I don't think conservative Christians want to throw gay people off roofs, so although both hate gay people, I don't think they are equivalent
You stated your position, but I have no idea if it's politically viable
I am asking if there a path to have people stop fighting that is politically feasible, not just something that is right according to various beliefs.
I don't really see a plan here on how to change things, just a position. Is your position politically feasible? Would anyone agree to it?
I have a hard time reading books because get bored with facts and reading stuff that's long and don't like history. I am sure that Palestinian civilians are enduring horrors I can't totally fathom. I have read enough at this point to know how bad it has been for many civilians there. I believe you are very knowledgeable and you keep supporting your positions with data so you've gained enough credibility with me that I take a lot of what you are saying as having a historical basis.
There needs to be a way to have an inclusive corporate culture that celebrates cultures and backgrounds but also allows brutal honesty about products without people being afraid of accidentally offending others or being too indifferent to the corporation's success to speak up.
A lot of it probably relates to how often people are fired and how short tenures are with companies. If you have a short tenure with a company or are expecting to, does it matter if Company A does well instead of Company B or Company C? It probably doesn't, and with social media capturing one wrong offensive faux paus for eternity (by which I mean until the planet becomes uninhabitable 300 years from now), workers have every incentive to let disasters like this go to market.
I am judging Microsoft employees but likely would have said nothing if I were there too. With all the layoffs in tech, why risk it to say something controversial? Even my initial post on this got down-voted into the depths of an abyss just for mentioning that men and women see pornography in different ways sometimes, which should hardly be controversial. I don't know whether the votes were from men or women, but actually I imagine more women than men down-voted it, and even this guess will probably lead to additional down-votes.
I dislike people like Elon Musk for his cruelty towards transgender people (despite his admirable intelligence), and I dislike Donald Trump for his cruelty towards those who are different in any way, but I also feel like people should be able to have discussions about actual uncomfortable subjects without it being automatically offensive. The fact I was so heavily down-voted immediately tends to illustrate my point.
The point of the first two sentences is that because there is a large gender divide on whether porn is acceptable, a lot of times men and women don't discuss porn because the subject will lead to conflict. This isn't true of all members of both genders. Since corporations often have a mix of genders, bringing up the topic of porn and how a feature could alienate porn viewers would be an uncomfortable topic that would be easier to avoid because men and women find the topic uncomfortable often for different reasons. In Microsoft's case, it seems like no one at Microsoft brought up how male porn watchers might not like AI watching their pornhub history and recording it to a file, despite it seeming like it would be an obvious concern to any male at Microsoft who watches porn, and likely many do. These means their corporate culture is so selfish on their own career protection and focused on not offending others that they let a really bad feature that many hate go to market instead of talking openly how this would be a disaster out of fear that it could cause workplace conflict.
So instead of saving millions of dollars in costs and damage to the brand, everyone at Microsoft aware of this problem just said nothing. That's a terrible corporate culture. If a product isn't going to work, even uncomfortable discussions should be had if it saves millions.
My point overall was that it's shocking this made it into the product. It's such a bad idea for a feature on multiple levels, that it seems like employees did not openly talk about this.
My other point was that if Microsoft employees didn't drop the ball, then this feature may have been forced into the project by a government order of some kind, which can and does happen in closed source software. Although hidden backdoors are often secret, the government could equally compel a large unlocked window at the front be added as well.
I like reading your posts because you are highly intelligent and include sources in them.
However, I am not sure if these documents mean that they wouldn't destroy Israel if they could. If all the Jewish adults and children of Israel were on an Island and each Hamas leader had a button that would destroy the island and everyone on it if pressed, I think all the Hamas leaders would probably press their buttons.
I am also still scared of Sharia law because I am part of the LGBT community and that makes me scared of Muslims because sometimes when they get a majority, Sharia law ensues. I am scared enough that I can't have rational views on this topic.
In all honesty, you are one of the smartest and most knowledgeable people posting on here. Have you ever thought of creating a post just putting forward what you personally think should happen in this situation, with specific ideas for the various government leaders to follow, like an actual specific plan for multiple countries to follow that would be politically feasible? And possibly address concerns that people could have and just reply to them in advance so it would be politically feasible?
Perhaps other people have done this, I don't know. I'm still too biased to feel like I can have an accurate opinion on this. I know your posts have been more critical that offering suggestions, but I think you are so smart you could actually craft a suggestion on how to solve this whole mess in a politically feasible way that would perhaps appeal to people, laying out specific solutions, time-tables, etc, keeping in mind political feasibility (and addressing concerns of LGBT people and women if you want).
You seem so smart. Are you a journalist or have a doctorate? I can sense your intelligence is formidable. I am not joking when I am saying that, you seem brilliant to me in the little I've read, which doesn't mean I agree with your positions. A hard part of change is not just convincing people but also political feasibility. I am still very scared of a Muslim or more Muslim word. I don't honestly think as a LGBT person my rights will be preserved if Muslims become a larger percent of the population. It shouldn't affect discussions like this, people should have rights no matter what, but it's hard to sympathize with a group of people who would potentially drop me off a building.
Most male computer uses watch porn and would not want an AI to log that. Many women find porn sickening and don't understand it and will never understand male urges that result in watching it. The fact that this got into a finished product tells you a lot about Microsoft's corporate culture.
No one working there really cares about the company enough to bring up uncomfortable issues, they are all there just to get their paycheck and actual outcomes be damned. The culture their must be toxic for this product to have been put into a product enabled by default.
If this was a top-down decision and there was no input by others into it, it leads to questions over whether this feature was forced to be included by the government, which can easily require corporations to do anything and then issue gag orders and whether it was some sort of test to see how much intrusive spying bullshit that regular consumers will tolerate now. If this was a feature that was forced into the product, the plan may have been to turn it off by default after negative feedback, but then just keep it in the program for when governments want to turn it on. Governments may have realized it in any capacity such a terrible feature would result in outrage and may have thought this was the path of least resistance, like saying "Would you like to eat a bowl of shit? No, okay, we'll just give you these brussel sprouts"
I literally said in the post "I don’t know you" and everything was a guess. Apparently I guessed wrong. Alright, I believe you. Perhaps you are some finance bro calculating net present values of bonds and staring at spreadsheets 10 hours a day?
I'm not passionate about equality and equity. I actually am just against torturing homeless people and against lower classes being forced to slave away most of their lives just to not die or become a tortured homeless person. It's a sad commentary on the world that disliking torturing poor people and expressing that is a "tirade."
It's not complex or idealistic. Don't torture homeless people, don't make the lives of the poor unbearable.
The problem is that when you ignore classism or don't realize that the antipathy of the upper classes causes these problems, you're part of the problem too. I wish I could wish you well, but people like you do enable massive cruelty by ignoring the truth, and I don't think you are stupid, I think you choose convenience and convenient thoughts and I hope you do end up suffering greatly and that your suffering gives solace to the destitute underclass. If you are part of the destitute underclass, I hope you learn to hate your oppressors and see them for what they are without turning into a communist who just wants to enslave everyone with big government.
You seem like someone who at least has some intelligence. Realize that the price gouging, homelessness, and extreme poverty and a system that allows elites to pay to persuade the stupid public with religion and wedge issues leads to corrupt outcomes. Even if you are a Democrat and vote against conservative policies, if you are going along with the current structure, you are supporting it because the structure is designed to not change much. It offers a convenient way to pretend you want change while enjoying the fruits of the extraordinary suffering of the extremely marginalized. You could change your views if you wanted. Realize that not acknowledging that the upper classes are the primary cause of this situation and that they use wealth to maintain power even if it means extraordinary cruelty. You can realize that voting Democrat does not absolve you from maintaining the power structure especially if you are a subtle apologist for it. Your views do matter. They hate ebikes because poor people and young people use them and it offers freedom: that is the main reason. It's not a crazy to think. They want you jaded and cynical and to think extreme poverty is a nuanced issue too hard to solve and has nothing to do with classism instead of the exploitation that it is, they make it convenient to hold ideas like this, distract your with hedonism and an easy life if you just forget about their worst inflictions of cruelty. Give up convenience and see the truth of how horrible some people are treated and that it's not a crazy conspiracy that their suffering has a cause from top to bottom. I don't think you will do it, I think you will continue to live in a bubble and not help the lowest classes and have the same laissez-faire morality towards the environment and only on your death bed when you see the impending death of the next generation due to environmental doom will you issue a mea culpa to whatever your fantasy god of choice is.
Saying I am crazy because I assert wealthy people dislike things that bring poor people freedom is a form of gaslighting. You and people like you enable class oppression. You're so fucking stupid you buy into the lie and because you have a nice lifestyle and higher IQ, you enable rich people to manipulate others. Even if you have some narrow technical acumen, you are in fact stupid at seeing the broader problems in society. Much in the same way in olden times everything that upset the social order was "evil" now everything that upsets the social order is "crazy." Yes, that's gaslighting. Maybe we haven't known each other a long time, and maybe you have not personally secretly harassed and demeaned me insidiously over time, which is the quintessential notion of gas-lighting, but YOUR KIND has done this to many people for a long time, lacks an understanding of the fundamental attribution error and is genuinely too stupid to see class oppression, yes, you are a gaslighter, you're just too stupid to realize it.
Class oppression does exist and the rich and their proxies have all sorts of ways from disclaiming it doesn't.
I don't know you, but I'm going to take a wild guess: you're upper middle class, 190K a year doing software development, your IQ is 130 and you feel like with hard work and intelligence anyone can make it and you came from a middle class or possibly even lower middle-class background. You feel like because you made it, and escaped poverty, others could have easily also. You were selected for class advancement because a small percent of the underclass gets to move up to pretend fairness exists.
The rich oppress poor people in different ways, including with those they have selected, and including by keeping an untouchable underclass too small to revolt to make the large regular underclass complacent ("at least it's not that bad").
But this is a strategy, a technique. They call their oppression other things. "Oh, those people are just..." lazy, drunk, stupid. Insert a word to justify oppression. And saying anything else is just crazy, and then they have little boot lickers like you to occasionally offer insults and antagonism to anyone who suggests otherwise, as well as religion to offer the naive phantasmagorical portraits of a non-existent hell for anyone who challenges the social order too much so that only real heros with courage say "fuck this" when faced with a corrupt order. You are part of this, your denial is part of this, your gas-lighting is part of this.
Do you think anyone has read this far down into the thread? We're on an old thread very far down at the part where you have to click to see more. Perhaps 100 years from now AI is reading this (if we haven't all yet died as a result of environmental catastrophe) to try to learn how to simulate replies. I don't look like an idiot, no one can see me right now, you're probably one of the few people who will ever read this.
It's so tired of morons like you sticking your head in the sand and then pretending like you aren't facilitating cruelty in the world. You see people on the street wiho can't sleep without getting a ticket, aren't allowed to even live in the forests, and aren't able to even get a moment to sleep under an overpass while it rains because assholes have put spikes there? Your naivete or stupidity is either stemming from arrogance or malevolence. You're worse than the upper classes inflicting brutality on people because you feign like everything is fine. You're disgusting and I hope you suffer for denying that you are part of what is inflicting this brutal cruelty on the abject of society.
But also I don't know you that well, so perhaps you've been homeless yourself, live a middle class lifestyle, don't have an IQ of 130, and haven't advanced in society by acquiring some narrow technical skill. Perhaps you are Ayn Rand Atlas Shrugged self-made and deserve it based on the work you've done. Idiots like you always create a false dichotomy that either extreme Marxism or unchecked capitalism are the only options, as though objecting to evil cruelty in society is somehow advocating for Marxism and that classism doesn't exist.
I see through your bullshit. Now go back to pretending that you've earned your place in society and everyone else can too and all is right with the world and you aren't some culpable vile ostrich while the world keeps heating up and the homeless population grows. You and your ilk disgust me and when not even your kind can escape the heat due to your inability to grasp math or history or data due to the convenience of avarice I'll be glad. (This is not meant to imply you don't understand global warming. You're allowed to think and express that's a problem at your social station without seeming like a "nutter." But your inability to see classism, you're willingness to parrot the common norms of society that the upper middle class or very lower upper classes are supposed to say IS the problem, and while scientists are setting themselves on fire trying to warm people we are all about to die, people like you are too stupid to realize that people at the top are a part of the problem and instead are towing the line of thinking what is socially acceptable. So go ahead and parrot normal ways of thinking and advocate for moderate sensible non-crazy change while exponents keep doing their thing. My only consolation is that your kind will soon be dead due to environmental catastrophe, along with all of us.)
When someone like you, with your above average intelligence, refuses to reason correctly, it's not laziness, it's just corruption through money and callousness. The 120-130 IQ set with their "everything is fine" mentality is just pernicious and it's pointless to even reason with you. The world is headed off an environmental cliff, there's nothing that anyone can do to stop it at this point, and I've played out scenarios in my head and there's no way I can personally stop this, even if I ran for office, even if I somehow could force most of the world to do what I want, because mathematically it's too late.
Actually, I've decided I'm wrong: I do look like an idiot opposing someone like you, it's a pointless endeavor. I read something in your stupid response that indicated mild verbal intelligence and I wanted to try to correct extremely poor logic but it was a pointless reflex. I need to learn to ignore your kind instead of giving into the time suck and distraction of those too deluded to understand classism or extreme poverty or upper class cruelty or impending environmental doom or the non-existence of god. Trying to reason with the stupid is only for the stupid, so I suppose we're both idiots. Enjoy the weather. The suffering your kind has inflicted on the homeless will soon infect the lives of every human as the planet becomes uninhabitable. Now go back to your non-nutter level-headed full stack development or whatever fucking shithead job you do and pretend while people on the street suffer that your acceptance of societal norms is not a part of this.
I don't own an e-bike or feel persecuted by wealthy people, you presumptuous gas-lighter.
You're also assuming I don't either have money or have wealth in my family, that I'm some angry lower class Marxist inventing reasons to be angry at the upper classes.
You don't know me or my life or anything about me. Your anti-Marxism and anti-paranoia has left you naive as to the sadism and avarice of humanity.
One person who I had a romantic relationship with literally talked to me about how he sold things that harmed poor people but someone was going to do it and the poor were stupid and these things just happen. He made millions doing what he did and was both extremely intelligent and cruel.
When slaves used to run off the plantations, slave owners put iron boxes over their heads after. Children used to work long hours in factories. People in China have committed suicide from working so much, because their lives are so miserable. None of these things were or are "needed." Not all cruelty and sadism has been eliminated. Not wanting the lower classes to be happy or free was part of it and on some level it still is, despite wealthy platitudes about giving and gestures of helping that don't structurally change things.
Rich people are at times sadistic and cruel to poor people, rich people not liking poor people is real. And e-bikes are not simply just frowned upon because they are annoying. You just lack the intelligence to see that classism is part of the equation. This isn't to say you're a moron, perhaps you're intelligent at some things, but you lack the insight to see that a lack of open class warfare doesn't mean that upper classes have no motivation to sustain their lifestyles and that poor people doing well could be a threat to that. The fact that wealthy giving does lift some people up, and the fact that socialism that doesn't reward individual effort leads to people being very lazy, doesn't negate these things.
Go gaslight someone else who won't respond to your tripe.
I am not trying to make my position any less nutty. I assert it is equally as nutty as before, which is to say not very nutty at all.
It's more than it being a minor inconvenience. If this were a pass time of the rich, the inconvenience would not be regulated. For instance, hobby sailing or expensive motorcycle riding is annoying and there isn't constant discussions about how to regulate it to make it harder for people to do those things.
You're wrong on this, you don't get it but you are.
"Uh oh, if the poor have more freedom and are happier, they may not work for such cheap wages collectively and it could affect my lifestyle. I better dislike the thing that makes their life easier."
But the wealthy do in fact make choices and respond in gut ways that protect their lifestyles.
The wealthy often do think of themselves as generous and benevolent, but then they do not structurally change society to make life less oppressive. No one should be opposed to universal health care. No one should support criminalizing homelessness.
There are also ways to structurally change society to make life easier for the poor that don't involve Marxism or incentivizing laziness. Classical economic theory and democracy can work together to make change but the poor are misled into voting for idiots because they are manipulated by the rich with religion and wedge issues and other clever tricks. Some of these rich people that deceive the poor with religion may even believe the lies of religion on some level. The logic of the mind of the average rich person may not be internally consistent, but they ultimately protect their interests.
In fact, google may be being told by the government to tell people that this data isn't being stored so people will be less concerned about it and not think it's being collected since many people know google collects data but may be naive as to the possibility that google is lying about the data being completely erased.
So you're saying that my position is clearly evidently wrong, just like purple is not the color of the sky and therefore that's clearly wrong.
I get it, but the easy lifestyles of the rich come from the suffering of the poor. The poor doing well is always a threat to that lifestyle and it's naive to think the wealthy don't often have a deep-seated gut reaction to anything that could threaten that. Even if you think it's a stretch, it certainly isn't as evidently wrong as a purple sky.