“Let’s test the new firmware in the district with the most minorities.”

You know it will happen. Maybe they’ll phrase it differently but the decision will be made.

Increase the volume on your alarm. Set it to a ringtone that is less relaxing. Set multiple such alarms, a few minutes apart.

It’s the bare minimum. For you to lambast the suggestion of doing the bare minimum would imply you prefer doing nothing, not doing more.

You’re touching on the idea of a “truth baseline” as I call it. How do you know what’s real vs bullshit?

My truth baseline is that maintaining the habitability of Earth is good. From that, I can deduce the following:

• excessive carbon dioxide in atmosphere is bad
• reliance on fossil fuels is bad
• clean renewable energy is good
• people who rail against renewables are bad
• political part(ies) that do the same are bad
• news figures that normalize that are bad

Etc. See where this is headed?

The ambiguity of whether someone is good or not is due to goodness being a subjective quality. There is no such thing as objective good. The closest thing to objective good we can attain is sustainability.

The same can be said about truth. If you want something objective, that’s called fact. Truth is a subjective perception of facts. Thus… there is no one correct truth. Just an openness to adjust to new information while dismissing those who are opposed to your truth baseline.

You either vote against fascism or you don’t.

You can call me insane if you like. But at least I’m not a fascist.

Are you?

Guessing you mean the speed of a truck relative to the speed of the Earth, as the Earth is traveling around the sun much faster than a truck

I try to say it exactly like they say it.

I had a coworker named Mahmoud, and all my native-English-speaking coworkers heavily anglicized the pronunciation, removing the throat-clearing sound of the h, and changing the first vowel to like the a in “math” rather than like the a in “mall”. Whenever I spoke to him, I tried to copy his inflection as best I could, and and he seemed delighted, but I never clarified if it was about my pronunciation.

Can you take a bus to a bigger city to buy them in person

If it was deliberate then it was probably well-intentioned, i.e., give them a moment to stabilize

Only douchecanoes use the term unironically, so it follows the person they are criticising is likely doing something morally right.

Have you heard the term virtue-signaling?

Selfish people want to paint people better than them as bad, so they try to adjust the narrative to suggest that those better people are actually faking it. The term virtue-signaling suggests that these virtuous acts are actually just for appearances, and insincere.

The term woke has a similar implication. It’s like “this person is trying very hard to appear to be virtuous, and in doing so, they’re going too far, and doing more harm than good.”

That’s my intellectual take on it, anyway. Plebs just adopt the term without understanding the implied meaning. “Other team == woke == bad” is all 95% of them think.

I mean, how hot is this nurse?

The hardest parts of gun use are aiming at long range and proper maintenance. Neither of those are a concern for someone planning to shoot at close range and not live another day.

I heard you can safely call someone an asshole

Wonder if creep would likewise be safe

i’M oNe Of ThE gOoD oNeS

… because it’s a team of dipshits?

So fire the dipshits instead.

If you don’t make profit then either you’re losing money or straddling the line between profit and losing money, neither of which is sustainable. Then someone else will come in and try.

I’ve heard good things about Polysecure. I understand your question doesn’t pertain to non-monogamy, but non-monogamy is an extension of being able to set and respect boundaries yourself rather than simply adopting boundaries that are the default in your community, so maybe it would be helpful?

The damage comes from strain, which can be caused by trying to see through the wrong prescription of lenses (or no lenses).

In response to your 2nd paragraph hypothetical, no, because the changes you’re describing are all forms of damage. You’d have to replace or repair the lens in the eye to revert the damage, and simply looking through a different type of external lens isn’t going to achieve that.