. Allow me to edit my reply.

did I say that gamergate participants were career politicians? Do you think I think they had the ability to pass laws?

Yes, you did, you compared this issue to the civil rights era, and then you went on to compare it to gamergate, as if all things were equal between them. Welcome to the transitive property! Or are you now saying that this situation is not comparable to gamergate? Hey look, I can be condescending too! Know why? Well cause, I don’t think you’re an ally >:(

I was using that example to demonstrate why the comparison was insulting, because, as we both agree, internet critics are in fact not politicians. Taking normal people criticising someone, whose internet presence thoroughly warrants criticism; and comparing that to a fight against the American ruling class, to win human rights for a group of people whose humanity is absolutely not up for critique or questioning; shows you don’t give a fuck about civil rights beyond the era’s ability to serve you in an argument. The fact you’re still doubling down on it is very telling.

I’m not being obtuse, I’m very openly refusing to entertain your argument because it trivializes a serious issue that is deeply important to me. This is the most stunning display of dunning-kreuger I have ever witnessed. Nice alt btw. Pretentious ass bad faith radlib. Ick.

suggesting that any and all criticism towards any woman on the internet simply must be based on her gender

I haven’t said that.

Do you know what the term “suggest” means? Have you witnessed the other people in this thread whose behavior you are trying to explain? Did you not literally follow that up by saying “I don’t think you’re an ally”? An ally with whom? What am I then?

did I say that gamergate participants were career politicians? Do you think I think they had the ability to pass laws?

You made the comparison to the rhetoric about forced bussing in the civil rights era??? I said it was an insulting comparison, then you doubled down, and now here you are agreeing that it’s a bad comparison because you think I made it.

Uh. Sexism is bad, I think.

Somebody should award you a nobel peace prize. That doesn’t explain why people are defending this particular artist so fervently or any significant events that would qualify as a “quick overview of the situation”?

Lol. Lmao even. And I’m the one being “deliberately obtuse”. Holy fuck you’re annoying, your arguments are bad, and the fact you avoid the actual argument; where one might actually prove sexism, rather than make a bunch of paranoid conjecture about people engaging in the age old tradition of gossip; is not a point in your favor. You have not “earned” the right to condescend, nor to decide who is and is not an ally. This isn’t even what I was asking about in the first place and you’re really only proving my point. Go away.

I pity you.

Uh, they spent the small amount of energy it takes to leave a few comments on the internet because the same painfully unfunny comic strip keeps coming up in their feed and they don’t understand where the popularity comes from? That’s why I’m here at least. Lemmy is still relatively small, I don’t get that many posts to interact with. If it’s so much energy to spend, then I’m fundamentally asking the same question as you. Why are these people spending so much of their energy defending her?

I don’t see why it has to be anything more than that and I really don’t appreciate the condescension, to suggest that I’ve fallen for some rhetorical manipulation that you think you’re somehow immune from. Yes, I was also here on the internet when those things were happening. It’s not that I don’t understand it, it’s that this is not that. There are legitimate reasons to dislike this person and their comics.

Do you really think that being annoying like this; suggesting that any and all criticism towards any woman on the internet simply must be based on her gender; is going to dispel negative attention from actual sexists? Do you really think that you aren’t gonna get a lot of false positives, from people simply expressing their legitimate criticisms on a platform specifically made for the purpose, and push those people away from whatever your message is by presuming to know what they are thinking and aggressively using that to condescend to them and dismiss anything they have to say?

Also yes, it was very obvious even to the least politically engaged person that gamergate was about sexism. Yes, even as it was happening. That’s like the whole reason people took part in it. They knew what they were doing just as well as the people calling them on it and were pretty open about their sexism. They weren’t career politicians trying to pander to a racist base without sparking major backlash, so they could quietly pass laws to prevent integration; they were gamers having their little boys club on the internet, being flagrantly sexist and bad faith. What even is this line of reasoning??

If you like this person as an artist and identify with the comic you can just say that and engage normally, if you don’t then why would you go out of your way to defend them and suggest that their gender has anything to do with it? You don’t have to keep explaining the same point, I know what you’re saying and I disagree.

Is it? I’ve never seen this before and seen lots of this artist’s comics posted here. It does seem it’s just as much one side as it is the other though.

Also I understand the concept of fear mongering veiled bigotry. That doesn’t even remotely appear to be what is happening here and, not to be overly pearl clutch-y, but as somebody with intimate knowledge of this history I honestly find the comparison to the civil rights era insulting. People expressing their dislike of an artist with questionable behavior on the internet is not the same thing as politicians in the real world using fear tactics as a fig leaf for their racist goals of preventing black people from fully integrating into american society.

I understand you mean well but this doesn’t really answer for me why the defensiveness is so over the top.

You seem to enjoy being annoying for the sake of being annoying, but that doesn’t mean anyone else does. Seems like a pretty lonely hobby actually.

I’ve only seen this artist reposted on lemmy and never knew the first thing about her other than her comics being pretty bland and art unimpressive despite being frequently posted, what is going on with all these people white knighting for her?? If you like her, cool. If you don’t like her, also cool?? What is the problem here??

The closest thing to “harassing” I’ve witnessed is of those with fairly reasonable criticism of the comic presented to us, accusing them of harassing an artist that isn’t even on this platform.

Can you give me a quick overview of the situation?