• 3 Posts
  • 435 Comments
Joined 2 年前
cake
Cake day: 2023年6月9日

help-circle





  • I’m not a fan of Harry Potter, and don’t like Rowling, but I read that whole damn essay and was not at all convinced. Half the examples could be said to be plagiarising each other by the standard they’re using. They say at the start the coincidences are too strong to be attributed to tropes, but I really disagree with that. Almost everything they list are common tropes, many even outside magical wizard settings. Mean adoptive family? Did she also plagiarise Cinderella?

    Sure, her books generally aren’t original themes, but to say they’re so similar that they are direct plagiarism is a real stretch in my opinion. Especially when you have to list like 30 books that have one or two things in common each, and mostly in a general sense.








  • I’m not asking for my comment to be restored, I couldn’t care less, but I just want to say anyone that read it could clearly see it was not gatekeeping. I was saying it’s not a good argument that someone can’t use a word based on whether another person can define it a certain way, not the other way around. Basically the opposite of gatekeeping. My other comment makes this even clearer.



  • I disagree with your assessment of lines unless the store is simply doing it wrong. I have 3 stores I use that are self checkout only, and the only times there are lines at all are “rush hours” such as when everyone is finishing work, and the lines used to be FAR worse at that time. It’s a line of like 5 people waiting at most, not per checkout, in total. Before self serve it was a minimum of 5 per checkout, so like 20+ people waiting total.

    The fact is they’re able to fit 6 self checkouts in the space there used to be 2 manned checkouts, even if they’re being fairly inefficient with space. So they get rid of 4 manned and have 12 self serve (real example of 2 of them did), and people can be 3x as slow with no extra build up.


  • OK first I have no problem with language evolving. I have no problem with trans people using the word man, woman or whatever else for themselves as they feel comfortable. I have no problem with new words being defined or old words being redefined. That’s not really my issue.

    My issue is making the argument that trans people should or shouldn’t be able to use the word on the basis that someone else can or can’t define it in such a way that would exclude them but not others. Can you really say with absolute certainty, with infinite time and space, such a definition could not theoretically exist? That it isn’t in the realm of possibility? And whether it can or can’t exist, should it really define whether they can or can’t use a word?

    Also out of curiosity, because as you said it’s not really the point, but regarding the cars, is that really a certainty, including all cars throughout history, all custom home made and kit cars, all foreign cars, specialised race cars, electric cars, they will ALL definitely fit into a single neat set of regulations/definition?



  • I mean, there’s a lot of things you can do for free that we pay people for. They’ve put together a device that is preloaded with a ton of information. To do this yourself would probably take most people a week or 2, at best a weekend if you worked hard and had pre-existing knowledge and a fast connection. Maybe longer depending how they modified the raspberry pi, though you don’t necessarily need it to do everything they made it do.

    You’d pay in this range for someone to clean your house for a few hours. You can also do that free. It’s the convenience you’re paying for.