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/)AN
Posts
10
Comments
1,766
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • Maaaaaate, this is awesome! The disabled spaces and curb cuts in particular is on my to-do list, because I am excited about how powerful openstreetmaps can be for disabled people if there is enough data there.

  • The closest that gets me to empathising with them is thinking about times in my life where I have done stupid, harmful-to-me things as a sort of lashing out to claw back any agency I could. For example, deliberately flunking a test because failing by choice felt safer than trying as hard as I could and doing badly anyway; I didn't realise what was happening at the time, but in hindsight, decisions like that were all about my inability to cope with uncertainty and vulnerability.

    I think that people who are unfathomably kind are probably a lot like me, in that they feel scared if they look at the state of the world. They probably recognise in their gut that there is very little that they, as individuals, can do to improve things, and that's scary to them. However, instead of learning to sit with the discomfort of uncertainty and learning how to lean into the vulnerability to do some collective action, they lash out at the world. Being awful to some poor person who is also overwhelmed doesn't solve any of the root issues, of course, but I think that it's cathartic to them to be able to impact the world in some tangible way — it makes them feel less powerless to be able to fuck up someone's day. Plus I reckon there's probably some transference stuff going on, where being unkind to an individual may set them up to be a sort of repository for all the bad feelings they have inside them, like a subconscious scapegoat

    Hateful people still baffle me, but over time, I find myself able to empathise with them more. I find people like this quite tragic, because I know that I would have killed myself long ago if I didn't find community and solidarity to keep me pushing onwards. It seems like quite a bleak existence, and it hurts to see them poisoning themselves with their shortsighted hate.

  • I appreciate your insight here. It has some relevance to where I am in the UK, where international workers are holding up the NHS. (This is one of many reasons why Brexit was a disaster)

  • I can't imagine how much it must suck for him right now if he didn't do it. Like, the way they're treating him is awful regardless, but I imagine that being responsible for the widely praised act would help a little (gosh, it must feel so awkward to have so many fans if he wasn't the one who did it — it has stolen valour vibes (except presumably he wouldn't have chosen to be the scapegoat))

  • "If you get in that situation, remember I'm just a random lemming and not a lawyer."

    Indeed! And along those lines, ask for a lawyer if you're arrested. Especially if you're innocent. People who think "I'll look guilty if I ask for a lawyer" just make themselves vulnerable to words being twisted against them.

  • Neat info. Positive comments in this thread prompted me to go read the thing, and I appreciated how it is a ground-up explanation, but still quite accessible. Now I understand why WINE is not an Emulator (I had been wondering, tbh)

  • "It's much easier to de-extremify (or even radicalise) a fascist than a liberal, and the reason why is pretty clear to me now - liberals are far, far more invested in the maintenance of the status quo than the rank-and-file fascist is."

    This is super interesting to me, because it simultaneously challenges my assumptions while making intuitive sense. I don't have any experience trying to de-extremify a fascist, but what you describe feels plausible

  • I wonder if the poor legibility is part of the point. I would not wear an outrageous t-shirt such as this in public, but I would be even less likely to wear a more legible version — precisely because more people would be able to read it. Poor legibility may evoke curiosity in some people who are too far to read it, and perhaps even result in a humorous surprise when someone who could not originally read the text moves close enough to read it.

    Smaller text feels like a whisper, and maybe that's the effect the designer was going for

  • For me, it's actually easier to trust sources like unionriot.ninja — though by "trust", I don't mean "take them at their word". It's more like a "I understand how to situate this journalism within its wider context". Which is to say that I find them easier to vibe check.

    I find smaller outlets like this are often pretty good with their sourcing. For the example, from these guys, I think I read some really good coverage of some specific issues in the prison system. The article was clearly written to persuade (and as you say, clearly left wing), but the way it was doing that felt transparent. In particular, I think there was a quote they used from a legal expert, but they also included links to that person's work/full quote, which makes it easier for a keen reader to vibe check the person. I like their transparency.

    I agree that it's hard to place them on a "reliable" spectrum. My instinct would be to place them quite high, because the fact they're open about their biases (i.e. left wing perspective) and they are good at citing sources makes it easier for me to evaluate their work. However, that doesn't feel right when we consider what kind of news outlets would typically sit there — many of our heuristics for parsing media are still anchored in a more traditional model of news coverage, which these guys clearly aren't.