• 0 Posts
  • 88 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 7th, 2023

help-circle









  • WoahWoah@lemmy.worldtomemes@lemmy.worldWeww lawd he's a coming
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    13 days ago

    We’ll be told the economy can’t afford another lockdown, so people will just have to report to work and risk dying. I highly doubt most countries will do that again in the near future. Let alone people abiding it.

    I really feel like that was a moment where we could have seen radical social change, but instead it just ended up being a blip when everyone made Tiktok videos. I always imagine what it would have been like if, for some unknown reason, like a massive EMP flare from the sun or something, made all digital and internet technology die.

    I think the best hope for the world at this point might literally be an extremely large and direct solar event/CME. It would cause chaos and result in a lot of deaths, but it seems like the only thing that would actually radically change the suicidal trajectory global society is currently on.


  • A black venti coffee from Starbucks has almost 450mg of caffeine. 200mg probably isn’t “whopping (!)”-worthy.

    I have a co-worker that drinks a pot of coffee at work each day by himself. That’s about 1,200mg of caffeine, and he has a cup in the morning before he gets to work, so he’s probably having about 1,500mg/day. Admittedly that’s on the high side.

    800mg of caffeine from black coffee per day is actually shown to be good for you. Reduced risk of alzheimer’s, type 2 diabetes, certain cancers, and Parkinson’s. Reduces inflammation. Lowered rates of liver cirrhosis and liver cancer.


  • It’s more or less an inevitability at this point, regardless of what we do. Really we’re just trying to get corporations and countries to make changes so it will be Gen A’s (or the following generation’s) problem instead of Z.

    Normalcy now has an unavoidable term limit. The question is if we’re going to shorten how long that timespan is by desperately holding onto normalcy now for as long as we can, or if we’re going to start making things harder, more challenging, and less normal sooner to make the transition less painful and give it a longer on-ramp.

    Currently we seem to be choosing option A.

    For what it’s worth, I’ve seen some friends take things a little more seriously when I’ve explained that currently we’re going to see abrupt and incredibly disruptive changes at the point in our (Gen Z and Millenials) lives when we’re at the age when we’ll be least able to tolerate the changes and most reliant on others. In 40-50 years, Z and M are going to be senior citizens at best. While we may be full of distracted, dopamine-seeking denial now, by the time shit really starts hitting the fan, we’re going to be extra weight on the generations struggling desperately to survive.

    Don’t expect a happy retirement.


  • Going almost triple the speed limit like that in the United States will end up being a combination of felonies, you’ll be taken directly to jail, and your car will be impounded as evidence. You could serve years depending on how the felonies shake out, you’ll no longer be able to vote, and the fines will be thousands if not tens of thousands of dollars. Further, lethal force on the part of an officer would arguably be authorized given the clear and present danger to the public by someone going at such an egregious speed.

    I’m not sure such an over-the-top example is great evidence of how strict Danish moving violations are.







  • The majority of individuals on platforms like Lemmy—and social media more broadly—engage almost exclusively as passive consumers. Their involvement often begins and ends with the simple act of upvoting or downvoting content. This limited interaction speaks volumes about the nature of digital engagement, where consuming information or entertainment takes precedence over meaningful interaction or contribution. The absence of deeper engagement is not a failing of the platform itself but a reflection of broader societal tendencies.

    People, in general, tend toward passivity, a trait that extends beyond online spaces and into areas like civic participation. In the United States, for example, voter turnout remains notoriously low. People express their dissatisfaction with the status quo, they crave change, and they criticize institutions, yet they shy away from taking the minimal steps required to enact that change, often hiding behind a hand-waving comment involving the words “systemic,” “structure,” and/or “institutions,” a transparent way of excusing their unwillingness to actually act. As though they themselves are not parts of those systems, structures, and institutions. The same individuals who will upvote or downvote content online without a second thought are often the ones who abstain from voting in elections, an “upvote/downvote” that directly impact their lives.

    What is even more concerning is that this passivity is not merely a result of laziness or apathy, but something ingrained and encouraged by modern society. Our institutions—whether educational, political, or corporate—tend to value compliance over initiative. Decision-making, once seen as a marker of personal agency and responsibility, is increasingly viewed as a burden. People have been conditioned to prefer being told what to do rather than take responsibility for their choices.

    If a decision goes wrong, there’s an inherent comfort in being able to place blame on someone else. This social conditioning makes being passive, fading into the wallpaper, not only acceptable but desirable for many. And yet, these same people will often feel deeply dissatisfied with their lives. But, rather than do something about it, they continue to be helpless, wishing someone would decide for them to improve their lives and then forcing them to do it.

    While it’s easy to express frustration with the passive nature of online participants, it is also, sadly, understandable. They are products of a society that rewards inaction more than action, where engagement is often reduced to the simplest and least effortful gestures. These platforms reflect the broader societal trend toward disengagement from real, consequential decision-making, reinforcing and reflecting a vicious cycle of passive impotence while they wait for someone or something to fix things for them.