What does minorities have to do with this?

Armenian’s were a majority. The Fur people of Darfur are a majority in their region. Palestinians are a majority.

Genocide is a method often used in converting a majority to a minority.

I agree with your endpoint that those people don’t care, but I think if you told someone like that that they don’t care about minorities I think you would be confirming their thoughts not convincing them away from it.

Because I don’t think a 2 year old should be given Adderall without a parent knowing?

I personally am pretty open minded about these things, I was able to get birth control with my partner when I was 15 without her Catholic parents knowing. That was very important, but I recognize that if we were 10 it maybe becomes a different conversation involving parents.

You might say a parent could be included but you also have cases of divorced parents where one parent is for and another is against and there is a question of if the childs opinions are theirs or their parents. What age should the child be able to make the call? 15? 10? 5?

You’ve got a bunch of nutjobs that will turn that phrasing into a white genocide conversation is the problem.

The second part of that is that genocide is a subjective term due to classification of ethnic groups being subjective.

Honestly this well encapsulates the problem I tend to have aligning on goals with other progressives and some liberals. Every time folks try to simplify something as complex as genocide down to a yes or no question it means they are already invalidating the majority of positions and forcing a conversation of agree with me or call me wrong. That isn’t how it works, that isn’t how discussion and debate work. Forcing people into Yes/No thinking doesn’t lead to progress, asking for people to think critically does.

The reasonable debate is at what age is that allowed. I do not think that has an easy answer other than legal age of majority for the country you are a citizen of. I think that the problem is there are harder answers than that worth seriously considering.

I can’t imagine thinking any medical procedure has a simple answer, especially anything that permanently alters you.

Medical professionals are people, sometimes they make the right choice, sometimes the wrong choice. There are people who shop for the wrong answer, and also people who get the wrong answer and live in suffering. It is important to question things and have a discourse.

If my 16 year old came to me and asked to have their hearing removed as a solution to their mispohonia and that their therapist agrees and they found a surgeon… I don’t think I could just jump on board with that call.

Genocide is a term that is both over and under used. There are currently about six genocides ongoing. I don’t see the point in trying to call someone out on it because no one is actually doing anything for or against it outside of a very small number of people.

If someone asks me if I’m anti genocide I assume they mean something they specifically consider a genocide and they are trying to use this as bait to get me to out myself in some way. They don’t actually expect I’m personally participating or countering it in any way.

Trans rights also is a loaded term now because there are a LOT of individual rights Trans people are needing to fight for all in parallel. It’s better to be specific.

Sure someone who says they are against trans people is awful, but I find folks set the bar in different places and use that to start an argument. The easiest example is, what age should someone be allowed to transition which is an intensely challenging question to answer even on a medical level.

You think the wait staff setup the machine to do math wrong?

Year of the Linux desktop pushed out a year due to Linux infighting and intolerable advocates for the 33rd year. Clearly the fault of the other distros as I use Arch.

Would you rather our current administration make their decisions by using the lowest bidder LLM, or their own brains?

Other countries have them as well but the US has the most pervasive one.

Your credit score is based on the history of accounts and payments. If you have late payments it goes down. If you have many accounts for a long time in good standing it is goes up. A person who has many accounts and has paid off everything for 15 years might have a score of 800. Someone who has missed credit card payments and has things in collections might have a 550.

When you go to get a loan for a house or car the high credit score person might be given a 5% loan and the low credit score person no loan or a very poor rate sometimes over 20%. It can take years to change your credit score.

Every system is racist because every system is human and humans are flawed. Credit scores include systemic racism and banks making calls based on their gut is direct practiced racism. Systemic racism is much easier to slowly over time work out as long as you recognize it. But the only way to stop direct racism is to take at least some of the power away from individuals.

The systemic racism like the structural one in the argument can only be gotten rid of if you entirely removed the concepts of loans. The problem with that is it is impossible. The majority of the folks who have attempted to outlaw usury and loans entirely are not really looked back upon fondly in a historical sense.

The world doesn’t work better if people help those closest to them. The majority of the strife in the world exists because people help those close to them and treat others as outsiders. You can look at any system ever used and the point of failure is always someone tipping the scales intentionally to favor those near them.

Do people want to go back to the system that was used before credit scores? Where the person serving the loan just made the choice based off if they thought you seemed trustworthy? Aka were a white man who went to the same church as them.

I get it, but we should as a community try to be better than that.

AI won’t fail. It already is past the point where failing or being a fad was an option. Even if we wanted to go backwards, the steps that were taken to get us to where we are with AI have burned the bridges. We won’t get 2014 quality search engines back. We can’t unshitify the internet.

That AI is the one you make or at least host. No one is going to host an online AI for you that is 100% ethical because that isnt profitable and it is very expensive.

When you vilianize AI you normalize AI use as being bad. The end result is not people stopping use of AI it is people being more okay with using less ethical AI. You can see this with folks driving SUVs and big trucks. They intentionally pick awful choices because the fatigue of being wrong for driving a car makes them just accept that it doesn’t matter.

It feels dumb, it is dumb, but is what happens.

Nestle bottling water is bad, so my solution will be to never drink any water and make fun of people who do. This is how it always comes off to me.

Sometimes I do. We have great healthcare. Can send a couple pics of a scrape like that and they note it incase anything happens which pretty much is never. And we can count the topical we buy or have delivered against the deductible.

It helps get the system down pat and shows our kid how to use it incase they have bigger questions for their doctor later or need to take care of a more serious problem without us.

Who in the world eats hard shell tacos?

I hearby ask you to fight whatever battles you want, as long as you’re not a dick to anyone about it. Hopefully this frees up any confusion.

Everyone should see a therapist. Not every day or even every year but it’s one of the best preventative measures you can have. People bring it up because a lot of folks who struggle with basic emotional health problems don’t see one or feel a stigma around it.

If your therapist sucks or just isnt a good fit for you, you find a new one. Like you would a mechanic, or doctor, or barista.