Skip Navigation
InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)SU
SuddenDownpour @sh.itjust.works
Posts 30
Comments 1.3K
EU passes law to restore 20% of bloc’s land and sea by end of decade
  • But a last-minute change of heart by Austria’s Green climate minister, whose vote is credited with saving the proposal, led to fury in Vienna, with the party of the chancellor, Karl Nehammer, announcing it would seek criminal charges against her for alleged abuse of power.

    The fuck?

  • ‘My state pension was £880 – and my rent was £1,000’: how a 70-year-old man became homeless in Britain
  • Ah, yes, I had forgotten I should have invested when my rent was 100€ higher than my income.

    Like, I mean, it is good advice for some people at the individual level. Specifically, those who can afford it. But an issue of this magnitude requires political, collective solutions.

  • Main road to Grindavík (Iceland) is covered under lava
  • I'll have you know, I have pretty high standards to consider someone an expert.

    I’ve been there on tour once, and I just looked at an online map to make sure I didn’t misremember. I also follow a guy on YouTube that talks about geology and has been focused on Iceland lately, so I think that makes me a complete expert.

    Oh, no! You're meeting all of them!

  • Ukraine rule
  • By "crossing the red lines" do you mean ex-Eastern block countries joining NATO? Those countries joined out of their own free will BECAUSE they feared Russia might want to attack them. And, oh surprise, Russia did attack the one country not sucking up to them that didn't join NATO. Why should Russia's security be sacred above that of all its neighbours?

    If by red lines you don't mean that, then they've clearly not been crossed. Russia and US or EU troops have not directly fought each other, and no country has used nuclear weapons so far.

  • As Starfield Steam Reviews Plunge to ‘Mostly Negative,’ Todd Howard Responds to Paid Mods Backlash (Confirmed plans to look again at Bethesda’s pricing for Creations content.)
  • I took a good look at Skyrim's Creation Club content after getting the latest release on Steam. I will, in an extremely polite manner, just say that it was underwhelming. I could accept paid mods if it was passion projects of people making DLC-sized content, such as Beyond Reach or Enderal. But that's obviously not what this is all about. It's just about further privatizing and exploiting whatever spaces of free community efforts do exist in an increasingly commodified world.

  • Ukraine rule
  • Do you recognize being invaded by a foreign country is a legitimate problem a country might have to face? If you do, and you oppose private military industry, that means you support public military industry, right?

  • Main road to Grindavík (Iceland) is covered under lava
  • To anyone acquantinced with Iceland: What kind of logistical issues does this actually provoke? What measures do you typically (or exceptionally) take to make sure that no location runs unsupplied for too long?

  • Teen self-immolates in front of Winnipeg Mosque to protest the genocide against Palestinians and Muslims in Gaza and the rest of Palestine
  • https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thích_Quảng_Đức

    Thích Quảng Đức was a Vietnamese Mahayana Buddhist monk who died by self-immolation (...) protesting against the persecution of Buddhists by the South Vietnamese government of Ngô Đình Diệm, a staunch Roman Catholic. Photographs of his self-immolation circulated around the world, drawing attention to the policies of the Diệm government. John F. Kennedy said of one photograph, "No news picture in history has generated so much emotion around the world as that one.

    Calling them brainwashed is disrespectul and ignorant of similar acts that, while they haven't been enough to change policy, have invigorated social movements that sometimes resulted in the goals they were aiming for. The fact that you use "brainwashed" specifically almost makes me think that you can't even understand how people could see the murders of tens of thousands of children as something worth taking radical action for.

  • French left finds governing agreement for 'new popular front' alliance
  • Wow, thanks a lot for the extremely detailed response. I suggest you copy it to a txt file at some point in case you get the chance to post it again somewhere else, because it almost feels like a waste that not much more people will pass through the thread.

  • www.lemonde.fr French left agrees to form new 'Popular Front' in parliamentary elections

    The French left, including the Greens and radical left Jean-Luc Mélenchon's La France Insoumise, agreed to form a coalition on Monday evening. But the question remains as to who will lead the alliance into the battle of the snap elections called by President Macron.

    French left agrees to form new 'Popular Front' in parliamentary elections

    List of the coalition's members on Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Popular_Front#Members

    3

    "So will your party join The Left or The Greens in the European Parliament?" "Yes."

    So Sumar's (Spanish party) politicians will apparently be distributed across both The Left and the Greens European parties. Presumably an image maneuver, since joining an European party usually doesn't bind your vote, and Spanish green parties usually get integrated in leftist electoral options anyway.

    10
    koreajoongangdaily.joins.com How to fix Korea's birthrate? Put girls in school earlier, controversial report argues

    A report suggesting girls begin school a year earlier than boys in order to raise Korea's birthrate has faced strong backlash.

    How to fix Korea's birthrate? Put girls in school earlier, controversial report argues

    "Notably, Chang's report claims that biological females develop earlier than males do, so requiring girls to enter school at younger ages will create classes in which the two sexes are of more equal maturity as they age. This, the author posits, makes it more likely that those classmates will be attracted to each other, and marry and have children further down the line."

    (...)

    "The report does not include evidence of any correlation between female students' early enrollment and the success rate of their romantic relationships with men. The author also does not detail specific mechanisms by which his proposed policy would increase romantic attraction or birthrates."

    98

    Netanyahu won’t agree to hostage release deal unless it polls well for him, Israeli families say they were told

    www.nbcnews.com Netanyahu won’t agree to hostage deal unless it polls well for him, Israeli families say they were told

    “The Israeli government made a conscious and deliberate decision to sacrifice the hostages,”  the Hostage Family Forum said.

    Netanyahu won’t agree to hostage deal unless it polls well for him, Israeli families say they were told

    Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will not agree to end the war in Gaza in exchange for the release of hostages unless opinion polls show it is politically advantageous for him, a top Israeli security official told the families of those held captive, a person in the closed-door meeting and an advocacy group said Friday. (...) “The Israeli government made a conscious and deliberate decision to sacrifice the hostages,” the Hostage Family Forum said in a statement Friday. “The hostages, and the entire State of Israel, have been taken captive by those who chose political interests over their national and governmental duty.”

    14

    Is this discrimination?

    Hi everyone. I don't have ADHD, but someone who joined my family some time ago does (we'll call him T), and is currently going through some trouble which I find quite perplexing.

    Some background: T has two daughters (8yo and 6yo) under shared custody with his ex-wife (they spend roughly the same time with each of them during the week). T has had some serious difficulties through his life, some of which are structural and will likely stay with him forever, such as difficulty to hold onto a job or keeping his house tidy (even less so when his kids are home), and others of which are temporary by nature, such as the recent death of his mother.

    His daughters had been having some issues for quite some time, including school performance and very frequent misbehaving. I don't particularly dislike kids, but holy shit, the very moment they got used to me, they became imps, almost constant screaming, fighting each other, not attending to reason, and so on. And I've barely seen them a handful of times. Anyhow, T decided to seek the root of these issues, discussed with his ex-wife the possibility of getting them evaluated for ADHD, and the ex-wife refused. T went forwards anyway, and the girls are now diagnosed with ADHD, and assigned to a psychologist who should theoretically have a session with them each month, but in practice, they're given less than 5 appointments a year. In general, T's complaints that he wanted more guidance on what to do with them have fallen on deaf ears.

    A few weeks ago, social services knock into T's home, and naturally, they find that the house is a mess, because it always is. They take note of it all, and recently summoned him for a meeting.

    T's current partner recently told me how the meeting went: social services claimed that the kids are sometimes late to class and they sometimes don't go at all, attributed all the responsibility to him, and he refuted that, while he's sometimes late when it's his turn to take them to school, they only completely miss class when they're staying with their mother. Social services disregarded this (shouldn't they have the means to corroborate it?), and proceeded to explain that, as a person with ADHD who cannot keep his life in order, he doesn't seem to have the competencies to raise the kids, so they want to impose a change in custody where they would stay with him less than 33% of the time.

    What I'm getting from this is that the only thing the administration will take into account when determining whether you should be raising your kids or not is your medical conditions and how disorganized is your house. The kids have some issues, sure (I'm not arguing that they being late to class or missing at all is ok), but if there are two separated parents, and one has an ADHD diagnosis and the other doesn't, is it ok to attribute all issues on the diagnosed parent rather than checking where the problems are coming from? Shouldn't the fact that the kids have ADHD a reason to want to make sure and the parent who does also have it to be more involved in their upbringing, since the one who doesn't will have less experience with it and its difficulties?

    26
    Political Memes @lemmy.world SuddenDownpour @sh.itjust.works

    Let's increase worker productivity?

    Art obviously by HappyRoadKill, beware the rampant NSFW furry art though

    58

    Tinto Talks #5: Estates

    forum.paradoxplaza.com Tinto Talks #5 - March 27th, 2024

    Welcome to the fifth Tinto Talks, where we talk about the design for our upcoming top secret game with the codename ‘Project Caesar.’ The state is me! Oh, you meant E-state, sorry.. not me .. Today we will go into detail about one of the...

    2

    Study suggests up to 1 in 5 U.S. adults currently suffer from major religious trauma symptoms

    www.nbcnews.com Religious trauma still haunts millions of LGBTQ Americans

    Some mental health experts are advocating for religious trauma to be considered an official disorder in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders.

    Religious trauma still haunts millions of LGBTQ Americans

    > Swift-Godzisz is among the 1 in 3 adults in the United States who have suffered from religious trauma at some point in their life, according to a 2023 study published in the Socio-Historical Examination of Religion and Ministry Journal. That same study suggests up to 1 in 5 U.S. adults currently suffer from major religious trauma symptoms.

    > Religious trauma occurs when an individual’s religious upbringing has lasting adverse effects on their physical, mental or emotional well-being, according to the Religious Trauma Institute. Symptoms can include guilt, shame, loss of trust and loss of meaning in life. While religious trauma hasn’t officially been classified as a mental disorder in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), there is debate among psychiatrists about whether that should change.

    > Experts say LGBTQ people — who represent more than 7% of the U.S. population, according to a 2023 Gallup poll — experience religious trauma at disproportionate rates and in unique ways. Very little research has been done in this field, but a 2022 study found that LGBTQ people who experience certain forms of religious trauma are at increased risk for suicidality, substance abuse, homelessness, anxiety and depression. And as political animus toward the LGBTQ community intensifies ahead of the 2024 presidential election, many queer people say their pain is resurfacing.

    16

    Macron calls for 'lasting ceasefire' in Gaza (plus others)

    www.tbsnews.net Macron calls for 'lasting ceasefire' in Gaza

    The Israeli military has said it “regrets the harm” caused by an Israel Defense Forces (IDF) strike that killed dozens of people in the Maghazi refugee camp in the centre of Gaza earlier this week

    Macron calls for 'lasting ceasefire' in Gaza

    I actually want to aggregate several articles from the last couple of days, for good reason. Let's hope the mods understand:

    Biden says he is pushing for six-week Gaza pause

    China Calls on Israel to Halt Military Operations in Gaza as Soon as Possible

    Macron calls for 'lasting ceasefire' in Gaza

    German foreign minister heads to Israel to urge for ceasefire as IDF prepares to enter Rafah

    Egypt, Slovenia call for immediate ceasefire in Gaza

    UK Foreign Secretary calls for ‘immediate pause in the fighting’

    Notice that even countries that have taken a favorable position towards Israel have asked for a ceasefire in the last couple of days. This is due to the imminent Israeli attack on Rafah, where most of Gazan displaced population is currently located, which to any rational observer is a giant warning that we may soon see a catastrophe.

    Rafah’s 1 million refugees fear Israeli onslaught after night of bombardment

    [ I would have liked to link to an article that relates both the latest diplomatic moves by so many countries and what's just about to happen, but unfortunately the only one I have is in Spanish, so I'm trying to do this is whatever way the community's rules allow. Please consider the possibility of allowing news aggregations in the same post. ]

    0

    Calls for ceasefire in Gaza are mounting up before catastrophe: USA, China, France, Germany, Egypt, UK

    Allow me to aggregate plenty of news in the same post for a good reason. Heads of State, of government and ministers of plenty of countries though the world have urged Israel to pause hostilities during the last few days, including many that have positioned with them during the last few months.

    Biden says he is pushing for six-week Gaza pause

    China Calls on Israel to Halt Military Operations in Gaza as Soon as Possible

    Macron calls for 'lasting ceasefire' in Gaza

    German foreign minister heads to Israel to urge for ceasefire as IDF prepares to enter Rafah

    Egypt, Slovenia call for immediate ceasefire in Gaza

    UK Foreign Secretary calls for ‘immediate pause in the fighting’

    The reason for this is that everyone who is taken a hard look at the situation is well aware that the next move declared by Israel is going to have catastrophic dimensions: if they attack and invade Rafah, the Gazan city where the immense majority of displaced population has ended up, we'll see the death of tens of thousands of civilians in a very short time, to the point that even Israeli allies might have difficulty justifying it.

    Rafah’s 1 million refugees fear Israeli onslaught after night of bombardment

    2

    The problem with liberation groups in monster-taming games (Pokemon, Palworld)

    Cross-post from: https://sh.itjust.works/post/13765975 at [email protected] (No idea how to properly link to the community)

    > Palworld has brought back a Pandora's Box that Pokemon let open in Black/White: Does Team Plasma have a point? Is the player in Pokemon/Palworld an evil entity just for playing? > > Some preliminary context for those unaware. Pokemon Black/White's version of an evil team was Team Plasma, which argued that Pokemon trainers were evil for capturing Pokemon and forcing them to fight alongside them. While the game gave us the character of N, who is honest and sincere in his ideas and intentions, Team Plasma is presented as an hypocritical boogeyman that wants to force all other trainers to free their Pokemon, but secretly this is only a ploy to make sure no one can oppose them when they attempt to grab power for themselves. > > Palworld has its own take on the idea: out of the different hostile factions, we find early on the Free Pal Alliance, which similarly argues that capturing pals and forcing them to do your bidding is evil, and we find again that their leader really commits to the idea, but her underlings are constantly attacking pals in the wild and sometimes even putting them in cages. > > Perhaps surprisingly, the Pokemon fanbase was very defensive of this idea, often repeating the arguments provided by the games that captured Pokemon like the companionship anyway, dismissing the fact that wild Pokemon violently resist being captured unless you force them into submission to accept the Pokeball. The fact that you forcibly push them into a situation where their previous freedom to choose not to associate with you gets overwritten by a newfound willingness to obey means that they're being effectively brainwashed - if we were to apply our real life standards to this situation we would say without a doubt that the situation is exploitative and we're wiping our ass with the idea of consent. Palworld is even more "in your face" about this, given that the brainwashing mechanic of Pokeballs/spheres does not only work on the mons, but on humans as well. The general reaction of the Palworld community seems to be acknowledging that it's fucked up, but nonetheless jumping straight to the fact that the Free Pal Alliance are hypocrites as a whole or even calling them a parody of PETA. > > My position here is: should these games even address the ethical dilemma? Once you put the ethics into the game's narrative, the designers are basically forced into going to "Yes, but" territory, since acknowledging the ethical issue leads you to the conclusion that the game only allows you to play as a morally dubious character at best, but given that that would be unwise from a marketing pov (at least for Game Freak), the narrative ultimately has to twist the argument into some sort of fallacy (The Pokemon actually want to be captured/The Free Pal Alliance is full of hypocrites anyway), which in my opinion is actually the heinous design decision, since you're pushing the player into twisting the moral dilemma in a way, thus training moral hypocrisy, rather than the much healthier position "Yes, capturing Pokemon/Pals is evil, but it's a game so no actual sentient creature is being harmed". > > Both Pokemon Black/White and Palworld hint at the idea of human-Pokemon/Pal association out of free will through the character of N and the Free Pal Alliance, who do not capture their creatures, but rather they choose to cooperate with them out of real free will, but this option is mechanically impossible for the player (save, arguably, for rare exceptions where Pokemon freely join you through through scripted events). This ends up cementing the ludonarrative dissonance where the player has to justify themselves into thinking that what they're doing is morally acceptable, despite being presented with actually ethical in-lore alternatives that they just do not have access to. It is understandable that, from a game design perspective, the Pokemon/Palworld developers do not want to spend significant effort into reworking the mechanics of Pokeballs/spheres, which are already effectively fun for their gameplay loops, but that leads them into the position where Team Plasma and the Free Pal Alliance have to become caricatures of their actual ideas, which on the other hand is a waste for their respective lores. > > Anyway, I hope you enjoyed my rambling. My Chikipis have already laid all the eggs I need for baking cakes, so I'm off to butchering them for meat, bye.

    7

    The problem with liberation groups in monster-taming games (Pokemon, Palworld)

    Palworld has brought back a Pandora's Box that Pokemon let open in Black/White: Does Team Plasma have a point? Is the player in Pokemon/Palworld an evil entity just for playing?

    Some preliminary context for those unaware. Pokemon Black/White's version of an evil team was Team Plasma, which argued that Pokemon trainers were evil for capturing Pokemon and forcing them to fight alongside them. While the game gave us the character of N, who is honest and sincere in his ideas and intentions, Team Plasma is presented as an hypocritical boogeyman that wants to force all other trainers to free their Pokemon, but secretly this is only a ploy to make sure no one can oppose them when they attempt to grab power for themselves.

    Palworld has its own take on the idea: out of the different hostile factions, we find early on the Free Pal Alliance, which similarly argues that capturing pals and forcing them to do your bidding is evil, and we find again that their leader really commits to the idea, but her underlings are constantly attacking pals in the wild and sometimes even putting them in cages.

    Perhaps surprisingly, the Pokemon fanbase was very defensive of this idea, often repeating the arguments provided by the games that captured Pokemon like the companionship anyway, dismissing the fact that wild Pokemon violently resist being captured unless you force them into submission to accept the Pokeball. The fact that you forcibly push them into a situation where their previous freedom to choose not to associate with you gets overwritten by a newfound willingness to obey means that they're being effectively brainwashed - if we were to apply our real life standards to this situation we would say without a doubt that the situation is exploitative and we're wiping our ass with the idea of consent. Palworld is even more "in your face" about this, given that the brainwashing mechanic of Pokeballs/spheres does not only work on the mons, but on humans as well. The general reaction of the Palworld community seems to be acknowledging that it's fucked up, but nonetheless jumping straight to the fact that the Free Pal Alliance are hypocrites as a whole or even calling them a parody of PETA.

    My position here is: should these games even address the ethical dilemma? Once you put the ethics into the game's narrative, the designers are basically forced into going to "Yes, but" territory, since acknowledging the ethical issue leads you to the conclusion that the game only allows you to play as a morally dubious character at best, but given that that would be unwise from a marketing pov (at least for Game Freak), the narrative ultimately has to twist the argument into some sort of fallacy (The Pokemon actually want to be captured/The Free Pal Alliance is full of hypocrites anyway), which in my opinion is actually the heinous design decision, since you're pushing the player into twisting the moral dilemma in a way, thus training moral hypocrisy, rather than the much healthier position "Yes, capturing Pokemon/Pals is evil, but it's a game so no actual sentient creature is being harmed".

    Both Pokemon Black/White and Palworld hint at the idea of human-Pokemon/Pal association out of free will through the character of N and the Free Pal Alliance, who do not capture their creatures, but rather they choose to cooperate with them out of real free will, but this option is mechanically impossible for the player (save, arguably, for rare exceptions where Pokemon freely join you through through scripted events). This ends up cementing the ludonarrative dissonance where the player has to justify themselves into thinking that what they're doing is morally acceptable, despite being presented with actually ethical in-lore alternatives that they just do not have access to. It is understandable that, from a game design perspective, the Pokemon/Palworld developers do not want to spend significant effort into reworking the mechanics of Pokeballs/spheres, which are already effectively fun for their gameplay loops, but that leads them into the position where Team Plasma and the Free Pal Alliance have to become caricatures of their actual ideas, which on the other hand is a waste for their respective lores.

    Anyway, I hope you enjoyed my rambling. My Chikipis have already laid all the eggs I need for baking cakes, so I'm off to butchering them for meat, bye.

    35
    www.aljazeera.com World reacts to ICJ interim ruling in Gaza genocide case against Israel

    Top UN court orders Israel to take all measures to prevent acts of genocide in Gaza, but does not call for ceasefire.

    World reacts to ICJ interim ruling in Gaza genocide case against Israel

    The article collects the reactions of representatives from multiple countries to the provisional ruling, including South Africa, Israel, the US and some other Western and Muslim countries.

    4

    Let's discuss monotropism

    Monotropism is a theory of autism that posits that the main functional characteristic of autism is a cognitive configuration that prefers to have less channels of attention. Despite the fact that there's very little discussion about it, it is incredibly consistent regarding what we know about autism, and it might help us understand ourselves a little better.

    According to this theory, autistic brains are better wired to pour as many resources as possible in fewer tasks to focus of attention on, in contrast to allistic brains that would prefer to distribute resources among more different tasks at the same time.1

    How well does this theory in more concrete aspects of life? Let's use communication as an example. People typically use plenty of tools to communicate: verbal language, tonality, hand and facial gestures, etc. If you were to define these as physical problems, this is, tasks that must be approached and worked through by a cognitive mechanism through material means, working according to algorithms of some sort, each of these tasks would have to be separated into individual problems, along with other functions such as coordinating the information gained through each of these processes to build a somewhat coherent whole that allows you to communicate back. If your brain works faster through individual tasks, but cannot handle as many tasks at the same time, it will have a tendency towards ignoring the least useful ones.2

    If you'd prefer a more down-to-earth metaphor, imagine communication is a card game where polytropic players are receiving one card of each category (verbal language, hand gestures, facial expression, etc.) each round, while monotropic players receive as many cards each round, but they can only belong to one category. Naturally, the monotropic player is heavily incentivized to choose verbal language, because that's the main pillar of communication for contemporary human beings. If you were to give this player the form of a human child, you'd get a kid that uses language with a lot of precision and is probably using more technical words than you'd expect at their age, but doesn't look at your face and often has a very unchanging tone. You can even link this with the double empathy problem, and argue that, since communication is a cooperative two-way problem (problem understood as a task to solve), information flows better when both players are using the same channels of communication in similar intensities (this is: using more technical language isn't that useful if the other person doesn't understand it; using facial gestures isn't useful if the other person isn't looking at your face).

    Let's get more practical. If the theory is correct, it would likely follow that the very first thing you have to do in order to prevent cognitive delays in autistic babies and children would be to reduce the sensory complexity of the environment. Choosing where to focus your attention is a cognitive task, which is easily understood when you compare how capable of reading you are in your living room in comparison to a disco, where your brain has to work on filtering the music, the conversations, and the lights. If someone's brain prefers to focus on as few tasks as possible, putting them at a place with plenty of noise and lights will collapse the resources of the brain, hindering their development in an optimistic scenario or even provoking trauma in one of the worst ones.

    Note that these previous paragraphs of mine are built as narratives. The site https://monotropism.org/ explains the theory at a divulgative level, references the researchers behind it and some relevant papers, and proposes some practical avenues to improve the lives of autistic people by respecting these different cognitive needs and preferences from the experience of people who have worked with the theory at a scientific level - but it should also be mentioned that monotropism has, unfortunately, received very little attention in comparison to previous theories ( mind-blindness , extreme male brain ) that had very little evidence and have since been proven as bullshit, and therefore there's relatively little research on it despite its apparent solid predictive capacity.3

    Does any of this ring a bell to you? Can you recall experiences that could be explained through monotropism?

    1: Because virtually no person focuses all their attention in one single cognitive process at the same time, and no single person places infinitesimally small amounts of attention into an infinite number of tasks, so I think it'd be more appropriate to talk about monotropism-leaning and polytropism-leaning minds.

    2: While the human brain is not a computer, the physical infrastructure of the human mind is the brain, and in order to fulfill specific tasks, it must be able to compute the solution to problems in a material way, even if that material way is immensely different from how contemporary computers work.

    3: It might also be noted that, as far as I'm aware, the theory of monotropism would explain autism at a functional level, but not yet at a physical one. This is, while monotropism could serve as a central piece to explain fundamental practical aspects of the lives of autistic people, there would yet not be an explanation on what's the specific neurological difference between the brains of autistic and allistic people.

    3