0_0 I take it you do the lion’s share of the finances haha

At least I hope

We do not grant you the rank of Master

My response is still the same. Because the more uncommon something is (i.e. not He/she/they) then it’s also reasonable to expect people to get it wrong a bunch. Also, I really feel pointing toward odd pronouns is such a stawman too, because it’s overwhelmingly people asking for he/she/they (male/female/neither).

If there is someone non-binary out there really getting mad at people who mis-gender them without being told first (again, never met anyone like this, ever), then I’d encourage them to practice some empathy and be realistic.

I’m betting there is practically no one out there seriously asking to be called master.

Though smeagol uses it for master. Master is nice to smeagol.

I really think this “debate” is such a waste of time. Just try to accommodate people if it’s easy.

And calling someone by the name they choose (and are often legally called), and the gender they identify with, is such low effort, and making mistakes is such a non-issue if your attitude is good.

What is the fuss all about. (I know the answer, I just think the answer is stupid)

Thanks for the in-depth response! These fair-share fees sound great, an anti-scab fee haha

54%?? Yikes.

I think the best response that’s always worked for me is:

“Who cares!” Person riled up about this inclined to agree with me because they think I’m on the two genders “side of the debate”. “Just try your best to call people what they want to be called and move on. If someone’s name is x, try call them x, if they say ‘I am a y’, try calling them a y. If you get it wrong accidentally, oh well, just say sorry and try again. Why are we even still talking about this? It’s such a non-issue”

Highly effective on those who aren’t super conservative and just been swept up in the (in my opinion) astroturfed outrage.

Right to work? Is this some euphemism for some awful employment laws, in the mould of the Australian Liberal Party’s (the Conservatives) “Work Choices” legislation?

I can’t wait for the budget framework to come out, 1 because current lineup is expensive (well, more than I’d like to spend on a laptop. I’ll run my shitty 2018 Microsoft Surface Pro 6 into the ground), but 2 because the product will be even more polished by that time.

Can’t wait to have a laptop and then just have it for like 10 years. Especially if it’s Linux out of the box 👍👍

300 Nazis outing themselves and going to prison to (hopefully) be rehabilitated with counseling?

Don’t threaten me with a good time.

(I am aware the prison system is not super fantastic in Australia, but we’re miles ahead of the US, and some of this 300 may actually be dissuaded. And also, they’re Nazis, so. If you believe your fellow human beings are animals, then you don’t get free speech, sorry.)

Thanks for sharing this

I’ll be honest, I’m not super familiar on the timeline.

I’m not looking forward to the future though, even less so than before :/

Oh well, we persevere

I wonder when we’re gonna get the Reichstag fire

How does it breathe?

I will be shocked if the cost of living comes down at a notable rate when compared to other developed countries.

Conservatives have never been better at managing the economy, yet people believe they are, for some reason ¯_(ツ)_/¯

I completely seriously, put forth that it’s the soul-crushing, rampant late-stage capitalism, with poor worker protections, much more than the lack of political freedom, is what is driving the low birth rates. (Now, obviously different story during one child policy).

I just think people are way to quick to overlook the economics, which is currently happening almost everywhere (the stupid house prices, real wages not keeping up with price inflation, the wealth gap between the richest and poorest of a nation getting larger, etc)

If China became a mutli-party representative democracy overnight, you can bet your ass no one is going to be having any more children than they are right now.

If you were to ask the average Chinese person if they support their government, the answer would be yes, despite what some people outside China would like to believe. (On average, of course there are still a notable number who aren’t happy at all with the government).

I can’t believe this is actually real, or the most professional looking joke I’ve seen in a while: https://theowo.london/

Nearly every medication changes your cognition—even OTC antihistamines.

I don’t know what it’s like in your country, but in mine depending on the level of impact it will say on the packet, and is illegal to drive while under the influence of any medication that impacts your ability to drive safely or operate heavy machinery.

I didn’t intend to imply it is the case for everyone

People should make the decisions that are best for them—know thyself.

One last time, I don’t endorse this style of living for everyone, but it works for me

Nah, this is not okay.

I do not accept this as a reasonable way to determine what we allow as societies in terms of vehicular safety. Someone’s freedom to decide for themselves what they consider to be safe, stops at everyone else’s freedom to not be run over. I very much assert what’s safe should be determined with science and enforced with regulation/laws. Not by everyone personally deciding for themselves.

You might be surprised at the sheer number of people who operate vehicles while stoned safely.

Dosing aside (I’m not making claims on what level is safe). We have a very important saying in my industry: just because a safety event hasn’t happened yet, isn’t evidence that a practice is acceptably safe. (Paraphrased). This is literally what habitual drunk drivers who aren’t that drunk when they drive tell themselves “it’s fine”, because they haven’t had a crash and are very careful. Sure, but they’re increasing the likelihood of a crash nonetheless.

There may well be people out there who have driven high without incident, my response would be 1. Let’s quantify that first before allowing it, and 2. They do this without incident, so far.

I’m sure you’re very careful, and don’t drive too high. You may never have a serious accident. But on a societal level, that’s just not an acceptable way to determine what is acceptably safe. Who are you to say that you aren’t increasing the likelihood of harm to someone else?

Wanna decide everything for yourself? Go live in the middle of nowhere, away from everyone else, where your decisions won’t impact others.

Don’t drive high unless you can back up your claims with more than “trust me bro”.

Amen to that

Are there sufficient studies out there showing fewer accidents while under the influence of weed? Or negligible effect?

Else, I’m gonna have to press X to doubt, and really would rather wait on further studies before letting you think your self-reported performance is convincing.

Weed affects your cognition, I hope we can agree on this. How adversely for driving, according to dose, that I don’t know. Though I don’t think anyone should accept people telling you “nah, it’s fine, trust me bro. I only got into an accident when I was sober!”

Cars are deadly, and you ought to be sober while operating heavy machinery.

Stop doing it until studies are done (and, they will, given how widespread it’s use is legally now), but heck, pressing all sorts of X to doubt on this turning out to be true. It affects your attention. And cars are deadly, so.

You are morally obligated to err on the side of caution here.

Stop driving high, please.

Yikes. Hecking big yikes.

deleted by creator