Carrot

joined 2 years ago
[–] Carrot@lemmy.today 8 points 14 hours ago

50% chance of your 50% chance of you waifu becoming real becoming your waifu

[–] Carrot@lemmy.today 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Yeah, that's what I thought. Unless you've got something meaningful to add, I'm calling it here. You argue with 100% emotion, never adding anything meaningful to a conversation. Glad you can admit that you're just being obstinate

[–] Carrot@lemmy.today 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (3 children)

"NU UH!!!" Never seen someone just bullshit before while using quotation formatting. You're putting on a clinic of being a slimy dishonest asshole

Please, point out where I'm making stuff up. With zero efforr responses like these, I'm not sure why I'm even bothering to respond to you. If you think I'm lying about the definition of race, here are all the human-relevant definitions of race in several dictionaries, almost all would suggest how I'm using race is the most common:

Race as defined by The American Heritage Dictionary

  1. A group of people identified as distinct from other groups because of supposed physical or genetic traits shared by the group. Most biologists and anthropologists do not recognize race as a biologically valid classification, in part because there is more genetic variation within groups than between them. 2.A group of people united or classified together on the basis of common history, nationality, or geographic distribution.
  2. A genealogical line; a lineage.
  3. Humans considered as a group.
  4. A usually geographically isolated population of organisms that differs from other populations of the same species in certain heritable traits.

Race as defined by Marriam Webster dictionary

  1. any one of the groups that humans are often divided into based on physical traits regarded as common among people of shared ancestry
  2. a group of people sharing a common cultural, geographical, linguistic, or religious origin or background
  3. the descendants of a common ancestor : a group sharing a common lineage

Oh! Okay! So once you deliberately strip race of all cultural and material context white can be declared a race 'because they look the same'

I didn't strip my race definition of anything. I'm using the definitions above. Me using the "look the same" example was to help solidify that race is a social construct, not that white was a race.

Well if you're willing to just compartmentalize literally everything until your premise is affirmed then you can tell yourself anything, can't you?

I'm not compartmentalizing anything. I'm using the dictionary definition of race. If you mean something else when you say race, then please, tell me your definition.

You've chosen a definition of race that's completely useless for everything except one task: to be able to claim victimhood for the privileged class

I've used a definition of race that fits 4 of the 7 dictionary definitions that I've seen. Yes, I guess I'm not using the ones regarding ancestry and genealogy, but those just segment what a race is further. Under those definitions, "black" isn't a race.

HOW FUCKING STUPID DO YOU HAVE TO BE TO LECTURE SOMEONE WHEN YOU OPENLY ADMIT YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT'S GOING ON

I understand the historical event you are referencing, and I understand that, in some places in the world, Irish immigrants weren't part of the "true white" race until they became racist towards folks without white skin and became police. What I don't understand is what that has to do with anything we're talking about. That doesn't make "white" any less of a race, that just means that white people in the past were extra racist, being racist against people from a different geological location, not just being racist by the color of their skin.

Bet you're white. "My feelings are more important than your facts and I'm elevated from you enough to speak without even knowing them" is extremely white coded

Please, point out where I am using feelings and you are using facts. Please, point out anything I've said that is not truthful. That's how arguements are done, and that's what I've been doing to everything you've said from the beginning. From my end, you have yet to have an argument that is more than "YOU'RE STUPID" without addressing a single thing I'm saying.

[–] Carrot@lemmy.today 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (5 children)

Fine, I'll indulge you.

white isn't a race it's the social construct

This is both true and false. By all accepted definitions of race that I could find, white counts as a race. However, race as a concept is a social construct. Some folks back in the day decided to categorize people by things they have in common. (e.g. physical attributes, geographic location, genetics) However, this doesn't have any basis in science due to there being more genetic variation within the defined races than between them. Most biologists and anthropologists don't accept race as a scientifically valid biological classification.

that means the absence of race

This is false by all definitions of race. Race is just a collection of people sharing similar attributes, so the "white" race absolutely counts, considering all "white" people share a similar characteristic: skin color.

Irish stopped being a race when they were accepted into whiteness by becoming police in large number

This one threw me for a loop, as I'm not really sure what you mean by this. Irish is 100% still a race, as they are a group of people that can be defined by geographic location. There are groups that don't think they belong in the greater "white" race due to some historical beefs, but at the end of the day, most definitions of the "white" race include Irish folks, as they have white skin.

That's why it's literally impossible to be racist against white people

This part doesn't make sense. By the most common definitions of racist, it's possible to be racist against any given race. Some definitions of racist that I read in school did change that by adding a clause for racism being prejudice towards a marginalized group. In that case, it wouldn't be possible to be racist towards the greater "white" race, as they have never historically been marginalised. However, this definition of racist hasn't been widely accepted, as it almost exists to prevent being able to say racism towards the "white" race exists.

If you think that it's impossible to be racist towards a race that is all-encompassing like the "white" race, then, unless you're using a different definition of racist, then if would be equally impossible to be racist towards the all-encompassing "black" race.

No need to lash out just because people are calling you out for your misunderstanding of your own words. Given how your sentences are written, English might not be your first language, so there's a good chance that this misunderstanding comes from a translation or language barrier. Hopefully I have cleared things up!

[–] Carrot@lemmy.today 1 points 3 days ago (7 children)

Explain how it isn't? Typically once someone resorts to name calling in a discussion it's a good sign they know they're in the wrong.

[–] Carrot@lemmy.today 1 points 5 days ago (9 children)

Mate, using your logic "black" isn't a race. This is also technically true, but not really how the term "race" is used. Taking your logic and applying it to this term that is widely accepted caloquially as a race, you end up being able to say that it's "impossible to be racist against black people" which would be seen as a racist remark.

[–] Carrot@lemmy.today 13 points 5 days ago

Yup. Linux + Nvidia is the problem here. I convinced my friend to move to Linux, explaining that all his favorite Steam games work on my Linux machine with no issues, just download and click play, tested it myself. Turns out, I don't have an nvidia gpu, he does, and a lot of the games straight up don't work, and the ones that do need at least one config change, if not more.

I have yet to have any issues on Steam myself when gaming with my Radeon card.

[–] Carrot@lemmy.today 3 points 6 days ago

Got really lucky, didn't have to correct any

Daily Akari 😊 Wed Jul 30, 2025 ✅Solved in 0:57✅ https://dailyakari.com/

[–] Carrot@lemmy.today 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I2P is basically this

[–] Carrot@lemmy.today 9 points 1 week ago

You can buy these posters (and many of the others that are posted across the internet) here: https://truewagner.bigcartel.com/product/wagner-s-rip-em-outs One guy has made pretty much all the weird posters like this. The number has been changed on this post, but the one from the book works and has an answering machine message that is an AI old lady talking about the dust she breathes

[–] Carrot@lemmy.today 1 points 1 week ago

While I mostly agree with what you are saying here, the problem is with these "features" being opt-out vs opt-in. I don't want ads on my start menu unless I go into my personalization settings and turn them off. I don't want to have to disable copilot. I don't want to have to jump through the hoops of turning off one drive. These things should be something I can turn on, not something I have to turn off. I get that it doesn't take long for someone remotely tech savvy to do, it's not like it's a struggle. The problem is that for most people, these services are extremely predatory.

You say it's much more manageable that people claim, but you're wrong. I know more normies that own computers than I do tech savvy people. All of these people aren't good enough with tech to be able to just go find the setting, so they go to the internet to look it up. The top search results are often predatory ad-riddled sites that pitch their weird middleware software as the only solution to the problem. Oops, now the normie has malware. Their computer chugs because their computer is mining bitcoin or something stupid. They go online to look for help. There's anti malware software available, so they pay for it and install it. It takes up most of their laptop's crappy specs, making it worse than the malware. They go online for help. One of the top search results is a number for a tech support scammer. They pay them, often an aggregious amount of money, hoping for help. The tech support scammer takes their money, but does nothing (or installs malware of their own, or heaven forbid gets the normie's banking details). Rinse and repeat this process.

That doesn't sound manageable at all, and I personally know 4 people who have gone through that entire process, and I can't imagine that I'm unique in that.

And on top of that, even if you turn off all the settings for all of these windows "features" they are still collecting and selling your personal usage info to the highest bidder, it just is slightly less valuable.

[–] Carrot@lemmy.today 4 points 1 week ago

My brother in law is a guy who knows pretty much everything about everything. Pretty much any interesting topic you bring up, he'll have a deeper, more interesting conversation ready about that topic. This might sound annoying, but he's got a way of making it seem like you're discussing something you both already understand. Like, he isn't explaining things unless you ask, he'll say things like, "I'm sure you've already seen/heard of this", "Maybe you were the one who told me this, but...", (even when I'm pretty sure he knows I wasn't) etc. By giving you the credit for the information, it removes the feeling of him trying to be superior or condescending. This might still be mansplaining, I don't know. I'm a man, so maybe I have more of an ignorance for being mansplained to since I don't have to constantly put up with it, but this feels a lot more like a man explaining rather than mansplaining

view more: next ›