If they actually cared about safety and consistency, they would make mask wearing required for everyone. But they don't care about consistency because they argued at first that everyone should have their own choice, and they don't care about safety because they are now banning usage of PPE. The article states that In-In-Out's statement was about being able to see people's faces, not uniform consistency. The article also mentions a specific location that was shut down due to vaccine mandate violations, which corporate appears to have supported, which has nothing to do with uniform consistency and everything to do with some very specific political nonsense. Your argument really doesn't hold water, and it should be a serious offense to prevent a worker from using safety equipment. Especially safety equipment that has a good chance of keeping them from having to use any sick days (do they even get sick days?).
One company buying another is always anti-competitive. The literal definition of removing competition.
Embrace extend extinguish. Do not allow them to join if you want this community to last.
The most useful way long term is to do year-month-day. The most useful in the very short term is day-month-year. Month-day-year only makes sense if you are most interested in the month over days or years. (I.e. time scale of financial quarters.) Granted, it doesn’t take long to read a whole date any way you write it, so all the arguments seem to be a lot about nothing in the bigger scheme of things.
The whole conversation heavily relies on the definition of free will, which tends to vary greatly from person to person. As far as the forces of reality go, while the world is not deterministic (based on the physics definitions and consequences of randomness of quantum events), we don’t have any good evidence to suggest that our brains have a conscious ability to decide anything irrespective of their surroundings or your history. That is to say that any “choice” we make is entirely a result of the inputs to our brains and potentially a bit of quantum randomness, not some independent decision making system. There is what is called a ”compatiblists” definition of free will, which essentially states that a specific person will always make the same decision because that’s who they are. I don’t generally regard that as free will, but some people do. I do agree with them that the classical idea of free will is nonsensical when you think about it; the idea that you could make any imaginable choice given a situation. You could imagine any number of insane ideas that you wouldn’t do, because they’re, well, insane. And some people might try something extreme to prove their free will because they feel challenged by the idea, but that’s not proof of free will, that’s proof of contrarianism. Wanting to do something because someone tells you that you can’t is a well documented human phenomenon. It’s a little like reverse psychology.
If you take the compatibilst’s definition, I’d agree that it exists, but it seems disingenuous to the phrase “free will”. As far as I can see, there isn’t a good argument that the free will to make choices exists. Your choices are always dependent on your inputs. And sure you can argue that maybe you will make the crazy decision because of quantum randomness, but that’s not arguing for free will, that’s arguing for randomness.
I just made an account and started browsing the threads. Easy. I still have absolutely no idea how any of this works. The info diagram that was posted around a week or two ago was not very helpful.
Do we actually know that early humans were fit? A couple of big things to consider are that we mostly see depictions of early humans made by marketing teams trying to get people to go to their museum, or see their movie, or eat their new fad diet. That's not likely to be realistic. And that natural selection would have culled the weak, slow, and otherwise deficient. If we picked a sub-population of humanity right now that would be similar to the humans of the past that survived to 30, most of us would not be in that group. Furthermore, it is absolutely possible that all of the humans in a given region were malnourished because they didn't have access to a varied diet. They might likely die out and be later replaced by humans that had learned to grow crops, bring cattle, or otherwise provide for the deficiencies in diet that the surrounding area couldn't give them.
I think they’re working under the assumption that the majority of users don’t care enough to leave and that new mods and people will step up after the exodus. Their actions, however, paint a picture that it’s going worse for them than they planned, if they’re taking specific reforming actions to counter the backlash. Or spez has just gone full Elon.
As I remember it, VOAT's userbase essentially got taken over by Neo-Nazis and/or nazi sympathizers. I thought it was great that reddit had competition and then that happened.