FishFace

@FishFace@lemmy.world

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. For a complete list of posts, browse on the original instance.

Google Allows Creditors to Brick Your Phone ( lemmy.world )

I installed NetGuard about a month ago and blocked all internet to apps, unless they're on a whitelist. No notifications from this particular system app (that can't be disabled) until recently when it started making internet connection requests to google servers. Does anyone know when this became a thing?...

FishFace ,

Yes? That's why loans with collateral charge a lower interest rate than unsecured loans.

FishFace ,

Hey if you're colourblind, all blues can be blurple. And so can all purples!

FishFace ,

Most of the death toll is women and children (7k and 10k, respectively). Even if you assume all men killed are Hamas fighters, which is not true, that is very high when compared to the attack which triggered the war.

FishFace ,

There is no need to "play devil's advocate" - if you believe something, argue for it. If you don't believe something but think I'm missing something, you can point it out and make a case for why it's important without being confusing about what you actually believe.

All evidence I have seen is that Hamas does not systematically use child soldiers. We can see the indiscriminate tactics of the IDF; we can put that together with the high death toll to make a reasonable conclusion that vast numbers of civilians have been killed. You're trying to cast doubt on this idea but the amount of doubt is akin to flicking water from your fingers onto a housefire.

FishFace ,

You say this:

interpreting casualty numbers that a militant group releases with clear propaganda intent in a light most favorable to them...

but just said this:

Statistically, half their forces are minors.

Pull the other one. If all you wanted was for people not to interpret casualty numbers "in a light most favourable to Hamas" you'd be acknowledging how high the death toll is while making your point instead of trying to distract from it.

With carmakers in a ‘state of shock’ over Tesla-beating BYD’s prices, EU investigators will visit China’s EV giants as part of an anti-subsidy probe ( fortune.com )

China might have problems with its economy, but as an exporter of affordable electric vehicles, it’s on a tear. Now, investigators from the European Commission will visit Chinese EV makers as part of a probe into whether they have an unfair advantage thanks to government subsidies....

FishFace ,

The article doesn't suggest it's impossible. It's difficult because you have to build up a competitive business from nothing in addition to the one you're already building up.

FishFace ,

Tesla is headquartered in an ally of the EU; BYD isn't. Maybe Tesla's subsidies are a problem to the EC - I don't know. But you're looking at it in a slightly simple way, as if it's very important that this process needs to be fair.

It doesn't need to be fair; it needs to be good for the EU. Is it good for the EU to impose tariffs on subsidised Chinese vehicles coming in (if indeed they are subsidised)? Quite possibly. (Quite possibly not: how important is it to have a big car manufacturing industry, versus your population having cheaper cars?) Whether it would also be good to impose tariffs on Tesla vehicles is also a valid question to ask, but those questions don't have to have the same answer.

FishFace ,

If the US said they were going to stop providing military support and tech it may well stop it...

FishFace ,

There is a great desire to see this kind of turnabout - for a long time people have said, without evidence, that the most anti-gay people are closeted, self-hating gay people themselves.

The real reason for this is because that juxtaposition, when it does occasionally happen, sticks in the mind precisely because it's so weird. But good luck backing it up, especially to the degree people portray it, as you have done. (which is fairly black and white, "more hetero people don't really think about this kind of thing")

FishFace ,

Did you read the article? The point here is that there is a division in conservative circles, so talking about conservative men as a single group is missing the point.

The same division, presumably, exists among conservative women (albeit bearing in mind that in the USA men are more conservative than women) so there will be an alliance between pearl-clutching Christian women who decry the debauchery, and women who are feminist but for whom feminism culminated with the third wave, for whom objectification exemplified in a mildly raunchy calendar is something to, at worst, roll ones eyes at.

So by all means enjoy the division in conservative ranks, and hope that it splits their base and ruins their chances of victory, but at least understand what is going on properly. What you think of as "respecting women" is probably not what conservative women think of as respecting women; you're judging and understanding their beliefs through your own lens, in a way that makes you misunderstand quite badly.

FishFace ,

Is this a reference to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vB9JgxhXW5w or have you just converged there by happy accident? :P

FishFace ,

That makes it so much better :D

FishFace ,

I know what conservative women consider to be “respect,” and was applying their standards to this subject. Even by their absolute bottom of the barrel expectations, men are letting them down in this case.

Do you think the conservative women who appeared in the calendar agree with you? I would guess they don't. So it seems to me your understanding of the spectrum of opinion is clearly missing something.

Maybe your views on this are out of whack because of spending "huge amounts of time" in a community with a view of conservatism skewed by their unique experiences? That's not a knock against doing so or against those people, just that fundies have particularly extreme experiences of politics and religion which is bound to mean you hear a lot of outliers.

so this “division” is really just a disagreement about how they want to be disrespectful - via mildly titillating pictures, or via religious control.

I am not conservative but I don't think looking at mildly titillating pictures of women is disrespectful, and I think that's an opinion which is pretty common across the political spectrum in the West.

FishFace ,

I think you've missed my assertion, which is that this is an example of confirmation bias. Listing examples of that confirm what I'm claiming is confirmation bias isn't saying much. What about the thousands of people coming out as gay who haven't got a history of anti-LGBT shit? Well they aren't as interesting so you don't remember them when you read such an article.

Your link is broken, but consider this: human beings are perfectly capable of hating one another for any difference, real or perceived. We don't doubt that racism is down to hatred of the other, rather than the self, we don't doubt that sexism is the same. Why is homophobia any different? Only because there is the potential for someone to be secretly gay.

FishFace ,

Thanks for the SciHub link, but it doesn't say what you're saying it does. It says that a particular kind of upbringing predicts a discrepancy between self-reported sexuality and a measure of "implicit sexuality." They further found a relationship between self-reported straightness and homophobia when "implicit sexuality" was measured as "more gay".

Leaving aside the fact that (in my quick read-through, at least) although there was a lot of effort given to validating that this measure measured something, there was little effort given to validating that it measured sexuality, this correlation does not allow one to conclude that "those who profess anti-gay views are likely to be gay themselves" which is the distillation of what was expressed above. Let us start from someone who professes those views. The research means that, if you know this detail of their upbringing and if you know that they explicitly identify as straight (not the same thing as public identification) then you can predict (with clear statistical significance, but still quite low correlation) that that person scores highly on this measure of "implicit homosexuality".

If you check the summary table you can actually just read off the correlation coefficient between homophobic views and the measure of implicit homosexuality and see that it's not statistically significant.

And I do think that the measure of implicit sexuality, though clearly interesting and measuring something is equally clearly not a measure of "are you gay regardless of what you say about yourself." It's reasonable to believe we can use it to estimate homosexuality, but it's like measuring distance with a ruler where all the markings have been scraped off. So even if a study like this did have a correlation with its measure, you then would have to mute the strength of that correlation by the strength of correlation between the measure and the underlying reality we're interested in.

FishFace ,

The detail here is that she applied for settled status, which would have granted her leave to remain in (and hence to enter) the country, but it was refused. Pending her appeal she was temporarily granted the right to work in the UK, but she was not temporarily granted the right to remain, it seems - or at least that's what the Home Office position implies.

It seems like an oversight to me: the application for settled status allows you to leave for up to 6 months at a time and come back and still qualify; if you can still work while you're appealing a decision, it would make sense to temporarily allow the person into the country.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • random
  • test
  • worldmews
  • mews
  • All magazines
    •