LukeZaz's recent activity

  1. Comment on Traders placed over $1bn in perfectly timed bets on the Iran war. What is going on? in ~society

    LukeZaz
    (edited )
    Link Parent
    So, there's always a contingent of folks who make fun of people for believing super hard in voting. And sometimes those people get kinda aggressive about it, to the point of believing that voting...

    Nothing else you can do about it.

    So, there's always a contingent of folks who make fun of people for believing super hard in voting. And sometimes those people get kinda aggressive about it, to the point of believing that voting is useless, which is wrong. But while voting – even in a rigged system – is a clear good, I think what you state here is exactly the issue underlying those folks' criticism. Because no, voting is not all you can do!

    Go to a protest. Go to several. Join a mutual aid group. Get to know your neighbors and build a community. Get involved in local politics beyond just voting. There are more options than most people know, and if you want to change things, you need to understand those options.

    Will it fix federal corruption tomorrow, or even next year, or even in four? No, probably not. But it will help speed the fix up. And it can do a lot of local good in the process.

    32 votes

  2. Comment on Weekly US politics news and updates thread - week of April 13 in ~society

    LukeZaz
    Link Parent
    Much as I'd like to see Catholicism turn its back on this charade of a government, that figure has some mighty asterisks next to it. Some American Christians, for example, have had a striking...

    Much as I'd like to see Catholicism turn its back on this charade of a government, that figure has some mighty asterisks next to it. Some American Christians, for example, have had a striking tendency over the last decade+ to worship the nation sooner than God or Jesus. And I suspect that faith in the papacy (if not the religion it oversees) might have been declining for a while now across the world.

    1 vote

  3. Comment on Dual national Londoner stranded in Spain by new border rule in ~travel

    LukeZaz
    Link Parent
    It's easy to judge from afar.

    It's easy to judge from afar.

    7 votes

  4. Comment on Esoteric Ebb | Fully Ramblomatic in ~games

    LukeZaz
    Link Parent
    I feel similarly. I want to believe that Frost truly felt he was doing the right thing, but that belies some pretty serious naïveté and misunderstanding. Real damn shame too, because Cold Take and...

    I feel similarly. I want to believe that Frost truly felt he was doing the right thing, but that belies some pretty serious naïveté and misunderstanding. Real damn shame too, because Cold Take and Chronicle were both good stuff.

    4 votes

  5. Comment on Esoteric Ebb | Fully Ramblomatic in ~games

    LukeZaz
    Link Parent
    I hear you there. I also struggle with respecting this game's concept with it being a seeming copy-paste of the most interesting factors of Disco Elysium. Certainly, if you're going to copy an...

    Because I struggle to contain my cynicism when looking at such a vulnerable, raw, angry, caring and earnest piece of art like Disco Elysium and seeing it filtered through the aesthetic and mechanics of Critical Role.

    I hear you there. I also struggle with respecting this game's concept with it being a seeming copy-paste of the most interesting factors of Disco Elysium. Certainly, if you're going to copy an idea, copy a good one — but part of what makes these ideas compelling is their originality. The way the review says it, it sounds like the whole "stats have personalities" thing was just done because Disco did it and that to me suggests a lack of understanding or inspiration. This is made worse by the way the character's "blank slate" shtick sounds like it was done in a much more boring way than what DE did. (i.e. plain old getting killed rather than substance abuse)

    But all that said, I've watched Yahtzee since 2016 and my tastes match his pretty well. If he liked this one – as it seems he does – then for all my cynicism I have to assume it's a successful case of "if you're not going to do something new, at least do it right." Probably will be a while before I get to it, but I'm gonna have to be adding it to my wishlist.

    5 votes

  6. Comment on Esoteric Ebb | Fully Ramblomatic in ~games

    LukeZaz
    Link Parent
    You must not watch him too much! His reviews were generally positive for Mewgenics and Pokemon Pokopia if I recall correctly, and last year had good reception for Dispatch and a very kind review...

    in years.

    You must not watch him too much! His reviews were generally positive for Mewgenics and Pokemon Pokopia if I recall correctly, and last year had good reception for Dispatch and a very kind review of Hades 2 and Blue Prince. Not to mention The Alters, which he was his GOTY for 2025 and he outright said he was championing it.

    5 votes

  7. Comment on Industry initiative launches Euro-Office as true sovereign office suite in ~tech

    LukeZaz
    Link Parent
    Maybe for a bit. But I think people actually caught on to their crap with this pretty fast, even amongst the pro-AI types. So I wasn't actually ever terribly worried about this much. Well, tell a...

    Do you feel like OpenAI set the precedent for how to masquerade as a noble venture while opening a for-profit arm where most of the decisions happen?

    Maybe for a bit. But I think people actually caught on to their crap with this pretty fast, even amongst the pro-AI types. So I wasn't actually ever terribly worried about this much. Well, tell a lie: AI stuff has been making the "Open" prefix sound more and more untrustworthy each year, and I do think OpenAI is at fault for that.

    I don't recall whether it was Value Village or Goodwill, but I was at both this weekend and one accepts donations as a non profit, but operates a retail chain, too.

    Probably Value Village judging by some Wikipedia glances; they're literally a for-profit that's owned by a private equity firm. If it's any consolation, them buying their products from donations is still better than it being thrown away, at least? (So long as they're not hoarding the supply away from more deserving candidates, anyway.)

    By contrast, Goodwill is actually a non-profit, and though they do have a Controversies section in their article, most of it isn't very damning. They do deliberately underpay disabled workers, however, which is very gross.

    5 votes

  8. Comment on Industry initiative launches Euro-Office as true sovereign office suite in ~tech

    LukeZaz
    Link Parent
    The illusion of open-source software makes them sound more trustworthy and helpful, rather than a corporation masquerading as such. PR, basically.

    The illusion of open-source software makes them sound more trustworthy and helpful, rather than a corporation masquerading as such. PR, basically.

    19 votes

  9. Comment on LinkedIn is illegally searching your computer [for browser extensions] in ~tech

    LukeZaz
    (edited )
    Link
    For those curious, here's a direct link to the evidence page. From the site: It should be noted that this appears to happen on Chrome specifically, though I'm unsure if Firefox wouldn't also be...

    For those curious, here's a direct link to the evidence page.

    From the site:

    Every time any of LinkedIn’s one billion users visits linkedin.com, hidden code searches their computer for installed software, collects the results, and transmits them to LinkedIn’s servers and to third-party companies including an American-Israeli cybersecurity firm.

    The user is never asked. Never told. LinkedIn’s privacy policy does not mention it.

    Because LinkedIn knows each user’s real name, employer, and job title, it is not searching anonymous visitors. It is searching identified people at identified companies. Millions of companies. Every day. All over the world.

    It should be noted that this appears to happen on Chrome specifically, though I'm unsure if Firefox wouldn't also be vulnerable. Additionally, the jurisdictions in which this is said to be illegal are European ones; namely the EU itself, Norway, Iceland, Liechtenstein, the U.K. and Switzerland. Not the United States, unsurpisingly. Though I wonder if the CCPA would have an issue with this too.

    Anyway, this is a time where I'm particularly happy to post to Tildes specifically: This page is very dramatic, and while the provided details do make some sense to me, the language surrounding it makes me suspicious and unsure if this is really so big of a deal as it's made out to be. I trust folks here more than other places not to fall for it if it is overselling itself, so I figured it might be worth posting here but wait before sharing elsewhere.

    39 votes

  11. Comment on US Supreme Court rules against Colorado ban on ‘conversion therapy’ for LGBTQ+ kids in ~lgbt

    LukeZaz
    Link Parent
    The first thing I'd like to say to this is that it is very insulting. Implying that I don't care for trans people is one hell of a choice when I am actively arguing against a ruling that directly...

    Also, I think it's extremely naive to think that legislatures in red states would not pass laws to ban trans-affirming therapy in the near future. Given other legislation targeting trans people in red states, this is an extremely present risk. And if you don't believe they wouldn't do this, then it's throwing trans people in red states under the bus to say that the risk of that is irrelevant to this ruling.

    The first thing I'd like to say to this is that it is very insulting. Implying that I don't care for trans people is one hell of a choice when I am actively arguing against a ruling that directly harms them.

    More to the point though, no, I don't think there's no risk. Red states can, have, and almost certainly will continue to pass legislation against gender-affirming care, and I wouldn't be surprised if they started trying to target talk therapy too.

    But the fact of that matter is that that isn't happening right now, nor has it anytime in the recent past that I've been able to find. Red states have had plenty of time to try, and have clearly preferred pursuing other avenues of harm. So we're left with a risk that, while not deeply unlikely, is still a "maybe" at best. In exchange, good protective law that we know was helping people has been damaged. That's not progress.

    As for the degree to which it will affect other states' laws: While I can find it believable that not all 23 states will be affected to a significant degree, I think it'd be naïve to think it's unlikely or that it won't be to a notable degree. Suffice to say you must have more faith in the Supreme Court than I do; certainly, you've more faith in the more liberal justices. Liberal politicians have disappointed me more than enough for me not to give them the benefit of the doubt.

    2 votes

  12. Comment on US Supreme Court rules against Colorado ban on ‘conversion therapy’ for LGBTQ+ kids in ~lgbt

    LukeZaz
    (edited )
    Link Parent
    So it should be noted that this isn't actually the neutrality it looks like at all. I've seen this rhetorical trick1 before, though I can't say for sure if or how many judges made their ruling...

    The court specifically noted that a state also could not ban talk therapy designed to affirm a minor's sexual orientation or gender identity.

    So it should be noted that this isn't actually the neutrality it looks like at all. I've seen this rhetorical trick1 before, though I can't say for sure if or how many judges made their ruling with the intent of performing such a trick.2

    Banning something helpful that is actually happening and saying it's alright because it also bans a theoretical bad thing that isn't happening is not a justification, because it's pretending that hypothetical future damage is just as important as non-hypothetical, real, present good. This ruling affects states that ban conversion therapy, of which there are about 23. As far as I'm aware, no other state is affected, because there is no state that bans gender-affirming talk therapy.

    Whether it may happen in the future or not is irrelevant at time of writing, because this ruling endangers good law that exists right now, and things that exist matter more than things that don't.

    1. I could swear this has a name, but can't recall one. If it does and anyone's got a link, please post!
    2. Given the political bent of the SCOTUS, my expectations are quite low.

    2 votes

  13. Comment on Israel passes death penalty [as default] law for Palestinians convincted [in military court] of lethal attacks in ~society

    LukeZaz
    Link Parent
    From the article: So, looks like it could theoretically apply more broadly. But given the officials behind it, their attitude about the whole thing, and just context in general I find it very...

    From the article:

    The law would only apply ​to Israelis convicted of murder whose attacks aimed at "ending Israel's existence", meaning it would mete out the death penalty for Palestinians but not for Jewish Israelis who committed similar crimes, critics ‌say.

    So, looks like it could theoretically apply more broadly. But given the officials behind it, their attitude about the whole thing, and just context in general I find it very unlikely that it would be applied to anyone besides Palestinians or those supporting them, regardless of the crime.

    3 votes

  14. Comment on Israel passes death penalty [as default] law for Palestinians convincted [in military court] of lethal attacks in ~society

    LukeZaz
    (edited )
    Link Parent
    Yeah, it's not ideal. I was trying to keep it succinct and keep changes to a minimum, and I wasn't sure of a better way to bring it up in the title with those restrictions. @smores' reply above is...

    Yeah, it's not ideal. I was trying to keep it succinct and keep changes to a minimum, and I wasn't sure of a better way to bring it up in the title with those restrictions.

    @smores' reply above is correct insofar as I'm aware; it's death penalty as the default, with an option for life imprisonment instead if the court should so choose.

    1 vote

  15. Comment on Israel passes death penalty [as default] law for Palestinians convincted [in military court] of lethal attacks in ~society

    LukeZaz
    Link
    Note: I know it's not a big standard here to include adjustments to headlines like this, but I felt the context was too important to leave out, especially given how even with these adjustments the...

    Note: I know it's not a big standard here to include adjustments to headlines like this, but I felt the context was too important to leave out, especially given how even with these adjustments the headline makes this sound significantly more tame than it actually is due to the "lethal attacks" bit.1 So long as the grave seriousness of this law is maintained, I'm perfectly fine with title changes; that same seriousness might warrant discussion first, but the folks here who change titles are good people who I trust the judgement of, so I'm not worried.

    Anyways, speaking of context, here's some snippets from the article:

    JERUSALEM, March 30 (Reuters) - Israel's parliament passed a law on Monday making the death penalty a default sentence for Palestinians convicted ​in military courts of deadly attacks, fulfilling a pledge by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s far-right allies.

    The legislation has drawn international criticism of Israel, which is already under scrutiny ‌for increasing violence by Jewish settlers against Palestinians in the occupied West Bank.

    The measure includes provisions requiring an execution by hanging within 90 days of sentencing, with some allowance for a delay but no right to clemency and the option of imposing a life imprisonment sentence instead of capital punishment.

    [...]

    Military courts in the West Bank can already impose a death sentence on Palestinian convicts but have never done so.

    The measure was promoted by Itamar Ben-Gvir, the far-right national security minister who ​has worn noose-shaped lapel pins in the run-up to the vote.

    [...]

    The original bill had mandated the death sentence for non-Israeli citizens convicted in West Bank military courts of deadly ‌terrorist acts. The ⁠revised legislation includes the option of life imprisonment.

    In Israel's civilian courts, the new legislation mandates either life imprisonment or the death penalty for anyone convicted of "deliberately causing the death of a person with the intent of ending Israel's existence."

    [...]

    Israeli rights group B'Tselem says that military courts in the West Bank, where Palestinians are tried for alleged crimes, have a 96% conviction rate and have a history of extracting confessions through torture.

    Ben-Gvir, who ⁠was convicted in ​2007 of racist incitement against Arabs and support for the Kach group on the Israeli and U.S. terrorism blacklists, has ​overseen an overhaul of prisons that has led to allegations of abuse of Palestinian prisoners.

    He made capital punishment for Palestinian militants a main pledge in his 2022 election campaign and since taking office has publicly backed some Israeli soldiers being probed for suspected ​excessive force against Palestinians. The next national election is due in October 2026.

    1. Specifically, the "lethal attacks" part makes it sound less unreasonable, since it makes it sound like it'd only be meted out for severe crimes. But when you add the context above of a 96% conviction rate, plus a military court, plus allegations of confessions obtained via torture... it's, er, not so great.

    21 votes

  17. Comment on I think Tildes moderators and admins may need to make a decision regarding how to handle Harry Potter related posts in ~tildes

    LukeZaz
    Link Parent
    I'm seeing you describe this again and again throughout here despite the thread that precipitated this having – to my knowledge – no instance of this occurring, which makes this feel kinda...

    I'm seeing you describe this again and again throughout here despite the thread that precipitated this having – to my knowledge – no instance of this occurring, which makes this feel kinda disingenuous. It's one thing if it's a hypothetical you're worried about, but you're not making it sound like one, and you're bringing it up an awful lot for something that didn't actually happen.

    23 votes

  18. Comment on I think Tildes moderators and admins may need to make a decision regarding how to handle Harry Potter related posts in ~tildes

    LukeZaz
    Link Parent
    Both. The key is in having an audience. If you've got an audience, so too does the person you're hoping to convince — this is a kind of platforming, and platforming harmful views is a terrible...

    Both. The key is in having an audience. If you've got an audience, so too does the person you're hoping to convince — this is a kind of platforming, and platforming harmful views is a terrible idea.

    Not to mention that it's harder for someone to genuinely listen to you and reconsider their views when they've got a bunch of eyes on them. If those eyes agree with them, they'll be overconfident, if the eyes disagree, they'll get defensive. It's just not helpful.

    8 votes

  19. Comment on I think Tildes moderators and admins may need to make a decision regarding how to handle Harry Potter related posts in ~tildes

    LukeZaz
    Link Parent
    I wasn't aware of Daryl Davis, so thank you for letting me know about him! In this case, I should clarify that when I say things shouldn't be debated, I was speaking in the context of a public...

    I wasn't aware of Daryl Davis, so thank you for letting me know about him!

    In this case, I should clarify that when I say things shouldn't be debated, I was speaking in the context of a public forum such as this. In private, engaging peacefully can have very real and very useful results, as Davis proves.

    In public, though? Even if it does work, it will serve to have two damaging effects: First, if one of the participants is a terrible person, it will provide publicity for them; and second, it helps drag approval for the given horrible thing closer towards the Overton window of acceptable discourse. Neither of these things are okay.

    If you want to convince someone with awful beliefs to let them go, and you feel strongly you're capable enough to do so, I won't tell you to stop. But that's hard, risky, and needs the right time. Any situation with an audience is not that time.

    11 votes

  20. Comment on I think Tildes moderators and admins may need to make a decision regarding how to handle Harry Potter related posts in ~tildes

    LukeZaz
    Link Parent
    That depends on with whom I am coexisting. Are we talking about people who do their best to avoid the harms of the franchise even as they consume it, i.e. donating to charities to offset it, or...

    I think the two sides presented here can coexist.

    That depends on with whom I am coexisting. Are we talking about people who do their best to avoid the harms of the franchise even as they consume it, i.e. donating to charities to offset it, or ensuring they don't financially support the media in question? Or are we talking people who're willing to write off the suffering of trans people as "not enough for me to care" just for the sake of media they like?

    I want to believe we're talking about the former, but part of the problem is that responsible consumption of media like this requires at least some degree of awareness to be spread when discussing it,1 lest that awareness be lost among those who know it, or never learned for those who don't. And yet complaints about that very thing seem to have been what caused this hubbub. That worries me.

    I have no problem with people who enjoy Harry Potter but take necessary steps to ensure that their enjoyment does not hurt trans people. But if it should turn out that what we're considering is the latter group, who'd prefer an easy carelessness — well, that's not really a group I'm keen on sharing a space with.

    1. Or at least, this is necessary while the author is still alive, profiting, and actively using said profits to hurt people. For say, H.P. Lovecraft, this knowledge is useful and good, but I wouldn't think it required.

    9 votes