I was referring to how the Roman calendar only had 355 days. It was fucking stupid.

The Gregorian calendar was 6 days ahead due to not having leap years yet.

Still better than the Roman Calendar

I also disagree with your take on well written villains. A well written villain can totally believe itself to be a big victim who is in denial about how evil they are.

Please note that I said “Most well written villains”. I wasn’t trying to speak in absolutes.

Touché.

But still: Heresy

I just thoroughly disproved their claim that “objective morality” comes from God a couple days ago, and the nut just kept yammering incoherently.

Just report, block, and move on. They’re not worth wasting your time on

I wouldn’t exactly call lemmy.ml a far left server. They’re more tankies, which is more defined by the philosophy of “America Bad, so their rivals must be Good”.

As a US citizen, the country has a lot of problems (especially with the current administration) but Putin and Jinping are still authoritarian despots.

Who spells “Gary” with 2 r’s?

In the original animated version, sure. Because that version had good writing, especially for villains.

Most well written villains are unapologetic and just naturally evil. They know they’re evil and they don’t care. For some reason, most movies nowadays (particularly Disney) now insist on their villains having some tragic backstory and thinking they’re good

Or Rimworld

But listen, epistemologically, you’ll encounter the is-ought problem, and without taking an “objective judge” into consideration morality will always be fought by corrupt scholars.

You literally ignored the entire point behind my previous comment. You don’t need to establish an “objective judge” because the traditional ideas of morality are already observable as an optimal strategy to go through life, and we can observe it via experimentation.

I don’t get why you insist on a nonsensical rant instead of just letting the other person have the last word when they prove you wrong. And at this point, I don’t care. You’re not worth wasting anymore time on. If you insist on sticming your head in the sand and ignore reality, then go ahead, but you’re not going to be bothering me with it because you’re getting blocked. Tata

The problem with Sig is they work too oftem, particularly when you don’t want them to

As a country though we’re making the choice to prioritise lives over convenience, as we often do. And for that I am happy.

Except restricting gun ownership isn’t necessary for that. The motivations for gun crimes are the same as any violent crime, in that they’re largely done out of desperation. Because of that, your best way to reduce gun crime is to reduce violent crime, which is done by improving people economic conditions: nationalize healthcare, have strong workers rights, properly tax the wealthy, improve environmental quality.

As you can probably tell, the US really sucks at what I described, hence the higher rates of violence. What’s frustrating is that Europe did fix them, but also restricted access to guns and continually (and incorrectly) points to that as the reason they have little violent crime.

Also, another thing to note is that a lot of gun control proponents tend to point solely to “gun crime” not “violent crime”. That’s disingenuous because they’re only looking at the methods, not the actual motivations

And how can I talk about objective morality without God?

Here it is! Here it fucking is! The single most overused thought-terminating fallacy that Jesus nuts like to pull out!

The answer to your question is that we don’t need a deity to declare what objective right and wrong are. We can use game theory. If you want to watch an admittedly better explanation of it, Veritasium made a video on it last year, but I’ll recap it below.

Decades ago, researchers set up an experiment where they paired various algorithms against each other, with each algorithm having different rules for approaching the prisoner dillema. And each pairing went on for hundreds of turns. Then the researchers tallied up all the scores. Thry noticed that almost all of the “nice” algorithms scored higher then almost all of the “mean” algorithms. And they redid the experiment multiple times with tweaks to the experiment, like randomizing the length of interactions between algorithms.

The overall rules that caused this highest scores were:

1. Start off picking the option to cooperate
2. After the first exchange, respond in the same way they were treated in the first round
3. A decision to not cooperate only affects the next decision, it doesn’t continuously affect every decision after that
4. On rare occasions (<10%), cooperate on the next turn even if the other algorithm chose to not cooperate.

Essentially it boils down to being polite, treating others how you wish to be treated, and being forgiving past transgressions. Strangely similar to what religions tend to teach, right?

It turns out, these are actually emergent properties that appear in any system where you have series of interactions between individuals. It’s not divine provenance, it’s natural selection.

I swear automation is taking the soul out of eating out.

Goddamn fleshlights are ruining everything!

Honestly, what I find frustrating is that even if a private seller wanted to run a background check, they can’t. Only FFL’s can do that. I think the ATF needs to open it up so more people can run them.

Don’t you mean “why do you need that many guns, you gun nut?”

I’ve seen this argument used in the context that the average gun owner in the US owns 2-3 guns. For context, that’s not the number of guns in the US per citizen, it’s the number per gun owner.

The person complaining was saying that nobody needs more than 1 gun. This is a good example of non-gun owners getting reactionary because they don’t know what they’re talking about. What if someone owns a rifle, shotgun, and a pistol? That’s 3 guns, all of which serve very different purposes.

Plus a lot of people don’t seem to factor in that sport shooting is a thing. Personally, I regularly take a dynamics class, where you go through a variety of scenarios where you’re moving between positions while shooting. There’s also competition formats that do this too.

Not only that, people don’t seem to understand that competition guns and everday carry guns are usually fairly different too. Much like how I wouldn’t want to drive a Lamborghini to pick up groceries or haul a trailer, I generally wouldn’t want to use a Sig P365 (a concealed carry gun) for a competition.

That signature American bloodthirst

Ah, yes, because it was clearly Americans that perpetrated the French and Bolshevik revolutions

The smart ones just take the product out of the packaging and leave it on the shelf somewhere.

Wait, so they take packaging but not the item? Weird.

/s

Not really, and that’s extrapolating from God’s words

1: No it isn’t. And even if it was, why should anyone care? The bible says that mixing linen and wool fibers or eating shellfish is a sin. A lot of the rules in the bible are made up bullshit.

2: Don’t bring religion into this

It gets really tiring watching people pretend like background checks don’t exist. There is no brick-and-mortar store where you can walk in, pay and walk out with a gun 5 minutes later no questions asked.

And that’s doubly so for online orders. Those have to get transferred to a local FFL who go through the background check when you pick it up