Lurker > adjl

lihlih posted...

Dudes, Hooters reversed their decision on the uniforms. Now they're making it so the girls can choose which bottoms to wear.

That's really the ideal. Presumably there'll end up being some disparity in tips, which is unfortunate, but that's pretty much inevitable within the business model of "earn tips by being slutty to drunk guys." Those that are comfortable being sluttier will do better within that model, and there's really never going to be a way around that.

Conner4REAL posted...

Here the girls signed on to wear a skimpy uniform, there was no nudity there still is none.

"Skimpy" has an enormous amount of room for subjective interpretation. Those that signed on before the uniform change signed on because they were comfortable with the old uniform. That does not in any way mean they're going to be comfortable with a skimpier uniform, nor should it.

Zeus posted...

I'm kinda digging these outfits, particularly that first image.

That first image looks like a 12-year-old. That's pretty gross, dude.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

BlackScythe0 posted...

It was his employee which is very unethical.

It is, but it's also extremely tame by workplace impropriety standards.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

faramir77 posted...

The quality of policing in Seattle is about to go way up.

Indeed. Removing officers that put their ill-informed personal feelings ahead of public safety is possibly one of the best things that could have happened to the force.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

helIy posted...

the city with the highest crime rate in america swaps between detroit michigan and st louis missouri

chicago doesn't even make the top 10

Excuse you my world view relies heavily on movies set during prohibition please stop trying to tell me that Chicago isn't a major hub of crime.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

streamofthesky posted...

I voted depends based on the above, but since it's common to advertise college as a "must" that will definitely lead to a better job/income no matter what you do there, it kinda is. Don't blame him for saying that.

Pretty much. Bonus points where new graduates struggling with debt are criticized for making poor financial decisions as 17-year-olds that have spent their entire lives being told that college is a necessity if they want to get anywhere.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Zeus posted...

If Chicago doesn't want cops, it doesn't have to have cops. But I'd wonder if most law-abiding citizens want to live in a city without cops.

Can you really claim that the loss of cops that demonstrably don't care about public safety is actually going to make a difference?

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

MagicalPrincess posted...

And they can all sue if fired since it's completely unconstitutional and illegal to force anyone to put anything inside someone's body.

You keep saying this, but it doesn't get any more accurate. Nobody's being forced, and mandating vaccines as a condition of employment and other forms of participating in society was ruled constitutional before your grandparents were born.

Heck, for that matter, even if it was forced, capital punishment by means of lethal injection is completely constitutional and legal in 27 states. Those states have already made their peace with the idea of forcibly injecting somebody for the sake of public safety. Not sure why they're getting so uppity about doing that here.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

bulbinking posted...

Lightning. Use the electricity to make a fireproof robot army.

You need quite a bit more than just electricity to build a robot army. Case in point: We've had electricity for 200 years and we don't have robot armies yet, and very much not because we don't have enough power available.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

wwinterj25 posted... Actually yeah in the USA paying more than double the price just to access some N64 and Genesis games is bad. I can only hope they add more to the service like more retro platforms and voice chat. Adding DLC for it's first party games to the subscription is however a interesting idea.

They definitely won't be adding voice chat to the service, since that would require new hardware. The Switch simply doesn't have any microphones built into it. They could conceivably update the system to be compatible with USB or Bluetooth mics (they actually just updated it to work with Bluetooth headphones), but I haven't seen anything to suggest that they aren't satisfied with the model of operating the service through smartphones (since that satisfies the need without requiring most users to buy any additional hardware or making changes to the system's functionality).

I do, however, suspect that more than just AC's expansion will end up included in this. The model of "pay for this premium subscription and get DLC for major games for free" is pretty reasonable if the VC side of things is seen as a bonus on top of that. Whether or not that ends up being compelling, though, remains to be seen. It's not particularly enticing with just AC in there, and the only other significant contemporary DLC I can think of is the Age of Calamity one (which is already out and not a particularly mainstream game). I can't think of anything else upcoming that could benefit from such a program, so I feel like it's still going to be a pretty weak offering. Nevertheless, it remains to be seen.

Revelation34 posted...

Sounds like Nintendo is just incredibly cheap. Valve has free cloud saves and are worth far less than Nintendo.

True, but it's kind of a given that PC online is a better, more valuable service than any console online. I'm not surprised that Nintendo is falling just as short in that regard as every other paid online service.

Flappers posted...

I really truly don't understand how that's no big deal. Please answer me why it's okay.

It's a problem, but that's the unfortunate reality of data storage. I've lost save files to corrupted memory cards (Gamecube 1019 card, just died one day and I lost everything that couldn't be/hadn't been backed up). I've lost save files that were on cartridges for no apparent reason, and the risk of any old cartridge losing my files because their batteries die is ever-present. I've lost save files on computers because hard drives have died. I back stuff up when possible, which helps mitigate the risk, but the fact of the matter is that you're going to end up losing some save data here and there, no matter how it's stored.

That said, complete system failure is pretty rare. I've had the disc drives die in my GC and Wii, and in the latter case, my save data was copied over to the new system when I sent it in for repairs. That's pretty standard for Nintendo. It's not going to help with cases where the system is stolen or has the storage damaged/corrupted (though if that's happening, there's a fair chance that whatever game you're worried about is going with it), but it does the job for any other system failures. That's why I don't consider it a huge deal: It's unlikely enough that it's not a risk that's worth getting worked up over.

Should it be possible to back stuff up? Yes, and to that end, a shift to read-only media is actually better (you can't really back up individual game carts, while it's relatively easy to back up other forms of storage). But that doesn't mean that saving stuff outside of cartridges is a major problem.

Black_Crusher posted...

I could be mis-remembering but one of the Etrian Odyssey games I own has one save slot devoted to the card and the rest are on the system itself.

I think it varies by game, I'm not 100% sure.

Revelation34 posted...

This is blatantly false. Expansion packs were always on physical disks that installed on a computer. DLC stands for downloadable content which means it's digital only.

Expansion packs were DLC before digital distribution was a common thing. They're not literally downloadable, no, but they're conceptually and functionally identical in that they're optional post-purchase content that can be added to the game by people that want to buy them. It's not "blatantly false," it's just looking beyond the strict literal interpretation of the term "DLC" and considering what function that concept actually serves.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Not personally, but my mom's boyfriend's brother-in-law did, as did the aunt of one of my coworkers. Another coworker had a friend that ended up in the ICU, but he survived (last I heard, he was learning how to walk again). That's all I can think of off-hand.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

deoxxys posted...

At the end of the day all I'm saying is it feels terrible to be cheated on, like in sometimes it can make you feel bad enough to want to commit suicide and I dont think we should accept that its okay to tempt people who are in a dedicated relationship. But Im also saying sexual urges are powerful carnal desires which can sometimes overwrite our better judgement. My duality is leaking through.

And what I'm saying is that the responsibility for cheating lies solely on the person who made the decision to cheat, because the other party has no obligation and has made no commitment to respect their relationship. It's inconsiderate in the sense that the other party is saying "I don't care about *cheated partner*'s feelings, but *cheated partner* is a complete stranger (in this case), so there's no reason to expect them to care about that (note that sleeping with a friend's partner is definitely a dick move because one should care about one's friends' feelings). The person doing the cheating is the one that's deciding to betray their partner. That's what should be focused on.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Flappers posted...

All I need to know is that I can play my file of ACNL or Pokemon Diamond on any DS system so long as I have the cartridge.

Are you thinking of Wild World? New Leaf was the 3DS one, and I'm fairly certain that its saves were stored on the system and not the cartridge (though I bought it digitally, so I'm not 100% sure).

Flappers posted...

I don't understand why they decided that was okay.

The same reason they "decided it was okay" for every single disc-based system that's ever come out: read-only media provides a lot of advantages in terms of just how much game you can fit into the medium. That carries the disadvantage of requiring external saves, but that problem is quite easily solved by using either memory cards or some manner of internal storage on the system (which has the advantage of allowing you to keep your save if your copy of the game is lost/damaged, to borrow somebody else's copy without worrying about overwriting their saves, or to have a potentially infinite number of save files). Like discs, 3DS and Switch carts are read-only, so saves have to be stored somewhere other than the cartridge.

Flappers posted...

They even recognized this was an issue and tried to patch it by offering Cloud saves -- but not all Switch games support that feature.

Characterizing it as a "patch" isn't particularly accurate. Cloud saves are a specific service that they started offering. It's not a matter of adjusting code, it's a matter of building and running servers that will automatically copy your system's data. Similarly, games not supporting cloud saves isn't a bug, technical limitation, or compatibility issue, it's a matter of Nintendo specifically deciding to exclude those games, usually under the pretense of preventing cheating in online games (which is a pretty flimsy excuse given how little effort they put into stopping other forms of cheating, but that's Nintendo for you).

Flappers posted...

Anyway, I don't think it is something they can fix -- it's just how they programmed the console.

Oh, they absolutely could fix it. The system has an SD card slot and several USB ports. There's no reason they couldn't push out a firmware update that would allow us to save a backup file on that SD card or an attached external hard drive, which could be copied to any computer storage as desired. They choose not to for the sake of making NSO's cloud saves more appealing. That is something worth criticizing them for.

Flappers posted...

I probably just got angry and failed to get my point across in the right way. In fact, I'm positive this is my fault because this is literally the only time I've ever stated this opinion and gotten backlash to this degree.

It's more that this is just a really baffling opinion to have in 2021, especially when you're using it to single out one particular system. The fact that the GBA and DS stored save data on their game cartridges instead of using memory cards or internal storage was very much the exception, not the norm, and the DS hasn't been contemporary for 10 years. Starting in 2001 with the GC taking over from the N64, every single home console used discs, as did the PSP (I don't think we need to count the N-Gage as a relevant part of the mid 2000's handheld market). Heck, even before that, the Saturn and PS1 both used discs as early as 94, with the N64 being the only console to hold out (and even then, several of its games didn't have space on the cartridges for saves and required an external memory card). If we want to toss PC's into the mix, they've literally never had any system other than saving files locally, since writing to external media has always been slow and impractical compared to using their hard drives.

If you were making this post 20 years ago, or possibly even 10 if you were focusing specifically on handhelds (though the Switch can be expected to lean toward more demanding games due to also existing in the console market, so treating it entirely as a handheld isn't entirely reasonable), it might make sense. As it stands, though, you're complaining about something that has been the norm for a very long time as though it's unique to the Switch, and that's just weird. The Switch should have the option to back up saves without needing an NSO subscription, yes, but there's absolutely no reason to expect saves to be stored on the game cards themselves.

Flappers posted...

I haven't gotten ACNH yet but I really want to.

I just want to wait until I have a stable job and am comfortable with paying for the Cloud saves.

For what it's worth, they hang on to your cloud saves for something like 2 years after your NSO subscription lapses, so if you aren't comfortable paying a full $20 for a year of the service, you can pay for single months for $4 and that will create a backup of all of your saves as they are at the end of that month. It's not perfect, but you could potentially exploit that to create snapshots every few months without spending as much as a full year would cost.

Also, AC isn't compatible with the regular cloud saves, but it does have its own backup feature that still requires an NSO subscription. Just FYI.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Yeah, I parsed that as him saying that it was concerning that Walgreens could make such an error, not that it warranted concern over the safety of the vaccines. I fully expect anti-vaxxers to try to claim that this warrants concern over their safety, but it really doesn't (beyond the safety concerns that every single drug has, namely the need for dosage considerations).

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Flappers posted...

How is that an unfair opinion?

Mostly, you're misunderstanding the nature of the problem and insisting on a solution that isn't actually practical. Game saves haven't been saved on the physical game itself for nearly a decade, or two if we're looking at consoles. Even with cartridges, modern data transfer needs mean that bidirectional data transfer isn't really viable. The system is pulling data from the cartridge at such a rate that putting data back onto it isn't an option. Given how cheap internal storage is now, it's much more feasible to store save data on that internal storage.

The solution is not to save data on the cartridges themselves, but to allow that internal storage to be backed up. That's where Nintendo is falling short. Other systems offer options for backing up their drives yourself. The only option the Switch has, though, is the cloud save service they've locked behind a paywall. It's a very cheap paywall ($20/year is basically nothing, or even less if you split a plan with other people), but there should still be a free backup option.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

wwinterj25 posted...

In the UK the normal online is 20 for the year and I expected 30 - 40 for this. Turns out I wasn't wrong as it's 35.

Odd. The normal online is $20 in the US, then the expanded version is $50. 35 works out to slightly less than the $50, but 20 is $27. Not sure why the base price is so much higher (15 would have lined up with the 20 USD price point), and the expansion price is still just as expensive, but at least the upgrade cost is more palatable there because it's a smaller increase over the base.

wwinterj25 posted...

I'm not going to get hot and bothered over something being 5 more a year than I would like.

It's less that the price difference is exorbitant and more that there's just nothing there that would be worth $30 extra over the already-questionable $20. As it stands, the base NSO package really doesn't do much to justify even its very low cost, and gets away with it only because $20/year is pretty negligible. A handful of the most common N64 and Genesis games (read: games that are likely to already be owned in some other capacity or that can currently be purchased elsewhere) and temporary access to a DLC for a game many people don't actually play really don't justify more than doubling the base price.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Flappers posted...

Never-mind being able to save your game on your cartridge (like a normal system), the files now save on the console itself.

Uhh, that's been standard on all consoles (including Nintendo's) since like 2001, when discs took over. It was in the form of memory cards then, as opposed to storing it on the system itself, but internal storage is the natural evolution of that. Even in the handheld space, the DS was the last system to save data to cartridges instead of on the system. The 3DS stored saves internally.

Flappers posted...

On the bright side, at least you can backup your save data in cloud... For money.

Yeah, paywalling save backups isn't cool. Charging for cloud saves, sure. Servers aren't free, after all. Having those paywalled cloud saves be the only option for backing up the system, though, rather than offering any sort of offline backup functionality? That's no good.

Flappers posted...

But even playing alone, you still have after-games to enjoy...if you pay for them in DLC.

Uhh, what? I can count on one hand the number of Switch games I've bought DLC for, and I've gotten plenty of enjoyment out of it. Heck, I actually can't think of a single Switch game I've bought DLC for, though I've been meaning to grab it for BotW, Snipperclips, and Xenoblade for about as long as their respective DLC's have been out (which still fits on one hand). You definitely don't need to buy DLC to enjoy single-player games.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

deoxxys posted...

I mean yeah no can be said but its still best not to offer a diabetic a donut or and alcoholic a drink.

In either case, though, the person offering isn't going to know that that's something the recipient would rather avoid until they're told. Once they've been asked to stop offering, absolutely, continuing to do so is a dick move, but I haven't suggested that that's any less true in this situation (and, in fact, responding to "no" with further pressure to engage in sexual activity could be characterized as attempted rape, depending on the circumstances). The individual's wishes should be respected, but the one providing the temptation has no responsibility to figure out those wishes before making the offer, nor do they have any responsibility to assume that any requests the individual makes shouldn't be taken at face value.

In the case of actual addictions, there are potentially concerns about the person's ability to properly consent, such that a bit more onus can be placed on the person offering to recognize when they shouldn't do so, but even then, it's not reasonable to expect them to show that restraint unless they've been given reason to. That also isn't particularly applicable here: Dude isn't addicted to anything, he was just horny.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

faramir77 posted...

Sounds like a huge lawsuit in the making. The pharmacist who fucked up is in serious hot water.

It also is troubling that this somehow will be spun into a logically fallacious "gotcha" talking point by antivax dipshits.

Exactly this. This is a major error by the pharmacist that should never have happened, and it's really unfortunate that it's going to do substantial harm to the public's trust in the vaccines because anti-vaxxers are going to spin this into indicating that the vaccines are dangerous and shouldn't be given to anyone. Most likely, those side effects are due to the dosage, not any inherent danger in the vaccine. Give 4/5-year-olds adult doses of any drug, and they'll have issues.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

SomeUsername529 posted...

It's a moba, dude. Obviously all games exist to make money but mobas and gacha games are dlc/micro-transaction vehicles first and games second.

Pokemon Unite is exceptionally bad in that regard, though. You can be heavily monetized and not have literally five different premium currencies to keep people from realizing how much they're spending.

Kimbos_Egg posted...

are they fucking crazy with that nso pricing??

Yeah, that's too much. Tacking on the AC DLC for "free" makes it a bit more palatable, but that's not particularly meaningful for those that don't play AC, and $30 for a year of access to two dozen old games that are available in many other places is just asking way too much. If they make a habit of adding in other large DLC's, I might call it worthwhile, and it'll get a bit better once the library expands a bit, but if the lethargic drip feed of NES/SNES games is any indication, I don't expect the N64/Genesis libraries to ever be worth that much. I was expecting $10 extra, in which case I'd have checked it out once the library expanded to include N64 games I don't already own. Maybe $15. $30 is ridiculous.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

deoxxys posted...

I dont want to live in a world where its considered "okay" to tempt people in dedicated relationships.

Why not? That seems like a pretty easy problem to solve with judicious use of the word "no." Nothing about this was in any way non-consensual.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

wwinterj25 posted...

I'd imagine it's down to the person not gender or sex as to if they are easy to please or not when it comes to sex.

Generally speaking, guys are going to get more out of bad sex than women are. Whatever happens, "squishy hole feel good" is going to be enough to make for a somewhat enjoyable experience (at the very least, an upgrade over your hand), even if the woman does literally nothing. Conversely, if a guy does literally nothing, women aren't going to see much of an improvement over just taking care of themselves.

I'd say the skill ceiling is about the same, once people put some real effort into learning how to improve and help their partners enjoy sex, but if we're talking about two people that know very little about how to please each other, the guy's generally going to have the better time.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

OhhhJa posted...

Most people are on the side of defending Chapelle though. Like the overwhelming majority of people. It's a small whiny minority that aren't

adjl posted...

Remember that most of the people defending this sort of behaviour don't actually see that as a problem.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

agesboy posted...

remember this is an issue that causes a massive suicide rate among younger trans people

Remember that most of the people defending this sort of behaviour don't actually see that as a problem.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

If I'm in a call where unmuting myself to laugh might be appropriate, I'm genuinely not going to be muted in the first place because it'll be a more casual, smaller-scale sort of conversation.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

BEERandWEED posted...

After marriage, have all the sex you want

So you do want somebody that treats sex like a recreational activity.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Oh my...

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

BEERandWEED posted...

I don't want to marry someone who treats sex like a recreational activity.

I take it you also do/plan to abstain from sex except for the purpose of procreation?

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

It's not a common thing to do, but I've seen it. Raspberries generally work better as a topping, though, whether whole or in compote form.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Celebrated by everybody dressing up like Jesus and wearing dildos on their heads?

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

BEERandWEED posted...

You think people only live less than 51 years?

Hint: Somebody born in 361 was born before 1970.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Courage is the magic that turns dreams into reality.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Revelation34 posted...

I always found them to be pretty meh. If I'm having a pancake that isn't just plain buttermilk then it would be a fruit one of some kind.

I find chocolate chip pancakes work particularly well with a couple other additions on top of that (namely fruit). On their own, they are indeed pretty underwhelming. One of my favourite ways to do pancakes, though, is to have chocolate chip pancakes with fresh raspberries, a homemade orange syrup, and whipped cream. That's a delicious combo, and I prefer that configuration to making raspberry pancakes and drizzling it with chocolate syrup.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

SKARDAVNELNATE posted...

If you want to know who controls you, look at who you are not allowed to criticize.

You heard it here, folks: The country is controlled by trans people.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Not entirely unlike the Bible.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

OhhhJa posted...

Comedy has always made jokes at the expense of people. It's usually funnier than trying to filter out what jokes you can and cannot make. And what exactly marks the distinction between jokes about trans people that are or arent at their expense. Like what qualifies as not being at their expense because I feel like that's a difficult line to straddle

I'm getting a really strong vibe of "I like laughing at marginalized people, stop telling me I shouldn't!" from pretty much every post you've made here. It's not exactly a good look.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Nichtcrawler X posted...

So which one is it? Constitutional or God-Given rights?

Given the extent to which these people worship the constitution, I'm not sure they understand the difference.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

party_animal07 posted...

She wasn't arrested because she refused to wear a mask. She was arrested because she wouldn't vacate the property.

Eeyup. Seems like a pretty cut-and-dry trespassing charge. She even consented to the charge before being arrested for it.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Modest_Mouse posted...

which is probably one of the s***tiest songs ever written

Eh, I wouldn't say that. It's thoroughly unremarkable in pretty much every way and would have faded into obscurity almost immediately if it didn't have cultural significance forcibly attached to it, but "worst song ever" is a very, very competitive title, and I don't think it comes anywhere close to qualifying.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Now that's an effective terrorist attack. In a way, I'm actually kind of impressed.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

SunWuKung420 posted...

At first they came for the unvaccinated,
I didn't speak out because I was vaccinated....

You misunderstand. We're not "not speaking out" because we're vaccinated and therefore don't have to worry about vaccine enforcement measures. We're actively applauding those measures because we recognize that there can be no end to this pandemic without higher vaccination rates and/or isolating the unvaccinated so they can't undermine that.

This isn't a matter of "them" coming for the Jews and everyone else looking the other way. This is a matter of them coming for the Nazis and the Jews cheering for them (to use an analogy that very obviously differs in scale and gravity for the sake of remaining consistent with your own analogy). By the implementation of measures to punish and restrict the tyrants that have prolonged this nightmare, I'm finally getting a taste of the freedom that I and countless others have been working hard to secure for the past two years, and that's awesome. Stop trying to keep that freedom from me.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Far-Queue posted...

lmao white conservatives are truly the biggest crybaby sissy bitch snowflakes on the planet this is gold

Pretty much this. I can't really do anything but laugh at how butthurt these idiots are.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

SunWuKung420 posted...

The idea that total compliance must be given is totalitarian.

But nobody's suggesting total compliance. Just compliance with requirements that are obviously necessary for society to overcome the crisis situation that very clearly won't be going anywhere until something is done to protect society from the non-compliant. Thinking critically doesn't automatically mean disagreeing with the government or the masses.

SunWuKung420 posted...

Proof that you are capable of driving a vehicle is not the same has getting a shot that doesn't prevent you from getting or spreading a disease.

Having a license doesn't prevent the holder from being a bad driver. It just reduces that risk. I wonder what other contemporary issue might be analogous to that...

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

SunWuKung420 posted...

It's a dangerous precedent.

What, firing people for failing to comply with their workplace's healthy and safety regulations? That's not a new precedent at all, nor is it particularly dangerous. Quite the opposite, in fact.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

InfernalFive posted...

Why are you paying so much mind to a joke account lol

Because these are arguments I've seen made genuinely in enough other instances that I don't really care if this one is a legitimate instance or not. People actually believe these things, so rather than validating those beliefs by letting these arguments go unchallenged, I refute them as though they're being presented genuinely. It's all I can do to push back against the misinformation and fallacious arguments that are undermining the response to the pandemic.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

BEERandWEED posted...

Choosing between blueberry and raspberry is not discrimination.

It absolutely is. Discriminating against something is simply making a choice that excludes it, whatever that choice may be or however significant it is. The vast majority of the times the term "discrimination" is used in vernacular speech, it's in regards to racism and the like, which is generally a bad thing and creates the impression that discrimination is categorically bad, but that's not remotely true. As a concept, discrimination is neutral.

BEERandWEED posted...

Actual discrimination is always bad, regardless of who or why.

It's always bad to discriminate against unlicensed drivers? What about doctors that falsified their credentials? Chefs that refuse to ever wash their hands? Chefs that insist on putting six tablespoons of salt on every plate they send out?

There are plenty of unarguably beneficial discriminatory choices that you and everyone around you make every single day. Saying "discrimination is always bad" does absolutely nothing to support the point you're trying to make, and really only announces to the world that you don't actually understand what discrimination is or why/when it can be bad. Take this as an opportunity to learn. You'll be better for it.

Now, having learned, please attempt to tell me why you believe that discriminating against the unvaccinated is bad enough to outweigh the benefits. Otherwise, expect to have your opinion treated like the ignorant nonsense you are presenting it as.

BEERandWEED posted...

Just because it doesn't apply to you doesn't change that fact.

What makes you think no forms of discrimination apply to me?

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

OhhhJa posted...

But that's why it should just be covered by tax dollars and health insurance should be done away with entirely. Healthcare shouldn't be any different than firefighters or cops. Health and emergency services should be covered by tax dollars. It's pretty infuriating how much of my paycheck goes to the government every week yet I can't even just go to the doctor without worrying about opening up my wallet

Especially where the US government already pays more per capita for health care than any other country in the world. That's what really gets me. If it were a question of just shuffling people's current insurance payments into increased tax bills to cover the care, there'd be some room for argument (as outlined here, I'd say doing away with insurance companies' obfuscation and inconsistent coverage would justify such a change, even without getting into the humanitarian angle), but that's not even the case. The government has currently allocated enough tax dollars to provide health care to everyone (an assumption that's based on the fact that every other country in the world has managed that for less than half as much money) such that nobody would be paying anything extra for it at all.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

BEERandWEED posted...

I don't know why adjl thinks I need to justify my thoughts that unvaccinated don't deserve discrimination. Not discriminating is the justification.

Discrimination is a morally neutral concept. You discriminate when you choose to put blueberry jam on your toast instead of raspberry. There's is no inherent moral or logical merit in merely not discriminating (in fact, the choice to not discriminate is itself an act of discrimination, though that line of reasoning just gets silly).

Instead you need to consider what the benefits and drawbacks of any given act of discrimination are. Refusing to employ black people economically disadvantages an entire race while yielding no benefit whatsoever, so it's clearly bad. Refusing to allow drunk people to drive inconveniences a relatively small subset of people who voluntarily chose to drink in exchange for considerably reducing the risk of traffic fatalities, so it's clearly good.

You want to know why I think you need to justify your thoughts? That's because your thoughts do not in any way justify themselves. If you believe that discriminating against the unvaccinated will do more harm than good, explain that belief. On its own, "discrimination is bad" is completely devoid of semantic value.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Being fired is really just being hired by unemployment.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

captpackrat posted...

How can they fire you if you're unemployed?

By firing you from your current position of "unemployed."

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

BlockWatcher posted...

I didnt know they refused testing, or staying home when sick, or masking. Thank you.

How are mask/testing/isolation mandates any less "tyrannical" than vaccines? They all involve significantly more personal sacrifice (a term which I use very loosely, especially as regards masking) than vaccination does.

Past that, do you really think that people haven't been spouting that exact same drivel in response to mask, testing, and isolation mandates?

Further still, after almost two years of struggling to keep up with the pandemic by masking, testing, and having people isolate when sick, are you really trying to suggest that they will be adequate to qualify as "countermeasures that have any hope of working" without also involving a vaccine or other, more effective countermeasure?

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.