fuck it!

The version of someone you invite in the door determines the initial trajectory of how that person will act in the community. You can invite in the leading edge of someone’s developing kindness or invite in the ossifying mass of their nature that is threatening to turn hateful and uncaring. No one instance of invitation to a new person (however that may happen, formally or informally) pushes the needle far either way within any one particular person (though sometimes it can radically do so) but the overall integrated effect is a moderate shift of the an entire community towards the better or worse version of the community members. When this effect is used for good people often describe the resulting community space as a community that accepts them for who they are or more succintly is a genuinely safe space.

Of course, every interaction is in an invitation in some small way, it doesn’t just happen once.

“may also be biased, even when trained on statements known to be objectively truthful.”

I feel like computer science aggressively ignores the humanities/philosophy as a waste of time and then fundamentally undermines and hopelessly entraps itself in the wrong questions for doing so.

Also the taller the building is the more potential passive air circulation on hot days.

The problem is that when the state of Israel tells you to stay home it is as likely it is so they can more assuredly wipe out your family in one go as it is they care about your safety.

The actual act of taking some moderate sum of crypto here is meaningless to me, you were able to attain a valuable thing and so you did. It is only an intimate knowledge of the context of that choice that can inform any kind of accurate judgement fraught with grey areas as it may be.

That isn 't what interests me about crypto, what I find interesting is that no matter what rock you check under in virtually the entire crypto sphere the attitude of the creatures involved always untangles into this same precise attitude. Maybe you fall under the category maybe you don’t, my point is about the mindset of this whole enterprise that permeates it at seemingly every level.

You didn’t need to tell me you own crypto, your post screams “crypto bro” at such screeching decibels that I think you just shattered a wine glass over there.

I do think that would be a superb opening monologue (set to a moody montage) for a skit taking the piss out of naive crypto bros though, well done!

Well yeah there is a gradient of culpability but it roughly follows the gradient of power and compensation, which is an exponential curve with the lion’s share of the area under the curve contained within the very very top.

If you want to get technical about it, if the average CEO earns 300 times the average (not the lowest) pay of employees at the company than sure, the average employee has culpability but it is 1/300th or less of the culpability of the people truly at the top and that is likely a conservative estimate of gulf between those two values.

Obviously one doesn’t somehow nullify the other but the structure of culpability here has to be taken into account in order to make an honest analysis.

The biggest impact of digital currencies so far has been the obscene, democracy destroying amounts of money crypto bros spent to help get trump and other corrupt lackeys into office.

https://www.citizen.org/article/big-crypto-big-spending-2024/-

This is what the rise of digital currencies is an indicator of, an accelerated process of societal decay.

Yeah but then we get Incel-In-Chief JD Vance as president which is honestly MUCH scarier.

Shaming people for having deep moral quandries about voting for a candidate who is actively and directly facilitating genocide is pathetic and pointless and makes you look like a parody of yourself.

“If someone from middle management or even low level worker who personally denied this guy′s insurance claim would have been assasinated, would we suddenly feel sorry?”

Absolutely! Who is making the decisions that lead to a mass loss of life? Not a random worker at the company.

I think you will find Palestinian citizens agree with you on that point.

This is a direct consequence of “the war on terror” attempting to redefine the military strategy of asymmetrical warfare as terrorism and inherently immoral.

To sell the bullshit “war on terror” the easiest way to make the US seem righteous was to degrade the public’s sense of why people violently resist and reduce it to the act of violently resisting an organized traditional military is immoral unless the thing resisting is also a traditional organized military.

I am glad that narrative is breaking down though as the distortion of how and why violent conflicts occur is dangerously blinding to a basic understanding of the world.

truth