3 actually, and it’s not a good group… And I’d like to say that most Americans actually support the idea of switching, but as a stubborn guy who uses metric for everything here I can sadly say that they are not by a long shot.

you shouldn’t have to work to exist, you shouldn’t have to be useful to anyone else to be part of a community

While I largely agree with your points (or at least some of the core of them) I think you’d have to flesh this out. For anything alive to exist, work needs to be done. And for anyone to be in a community people must mutually agree on membership. The “freeloader” problem isn’t a problem of ability where individuals “not useful” (and that gives me chills as much as it probably does you) to society can’t work, though it’s often framed that way to varying extents from both sides. I feel that it’s a problem where a large enough segment of the population would not be productive at what they could be doing simply because they don’t have to.

Our brains are literally wired to seek out more for less energy.

Again, I agree with most of your points, but these two could probably use a bit more explanation (at least to me)

I think they might be talking about stuff like “it’s wrong to expect black people to be on time for meetings” which was a quote I heard from someone who I believe meant well. There is a reasonable argument on both sides of that probably, but it left a bad taste in my mouth

Uneducated guess: the preponderance of subjects which appear to be underage (despite the fact that they are indeed a 1000 year old demon)

The nice thing is we aren’t really “competing” so to speak. I definitely want lemmy to grow, but the community can be a .0001% chunk of the internet and I would be totally happy as long as it were a kind, useful, and fun chunk

It was certainly fun back in the day. I was in middle school when I noticed everyone around me starting to use it and it was a bit of a mixed bag for me… at that point not everything was social media so it wasn’t such a hellscape and was a bunch of fun, but even then I think it had a negative impact on me, my friends, and our social lives. I don’t know what it was like before, but seeing that a popular kid had a huge number like 100 notifications on their Facebook could not have been healthy—I don’t think that kids need analytics on how socially successful they are

Geez it’s just so incredibly sad to me that facebook has survived this long and even THRIVED while probably being the worst version of what they do, and being the most evil doing it

Why doesn’t this meme also show how they’re doing it in prisons?

You’re right and me neither, and as much as I don’t want my home address to be public, I’m sure there are people it would be WORSE to have know it than others. US companies acting how they do is unacceptable, but they can at least (if they have scruples) say fuck off to the government assuming we aren’t living in a truly renegade government. The meme here is correct and I think we should hold companies to a higher standard, but acting like every government is equal or the CCP isn’t immediately scarier than the US government doesn’t seem helpful to me.

I love Chinese people, I love their culture, I grew up there, I do not love their government.

Now I only upvote in comments so they’re super public.

!UPVOTE

Unfortunately they could just spin up a lemmy instance on some anonymous server somewhere and do that anyway. I don’t want them in here, but they can certainly already pull the data up. To me that necessitates some form of anonymizing protocol, or even a form of shared encryption making it so you can’t simply pull data in, you need to be invited or allowed into the federation.

Literally just did this on Saturday. It was easy to do and I’m not seeing any significant changes in resource utilization. I am enjoying being able to directly download media onto my phone with Infuse, however.

Let me tell you that it’s worth it. You could probably start with a pi with some external storage for a while depending on how big your library is… but getting some metal to run proxmox over is very very nice (and unfortunately very addicting)

Whew I’m glad I just started up my jellyfin server!

**Ask them anything apart from why they aren’t pooping for 3 days

I honestly wonder if that’s the first instance of lemmy lore

I think that I agree with you in general on your first point. A business isn’t a person, it doesn’t have a religion, it can’t have an opinion on people. But we’re talking about a small business. If someone is running a web design company, they don’t have a huge staff, they’re just one person, so their individual convictions are at play, don’t you think?

The example you give in your second point isn’t quite congruent with this case, taxes are not speech. We’re talking about speech. Now I have a personal conviction that the USA shouldn’t be spending nearly so much on the military, but unfortunately for me, my taxes, and many people around the world, I don’t have a say in the matter. If someone said something like “I don’t want to pay this tax because it’s being spent on something antithetical to my religious belief” even there, it’s not speech.

You’re right, and it doesn’t to me either, and I feel that it’s wrong, and I wouldn’t go and get a cake made with someone I know does this. I also think that you and I would agree on more than not. I’ll also add that I don’t have a dog in the religion debate here. But I still feel very strongly that in a free society it is their right not not be compelled to write something which directly contradicts their belief. I’ll need to think about this more in general, I might end up changing my mind on it, but at least for right now the right to not have to say something you don’t believe feels important to me. Let me ask you this, if an atheist baker were asked to write “Jesus is Lord” on a cake and said no, would you take issue with that? I wouldn’t; I’d argue that is a very clean first amendment right, and an important part of living in a liberal society. I also would go as far as to say that isn’t even intolerance from the atheist, it’s simply them believing something.

To your second point, while I agree that a business owner should not discriminate against a particular demographic, I’m not sure I’d go all out on any time someone says this they’re discriminating. Every religion and value system has prohibitions, and few of them are aligned. It’s possible to respectfully decline to do something as it directly contradicts your beliefs. Now if your beliefs are discriminatory, that’s a different and more complex question entirely. I’m not sure what to think about that case.

Yeah sorry, a couple of people sound like they think I meant that, I must not have articulated myself well.

If this decision protects that cake maker from doing so, then I would worry about it. Imagining EVERY cake were the same, obviously that would be wrong. I’m just trying to say that it seems like the law has more to do with the content of the message. If a couple wanted a cake saying “only gay sex” or something similarly funny, or a straight couple wanted a cake saying “all gays are bad”, I would feel that while we don’t need to be tolerant of the former business person, or the latter client, neither business person should be compelled to write the message on the cake. In the former case, they should be compelled to make a blank or similar cake with no message, simply not compelled to write the message.

Again, I’m not a legal expert so if I’m misreading the decision, that’s a different story.

The question THIS LAW interacts with is the CONTENT of the message. If you’re providing tables for a wedding this law wouldn’t protect you. If you were asked to write something specific for the wedding and the content of the request is antithetical to your beliefs, this law would protect you, if you could show that. Not a lawyer, but that’s how I read it.

Now. Is it “right” to do so? I would say in absolutely no universe. It’s morally wrong, it undermines our liberal society, and I have no tolerance for it. My point is that this particular law isn’t about whether someone is a Christian, their race, or sexuality. This decision wouldn’t protect me from writing some basic software for a nazi (others might) but it DOES protect me from building a website supporting them, or writing prose related to nazism, or anything else which would be CLEARLY against what I believe. Please DON’T read that I’m saying that being a nazi is the same as being homosexual, it isn’t, I’m not, fuck nazis.

To get back to your question: as I read this decision, a cake maker could potentially be compelled to make a cake for an interracial couple, but they might not be compelled to make a cake with something like “interracial is the only way to go”