Like most popular social media sites, you usually won’t see very valuable discussion in the comments, at least in my experience. It’s mostly for people to post news, research, and so on, and follow the big names or organizations in their field.

Most of the valuable information is diffused via posts but I do put a bit of time and effort into trying to filter out all the crap posts like memes, the faux inspirational stuff, self-aggrandizing nonsense, etc.

I recognize that my intrusive thoughts are my own, but this term existing is helpful because: 1) some people incorrectly believe that thoughts imply a desired outcome, and this term helps explain and describe that this isn’t always the case and 2) it’s a meaningful and useful way of categorizing these types of thoughts for the purposes of psychology, psychiatry, understanding ourselves better, etc.

In cases like severe OCD, classifying intrusive thoughts as such could help someone understand and cope with disturbing thoughts and develop subsequent coping mechanisms. Not everyone’s the same and some terms can be helpful.

I’ve often looked out of a 20th story window at pedestrians and thought, “They have no idea someone is looking at them right now,” and then I always wonder how many times that has happened to me.

That must happen to people all the time who visit that church.

I think that’s their point: That maybe, as long as a candidate is mentally fit, then voters ought to be able to continue voting for them if they feel like the candidate is still worth voting for.

Honestly, if there was some kind of magical bullet to simply ban candidates who are mentally unfit (i.e. losing their marbles) from holding office that couldn’t be exploited, I think a lot of people would find that preferable to an age limit.

That doesn’t address issues like politicians who are too technologically illiterate to do things like open PDF files, though.

They’re saying that politicians like AOC, Katie Porter, Sanders, etc. are high quality public servants, and that high quality public servants should be able to be elected as long as they have cognitive function.

On one hand, in a hypothetical and ideal scenario, that would be nice to have for us voters.

On the other hand, even if an elected official does great work and has a great track record, should they be able to just serve indefinitely until their brain gives out? There’d be a lot of potential problems such as having entrenched and corruptible political operators, even if they started out good, who prevent “fresh blood” from entering politics. It’d be neat to see a study comparing different countries and political systems where there are age barriers and term limits vs those that don’t have them.

I wish I could upvote this twice

if you’ve never posted anything useful to anyone

First of all, I’ve put painstaking effort into a lot of contributions. It hurts to delete them. Second of all, I don’t need to be a contributor to be impacted by people deleting valuable comments, but I still support the deletion.

Reddit had become the “go-to” place for finding trustworthy user reviews, and it’s been shoring up weaknesses in Google’s search engine for a few years now. They don’t deserve the reputation of being that platform because they regularly abuse and alienate good-faith contributors, and the CEO of the company has been caught multiple times in lies and completely unprofessional and untrustworthy behavior.

Fortunately, there are backups of Reddit and archive systems. It’s time for users who care about contributing to bring their value elsewhere, where we can build new ecosystems of user-powered value and knowledge sharing.

It’s not about spite. It’s about not wanting your past work and creativity to continue to help an individual and a company who are bad for society, and who are destroying a platform many people loved.

I think jumping straight to calling Spez a Nazi is ridiculous.

On the other hand, Reddit has repeatedly aggressively looked the other way when it came to communities that blatantly violated the rules such as The Donald, jailbait, etc, while cracking down on and banning far milder users and communities.

DeSantis has made very careful, calculated moves his whole career until recently. If he lost he’d probably wait his turn and try to pivot strategies.

I hope his failure to be Trump 2.0 kills his chances.

The threat is a new sustainable community that’s sheltered from advertising that people could leave Factbook/Instagram/whatever and go to.

So then why was Meta trying to get Threads to be on the Fediverse? Of course they’re aware of any potential threats, no matter how small.