Like was it a meaningful debate or a flat out flame war? And what was the main theme you were arguing over?
Way too many people think trans people’s right to exist is a debate.
The reading comprehension and overall common sense on this website is piss poor.
I struggle to recall any “meaningful” debates.
There is no debate. Everyone has the right to exist. How could someone argue against that. They are just shouting idiocy.
If lemmy counts as social media in the context of this question: In one direction it was meaningful, but all I got back was flaming and brigading. But I’m sure they are convinced I have it the wrong way around. I was calling out a tankie for being objectively wrong in their statements, and that their defense of stalinism was stupid.
Seems legit. I hate arguing about politics. I avoid like the plague.
I think as many people as possible should be as well off as possible, with as much freedom as possible, at the expense of as few as possible. I dare you to challenge this standpoint. Sure, how we weigh and balance each of those is up for debate (A debate I am sure neither of us are interested in participating in), but as an outline, I find that only weirdos object to the premise as a whole.
I agree.
Easily trump
Buying a Pixel to install GrapheneOS is not the only reasonable alternative to mainstream Android.
Each person has their own threat model. My priorities will be very different from a journalist in China, a whistleblower, or even my own mom. Some are more at risk of ransomware and a device with root is risky. For myself, I’d incur that risk as a power user and would rather my phone can be backed up so I don’t have to worry about it breaking. GrapheneOS devs/followers believe that security is the only thing you must ever want, nothing else matters, and everything else is irrelevant, as though Google or street thugs will come to your house and exploit your bootloader if you don’t give them data voluntarily. They just don’t realistically question the statements the project makes, like what threats are worth mitigating (ubiquitous tracking? Who cares, I’ve got security patches and a locked bootloader!) and what options they’re giving up by using GrapheneOS that’s about as locked-down as the average Samsung phone. The marketing game is super strong because it’s hard to argue against at scale: everyone’s situation is different and “don’t you want to be safe?”
Probably 15 years since I had more than a 5 or so back and forths about anything. I lose interest and just stop replying.
People that believe all that ghost shit on YouTube is real. It’s basically boomers and religious tards with a 3rd grade education that don’t understand how easy it is to edit video for the average person. They all comment “May Christ protect you” and other crap like that. While these people pump out an episode every week like clock work where they’re possessed, attacked, or some other BS. Best part is when they go “we almost died” over and over, because name one person on a paranormal investigation that died that isn’t an obvious natural cause.
Israel / Palestine - whatever you say, you always get attacked.
How dare you say that about them!!
That’s what I mean.😭
local AI has none of the ethical issues of big corporate AI
From people who self-identify as Leftist too
Idiots who don’t understand that vi is better then Emacs
:q!
That historical events can be approached and assessed without contemporary extrapolations. But to boil down years of internets, including old ezboard forums, I’d say it’s been over the Clean Wehrmacht theory/myth.
I used to be really into WW2 history communities and I would routinely approach things objectively and piss a bunch of nerds off who pervert history and just want to obsess over how Hitler could’ve won.
So I have argued far too much with people who hate Hitler just because he lost the war to Stalin. Like, primary sources would mean nothing. I’d have correspondence transcripts from commanders and diplomats, and they’d have their latest Hearts of Iron game run.
People on social media get irrationally angry when I point out that all science confirms that physical punishment of children for the purpose of behavior change or discipline is a net negative. For both the development of the child and also society as a whole. And as such, any corporeal punishment of children should be considered assault and child abuse. People will desperately defend their right to exert violence on their own children.
What!? Really!? That’s insane. It’s the whole boomer generation for ya. Millennial and even Gen Z are now having kids and most I talk to are completely against hitting their children. It’s definitely boomers and Gen x (maybe Gen x) .
No, not a generational thing. Everyone, including millennials and Gen Z. It’s more related to familial trauma. Those who lived through a violent childhood are the ones most likely to defend violence against children. They almost always use the old “I turned out fine, it made me a better person because I was a naughty child. So I will do the same.” It’s like survivors of hazing trying to rationalize hazing others in turn.
Oh. I see. My best guess was wrong. That’s okay. I understand where you are coming from.
I would say it’s mostly topics I’m not actually arguing about.
I tend to point out false statements or false assumptions. I do it regardless of the topic or my position on an issue, but usually it’s taken as general opposition to whatever the person was saying. So they call me a shill or demand that I prove a ridiculous point of view they imagine I must hold. It’s like only The Enemy is expected to care about the accuracy of what The Right Side says.
I always hate when someone I agree with makes a stupid argument. Then if I point out their bad argument, I look like I’m arguing the other side
Same.
Socialism, but it’s on me for engaging. I’ll do it again.
That nun-chucks don’t follow Whip physics
Do they?
Nah. If you’re able to get nunchucks to break the sound barrier you’re either doing something very wrong or very right.
No. Nun-chucka are a solid equal cross section, whips taper, so with a whip the force in the first section passes more speed to the next thinner section as mass decreases the speed increase per conservation of energy.
That’s an amazing distinction.
I recently had a discussion about the bible with someone who actually took the book literally. At least the bits he considered “good”.
He did not even understand simple concepts like “John the Apostle” is neither “John the Evangelist” nor “Apocalyse Fever Dream John”.
I am a fairly new Christian so I cannot relate. I know who John the apostle is but I don’t know about the evangelist or apocalypse fever dream John lol. Never heard those terms. I’ve been reading the Bible consistently for about a year. I still have a lot to learn in order to properly debate anything about it. For some reason I worked backwards. I read revelations first and tried to make sense of it by them reading the gospel and parts of the old testament. I still skip around but never do I take the Bible literally. I mean some commands are straight forward but I cannot wrap my head around the fact that Job was just whipped out of nowhere by the devil and it doesn’t show him like freaking out because the devil either showed up or was whipping him somehow from the spirit world. It was the first book I really connected with.
It is about getting the message out of the text.
Take Noah. Two different stories, two different boats, and both with differing writing styles. Some people seem to believe that the text provides accurate building instructions. Which leads to the issue of which one to follow, and needing steel, because building it from any of those texts with wood and reed in that size is a folly undertaking.
Or take the Gospels. You can basically condense the Gospels to a few lines of text along the lines “God loves you, regardless of who you are, and wants you to do the same”. That some people don’t get this “regardless of who you are” and that some televangelists shamelessly exploit people on the line of “Give away your riches and follow me” are the most painful failures of American Christianity.
