I'm an autistic woman, and I've found great success in leaning into my autistic tendencies. By that, I mean just being blunt and upfront. One of my favourites is that if I've got chemistry with someone I don't expect to see again, before I bid them farewell, I'll give them a note with my number on and say something like "I had a great time hanging out with you tonight, would you like to go on a date with me sometime?" And then I hand them my number and scuttle off like a crab because I can only put on a cool face for so long before I crack under the anxiety.
Aspie man here, it's harder for us to do that. I have a friend who I gave the standard, "Hi, my name is MapleEngineer and I have Asperger's. That means..." speech to when I thought she was hinting. She said, "Ok, you don't like hints?" "No." "Ok. I've always found you attractive and have fantasized about sucking your cock. We should get together." We did. It was awesome.
Life would be so by easier if the normies didn't muddy the waters so much with their hints and clues.
Oh yeah, it's why I mentioned I'm a woman - it's certainly relevant to my experience here. I don't have to worry about being perceived as threatening - if I flirt with a woman in an upfront way like I described, I never feel like there's a risk of frightening her. Whereas on the flip side, if a guy asks me out, I'm always a bit on edge because of the small minority who are not safe to politely turn down. "Privilege" is definitely the wrong word for this, but being perceived as non threatening does make some things simpler.
I have been accused of being incredibly dense because I mask by playing all new relationships with women as completely natural. The woman I mentioned in my comment was hinting hard but I played it neutral. After I had a couple of hours to think about it I went back and said, "I have Asperger's and here's what that means. Here's what masking is. I mask by playing hard neutral. I think you might be hinting. Hinting doesn't work with me. If you're hinting you need to stop and just say or ask what you want to say or ask. I won't be offended. I will probably say, 'Yes' (I'm a sexy Aspie and I always say, 'Yes'. )" So she just asked, I said, "Yes" and we had a good time. She told me that she had always found me and my attitude toward sex very appealing but thought I didn't like her because I never flirted or expressed any interest. She said that in the almost 15 years we had been acquainted I had never even touched her. I said I thought it would be fun if the first time we touched was a kiss. The first time we touched it was a kiss. Now I'm waiting to find out if she's going to go with me on a short road trip with one or two nights in a nice hotel this weekend.
I could've written this comment word for word. It really does make things a lot easier to just be direct, being able to do this is one of the very few outright advantages of our non-standard brains imo!
It bothers me that in the U.S., we extend that courtesy to pets who are suffering from terminal issues. But we expect loved ones to hang on and suffer for no real reason other then the vague notion that the imaginary sky man would disapprove.
My grandma passed away 2 months shy of her 101st birthday. I visited her a few weeks before she passed, she was gaunt, skeletal, couldn't see us and was reacting to hallucination caused by their body slowly shutting down. She didn't even know my Mom and I were even there, and when we told her her daughter was there to see her, she said "No, I don't believe it" while staring blanking into the corner of the room. She wasn't suffering from dementia, it was cancer that came back which was killing her. What reason would we not allow a loved pet to suffer though that, but a blood relative, hell yeah, let them lay and suffer for weeks, months, years.
I don't have any grand ideas on how to prevent abuse, I just think it's humane to not let a thinking being suffer needlessly.
It's the same for the young end of the spectrum, I've seen lots of kids and adults who were born with a bad disability to be permanently wheelchair bound unable to care for themselves or even communicate. But "they were breathing on their own when they came out, so we can't do anything about it now" because sky daddie might be mad
And then ofc the whole stress added onto the parents who will have to primarily care for the child for the rest. Of. Their. Lives.
I think a legitimate concern for that one is what do you define as a disability worth terminating the baby's life for. Some would likely abuse it for eugenics.
Not being able to live without any assistance and no hope of improving seems like a reasonable criteria. In fact, with that criteria they can remove the assistance and let the child (or adults) suffocate and die right now, but they can't use drugs to ease the suffering and speed up the process or it is 'murder'.
There are many things we can put in place to mitigate the concerns about eugenics, like requiring two doctor's to agree that it is appropriate in addition to consent of family/guardians/other legally responsible persons.
With minimal reading comprehension you could have inferred that the assistance in the example was breathing for the person since they would suffocate without the assistance.
Im the hopes of avoiding a similar stupid post, that does not mean I think anyone who need needs a machine should die. That was an example of a situation where doctors can currently let a patient die through 'inaction' by removing the assistance that is taking care of vital functions like breathing. Think brain dead people or someone whose cancer is so bad that they refuse care that could keep them alive, but have no option to end the suffering faster.
Good investment and R&D for better early pregnancy testing would be a good start, if we can accurately predict disabilities early enough for an abortion it would head off a lot of issues later on
But for post birth disabilities, yea, but it's hard to even have that conversation because many would just shut the conversation down entirely with "life is life" or some BS like that
if we can accurately predict disabilities early enough for an abortion it would head off a lot of issues later on
That literally already is eugenics.
And the fact that you consider people advocating that disabled lives have just as much value as abled lives as "BS" tells me you really don't care, because even if you won't admit it, you are a eugenicist.
Yea no, to cross the line into eugenics the state or other authority needs to mandate that X or Y disabilities need to be aborted even over the objections of the parents
Simply giving the parents and their doctors the tools and legalities to detect and come to their own decisions, is not
Bidet / washlet. Your life will forever be divided into a time before you had one, and a time after you had one. You may no longer enjoy vacations because of the lack of one.
I cant fucking stand water flossers, the feeling is much worse than regular floss, it kind of tickles in a really annoying way. Besides dentists seem to prefer people use regular floss anyway.
I mean, literally anyone who's used a bidet before will know from daily experience that your comments are just wrong. It's not difficult to dry off, in fact it's pretty simple, and it uses much less toilet paper than the old way. The primary purpose of a bidet for most people also isn't TP conservation - that's just one of several nice side-effects.
I'm gonna duck out of any further replies here though because, frankly, you seem more interested in pushing this weird narrative you've settled on (in an old / dead thread, no less) than actually discussing it, and I can think of about a hundred things I'd rather be doing with my time. You do you, clean your butt whichever way makes the most sense to you.
Lemmy not catching on and Reddit dying aren't mutually exclusive, unfortunately. I personally know quite many users who left Reddit, but never made the jump over to Lemmy, because they mostly stayed on Reddit due to particular communities. With those communities getting decimated during the APIcalypse and its fallout, they had little incentive to join Lemmy.
Ultimately my personal opinion is that Lemmy is going to persist, even if it doesn't cross certain thresholds, it is still a part of the larger Fediverse and due to its interoperability, Lemmy can benefit from the success of the Fediverse, even when not being all that successful by itself.
Ultimately my personal opinion is that Lemmy is going to persist, even if it doesn’t cross certain thresholds, it is still a part of the larger Fediverse and due to its interoperability, Lemmy can benefit from the success of the Fediverse, even when not being all that successful by itself.
When doing a convolution of two curves in time, you flip one of them backwards.
Our shit statistics teacher made it so complicated.
And then one day, next semester, in a lab for signals class, the TA casually said "flip one, so they both start at zero seconds" and half the class started convulsing as an entire semester worth of misunderstood math magically snapped into place.
Lots of engineering teachers, have no business being teachers.
As someone who has to review CVs/resumes at times, depending on the content of the overall CV, a couple jokes would get a chuckle out of me - assuming it is a strong CV otherwise.
If it’s a terrible CV, and then has jokes too, I would assume you’re wasting my time.
Its a high risk / reward strategy
edit - replying to the actual question
”I am in direct communication with multiple Nigerian princes”
Not really, unfortunately. 99.9% of CVs are dry, samey samey documents. I guess the only mildly humorous parts come from actual interviews afterwards.
I work in software development, so all interviews are focused around that. We are also fully remote, so all interviews and work is over ms teams.
Asking someone questions about a topic on their CV, and they haven’t actually got a clue. “So you mention XML on your CV. In XML, whats the difference between an element and an attribute?” - blank stare
More than one person who were clearly googling while answering questions, and reading verbatim from the results
More of a slightly unrelated rant - people who refuse to put cameras on. We are fully remote, we need to be able to see each others faces to communicate effectively. Its the way we work - I understand that might make people uncomfortable however its just something imo people need to get over. Especially in a first meeting, where you want to make the best impression to the interviewer.
I don't do a lot of software development anymore. I had to look up attribute vs element. But it took all of 5 seconds to understand. Often I know how to use something even though I won't know the names of the parts.
As for 3, I can understand for specific cases, like interviews. But most meetings I don't feel comfortable inviting people into my home. That's a fine line for me.
That was an older example, and not really a great question. But it did demonstrate they didn’t have a deep grasp of things on their CV
everything below is just my personal opinion
To be clear I don’t have a draconian “camera on or fuck you fired” approach. I mean this more as what I see as a reasonable expectation from someone fully working from home.
Ive heard the “inviting into your home” argument, but when its a fully remote job, it kinda comes with the territory and should be expected. I am lucky enough to have a separate room to work from, but I still also use a virtual background. I can’t recall anyone who doesn’t at least blur it out.
Fully remote work comes with the expectation of having a private working area, away from disturbances etc. Where its less like inviting someone into your home, and more like they are in your personal workspace.
As well, to be more specific. When I would personally have my camera on and a reasonable expectation others would, is in meetings / calls where the invitees are all expected to be participating, not meetings where you’re invited and sit there wasting time for an hour.
IMO, after working from home years, communication is noticeably and significantly clearer and more productive when we can see each other
Question, what if I don't have a camera during an interview? I remember one time I had to set my phone up on a step ladder. I did get the job though. But the call quality was absolutely trash.
With the camera thing, if its like youve got a reason not to have one (broke that day, whatever). Not suggesting it is always a no, just because of it. If youre a strong candidate, then you have a strong chance. But when picking someone to offer to, people who had their camera on are naturally going to stick out more.
Day to day working its not a requirement to always have your camera on but some occasions will require it.
virtual backgrounds are good enough to hide everything else. Personally I have a flat black vbackground.
You can communicate without seeing each others faces, of course. You get a better connection, and better communication when you can see each other. Reading faces is a big part of how we communicate. Especially when I am training someone / pairing, seeing someones face let’s me know if they’re getting it or not.
Im talking from the perspective of my industry, and the work I do. Its just my experience. Im not stating proven facts or something. I am just explaining my perspective, thats all. Its not applicable for everyone - we are all different
Ok, understood. From my perspective, its a better way to communicate. Im not saying its the only way. And faceless communication can also be productive
I also think this changes depending on the job you're going for. There's absolutely no reason I'd try to be funny or interesting on my entry-level order picker job. Assuming they even bother to look at my CV they're mainly looking to see if I've got any work history.
If I'm applying for something creative, or maybe something that requires a bit of personality I'm sure it'd go over better... although even that is a double-edged sword.
Friendlier than reddit, but a lot more really stupid hot takes than reddit. Not as many shitheads; but the shit heads that are here are even shittier than anywhere else I've been on the Internet. Mostly the super paranoid security and super hardcore "free speech" folks that are like the main character of Conspiracy Theory. This platform seems to attract a lot of those.
To be fair, I didn't exactly come here by choice; I was ran off of reddit because Spez is an asshole and killed off the only good way to use the site on a mobile device. Though had I known about Lemmy before the appocalypse I would have come by choice. I didn't know about it until all that kerfuffle and was already looking for alternatives.
I think you've hit the nail on the head. There are some hilariously poor takes on here, and some that were never an issue on Digg or early-days Reddit. I've had arguments on here that I've never had anywhere else, from Americans telling me that I am incorrect about my own country, people telling me that I am wrong about software I've literally worked on with my employer, and frankly some of the worst political views you'd find on a left-leaning board.
I can tolerate the Linux and security nutjobs, because they're just rehashing the same tired arguments from a decade ago, and will be making up the same nonsense about switching their parents from Windows to Linux and them just saying "oh, that's nice, it's really good" all while they're just happy that their son is interacting with humans for a change.
Literally true, bc when an actual world leader (USA, UK, Canada, ofc Israel, Brazil, etc. etc. etc.) says stuff, some people strangely are likely to believe it.
Like: "Drink bleach". I am 100% not kidding you there - multiple people did precisely that!
It emboldens the crazies to realize that they are not alone.:-(
I can tolerate the Linux and security nutjobs, because they’re just rehashing the same tired arguments from a decade ago, and will be making up the same nonsense about switching their parents from Windows to Linux and them just saying “oh, that’s nice, it’s really good” all while they’re just happy that their son is interacting with humans for a change.
Sadly so many of the tech people here are the kind of slashdot dredge that think gluing USB ports shut is good for security and installing a Plex server is the solution to any media-related problem expressed.
Back in the day I used to see tons of posts claiming that Reddit was "the elite", in comparison to the likes of Facebook, or Twitter, or Tumblr, or Instagram, and so on. So, while your statement is technically true (the best kind!), that anti-Reddit people don't tend to say so...on Reddit, so much as here anyway (though if you look in the likes of r/ModCoord, occasionally there is a comment that makes it past the new mods and is allowed to criticize Reddit in some way) I think it's common to all social media. We (in-group) are The Best! :-P
There’s also that weird “we’re better than people on Reddit” smugness.
It’s rare, but it is a unique brand of fuckery you don’t have to deal with over there.
Isn't the Reddit equivalent something along the lines of, "We're better than people on [social media]" smugness? Social media being a catchall for say, Facebook, Twitter, or in the past few years, TikTok.
It reminds me of the classic silliness of competing forums for the same subject/topic back in the day. "We on TechFans95 are so much better than people on TechFans94" and vice versa.
The smugness can be a bit annoying but I interpret it as mostly jokes and healthy for the growth of the platform. I am enjoying myself more here than on Reddit, and when I see that others share that sentiment (smugly or not), it does embolden me to encourage my friends to give Lemmy a try.
Idk, if all the discussion on Lemmy was 'damn this place sucks' then I wouldn't want to share it with my friends. Maybe it is just a bad take though lol I'm not feeling too hot on it reading it back now
I believe most of us here block as many ads as possible by any means possible. I so rarely see ads that every once in while when I do (on other peoples devices) I'm shocked and disgusted.
You don't have to live like that and I feel sorry for all the people that do.
All that being said I know what you mean, even the content itself is now saturated with ads, i.e. a word about our sponsor for five minutes at the start of any video...
I’m sure you know about Brave being called out here lately so I just want to give you some iOS alternatives so you can stop using Brave (if you care enough, of course)
AdGuard (I paid for the lifetime, $12 I think) and it works great. Just like having uBlock on Firefox, but in safari so I still get all the integration that safari offers on your iOS device.
Dark reader is on the App Store.
When it comes to YouTube, I sideload a YouTube app with all the essentials installed using Sideloadly.
I appreciate the well thought out and articulated response.
The thing is it's not like I'm blindly using Brave; I've tried to dig into these things with Brave which users have brought up, the biggest complaints usually being "forced" cryptostuff (I had mine on first, and now off...), affiliate links and Brendan Eich being an anti lgbt asshole, etc. Then I went down the same hole with Mozilla; their asshole execs laying off people and then giving themselves bonuses, making deals with Google, etc.
Richard Stallmans an asshole too, should I stop using GNU? The world is a fucked up place and people are the most fucked up of all and pitting my morals against pragmatism sometimes only gets me so and so far.
I'd love to get behind some sort of new open-source alternative; I'm hoping we get a viable new thing ASAP, waiting for someone to pull a Linus and create something that truly enables me to consume the web in a manner that I can be personally satisfied with.
Unfortunately, AdGuard for iOS does not block ads in Safari as promised, at least not with the free tier (I double checked the instructions and toggled on all AdGuard related features in Settings). Comparing it to uBlock in Firefox is laughable.
For example, I searched for lasagna recipes, still saw ads in search results on DDG. Clicked a link to allrecipes.com, and bam—multiple banner ads embedded in the page before I can even read the actual recipe, plus another one docked to the bottom of my screen. Fail.
EDIT: Clarified that I’m referring to the free tier of Ad Guard, which I think is fair to say represents most users’ experience with it.
I do know that you need to manually update the blocklist through the AdGuard app.
Comparing it to uBlock on Firefox is laughable how? You do know that there is a way to add or remove any blocklist you want in the app. Now, this is only with the pro or paid version which is one of the reasons other than blocking ads as stated that I decided to spend my money on it.
World’s Best Lasaga - scroll down past the image carousel and the little box that shows prep time, cook time, and servings. Under the prep time box, before the orange “Jump to Recipe” button, there’s an ad.
I was able to slowly scroll down all the way to the very bottom of the page and saw no ads at all.
I also need to let you know that I use their DNS protection which you might not have ticked in the settings. I wish I could help you, but I think if you dig more into the app, you’ll see more options that will allow you to block just like I have. :/
I see what you’re saying. I instantly went for the trial because I saw how cheap the lifetime was and if it worked well enough, they could have that $12.
I apologize for misleading you. The app does work as intended for me.
I do understand about not springing for premium! I loathe ads so much that I’ll pay for something to get them out of my face. 😅
Big budget movies nowadays tend to be riddled with Product Placement so not even all that you're doing will save you from Ads. Product Placement Ads are just generally more subtle than those in dedicated Ad Spaces (though the latest Aquaman was not at all subtle in their in-movie add for a certain beer brand: it kind left you with a bitter taste in your mouth and not in a good way).
How do you actually load the smart tube app on your TV? I have a chromecast btw.
EDIT: Just figured it out. Involves installing the Downloader app on my chromecast from the Google Play Store, then within the Downloader app I downloaded and installed the Smart Tube apk file from GitHub (after enabling Developer Mode in chromecast settings first).
Tested it on a gamer content creator channel and it skipped the sponsor segment at the very beginning. I’m in!
I suspect that youtube is intentionally flinging these assholes' content at younger men beyond what would be expected of the algorithm being left to its own devices. Facebook does something similar in that their algorithms were intentionally designed to result in polarization in a general sense. Conflict and extremism generates more profitable noise than reasoned debate does.
Reddit does this too. They pretend that they're a "bastion of free speech" (when it suits them) when in reality they like the conflict that results from extremist views generating more profitable noise. These companies are doing what the profit tells them to do and the profit is telling them to nudge content in a direction that could very well eventually tear society apart.
@xkforce yeah youtube have a hair trigger for recommending Andrew Tate.
The UK's Tate Modern gallery sent an art exhibition about Light to New Zealand and I was very specifically looking for info on when it closed. Next minute Andrew Tate popped up in my youtube feed and was quite hard to dislodge.
Lol I read all three formats. I have shit ton of physical books in my home and I have a serious buying issue where always buying more books and read them. And thanks to my library I have a Libby account and so far read over 26 books just through my kindle alone. Lastly I listen to audiobooks anytime I behind the wheel commuting to work or just driving. I just love to read and also love to write.
Clearly you don't read enough books... Like, bro, she's clearly absorbing the contents of the book through diffusion. If you don't know how to do this then you're clearly not in our league.
Obviously they are using osmosis via the ocular membrane... I was confused about why they needed a scarf. Reading that way uses a lot of energy and should generate copious amounts of heat via friction.
How does "had" add anything? how does one "had better." how is that grammar, how is it semantically useful. Its just an extra verb someone decided sounded good in middle english that weve been lugging around all this time. Its also not the correct tense for that sentence; for the future perfect tense in which the sentence was written, shouldnt it be "you've better?" or perhaps "you will have better?" even that isn't grammar though, and it doesn't actually semantically mean "you would be better to believe..." which is what both "you better" and "you'd better" are intended to be understood as. In my opinion.
I have a strategy to avoid this. You might find it helpful also.
I go through stuff and set aside in boxes anything that I think might be useful, but I don’t really want or need. This brings that item into my mind, the same way throwing it out does. I label the boxes with the date, and either donate or trash, and put stuff in accordingly.
If a box sits unopened for 6 months, I toss it or donate it without opening it and seeing what’s inside. If I open a box to use something, I put the new date on it and reset the clock.
Then there’s no pain from actually getting rid of stuff. There’s no “man I just threw that out!” regret.
I'm male, and bi. I'm about equally bad at picking up on hints from men and women, but it seems more common with men to just flat out state what they want, either immediately, or after I miss their clue, which I'd presume to be cultural.
I'm bad with social clues in general, so I dunno if it's a male-thing, or a me-thing.
I'm not sure if @FatTony is talking about romantic hints or all hints, but I think in many cultures women are socialised to be little a bit more Guess Culture than men, even if it doesn't come naturally. The same goes for LGBTQ+ in cultures that are repressive. And of course some nationalities tend towards one or the other.
As someone whose natural state is very Ask, I found this concept really helpful. Sometimes I straight out ask the Guess people if they are hinting to me.
The funny thing is, despite often being bad at ascertaining what is being hinted at, I have very much been raised in a 'guess' culture, a family that found itself to be very high-brow and fancy, which lasted until the companies went bust, and the debt caught up to them.
Anyway, that leads to me, while having lots of problem with reading 'guess' people (unless they grew up in similar circumstances, that usually helps), also apparently being pretty hard to read for many conversation partners.
In the end, I found that jumping over my shadow and just spelling out what I'm trying to say, ask, or think I'm being asked, usually resolves things.
@VeganCheesecake yeah I was raised in a mostly 'guess' family as well! They think I'm oafish.
You're right it does cut both ways. My 'guess' ex thought I was super hard to read because they couldn't grasp that I literally meant exactly what I said not some extra hidden meaning.
These days I'm with another 'ask' person so the only stress like that is figuring out what our mothers are trying to get at.
My mother's actually pretty approachable in that regard, she's a surgeon from a mostly working class family that married in. Anyone else can be pretty difficult though. Especially the part of the family that didn't crash and burn financially, though they life on the other side of the country, luckily.
I'm usually a bit taken aback when I meet a 'guess' person that gets legitimately offended when being asked stuff directly, because pretty much everyone in my circle is pretty chill.
I guess everyone is living in their own world, in the end.
That's interesting how it's linked to social class so clearly in your family!
Come to think of it, the guessiest guesser in my life is from an industrial factory-labourer workingclass background, but different country. They experience direct requests as confrontations, so they are very easy to inadvertently hurt. It used to exasperate me, until I read the above concept.
Yeah, kinda curious, might also be one families customs vs the others, though. Might also be a family that became wealthy at the turn of the last century, and then got stuck in the way they thought they where expected to act, enforced via 'traditions' taught. Dunno, really.
The guessiest person I ever met was actually the mother of my last partner. She was, on the one hand, usually offended by direct requests, while also very much assuming and extrapolating things from anything indirect one said, to the point where she often became incredibly offended by things no one said, but that she heard. It was exhausting, to a degree, and my first instinct was that she was looking for things to be offended about, either consciously or subconsciously, but I also feel that I can't really judge someone for the way they perceive the world.
I think once you get a group of people all guessing it normalizes it within a family as well maybe?
It really is a perception thing I think, but yeah it can feel incredibly exhausting for us, instinctively oppo and I guess frustrating for them.
I had some insight once when a sibling was complaining about how they kept making excuses not to pick up a gift they'd accepted and they seemed genuinely angry the person was still offering and hadn't "taken the hint" they don't actually want it. It's flabbergasting to me but seems like that's really how they see things.
One way to normalise it was probably that there where euphemisms seen as the acceptable way to hint at, or say something. I guess.
And yeah. I think people just need to come to terms with there being a range of ways others express themselves, and that they can't expect everyone will just understand their specific way immediately.
[Outdated, please look at pinned post] Casual Conversation
Top