I'm sure I've also seen some news articles you haven't, its kinda hard to keep up with literally every single piece of news, especially something as inconsequential as that.

Hell, I had never even heard of the term 86 before today, and I know I'm not the only one in the comments that hadn't.

Listen, I hate to defend republicans here, but your comment implies that all of them are pedophiles and that's just not true. They all may be fucked up in some way or another, but even republicans dislike pedophiles.

I read it as in "is considering distributing..." and was VERY confused.

Yeah, with billions on the line, 24 hours is a cake walk

Its funny because I have no issue killing or robbing NPCs no matter how good or friendly they are. But the second any multiple choice response pops up, pictured below is me any time I hover over the rude answer.

Yup, this was me. I picked up Stellaris probably not even a year ago at this point. While not entirely friendly, I at least made peace with my neighbors during my first play through. And then for my second play through I pirated all the DLC because holy fucking shit that's expensive. I ended up becoming the crisis, blew up some stars, and eventually the whole universe. Good times.

And calling people that get another animal heartless isn't?

Anyway, it was meant as a commentary on how people can grieve but still get new pets. I wasn't commanding them to grieve this way. Maybe "you gotta" was a poor choice of words.

I never said anywhere that anybody needed to take on another pet. All I said was, essentially, it's okay to do and people aren't heartless for doing it.

You gotta move on through the grief, accept that they're no longer with you, but that you gave them the best life you could. And maybe realize that giving another pet a good life doesn't mean you're replacing or forgetting your last one. Some people are just better at it than others, they aren't being heartless.

That said, people who get a new dog a week or two after their previous one died are insane to me. That just feels disrespectful.

While art will likely never be completely replaced by AI due to passionate people doing it because they want to anyway, the fact that it is becoming less and less viable of a career path is depressing. Far less people will pursue art even as a hobby in a society that requires working and won't pay for art.

I don't think any Midwest factory workers particularly loved their job. There was little passion or soul behind it. Machines are meant to replace menial hard labor, not passion.

Did you perhaps mean disapprove?

Depends. They certainly lose a potential sale from some people, but many people who pirate books never would have read it if they needed to pay for it. Be that because of a lack of money or a lack of interest. Same with games and shows. So no lost sales there.

You could even argue that pirating helps with sales by causing people who never would have read the book otherwise to discuss it with friends or strangers online. I personally think that argument is a big stretch, but it's not entirely wrong.

But yeah, more pirates should be willing to support authors of books they like. If you think they deserve it, buy the ebook even if you've already read the whole thing.

Thanos was the universe's biggest mass murderer, but at least he had a point (even if his solution was the dumbest thing imaginable}. Musk is just a PoS.

I'm very new to this particular instance, but my original .world account turns 2 in just 10 days, so I see we found Lemmy around the same time.

Happy birthday, .zip!

Paid for out of your own wallet? That's super cool of you.

The dude literally waited until he was on camera to take the shot. Not only did he know exactly what he was aiming at, he wanted to be seen doing it.

It's not similar to "god of the gaps" at all, as I'm not inserting anything inside of that gap. I have no fucking clue what's causing it to emerge, and I probably never will. Rather than saying "I don't know what's causing lightning so it must be Zeus," I'm saying "I don't know what's causing lightning, but I can see it's coming from the sky." Or in this case, I have no idea what's causing us to experience consciousness, but it seems to be a result of our brain.

And I see no evidence for the idea that consciousness can even exist outside of the brain, nor that an afterlife exists.

I find it odd that we doubt the afterlife.

Most people don't, unfortunately.

How do you define consciousness? How do you define "you"?

I believe that consciousness is simply an emergent property of our brain. Without the brain, there is no consciousness. A brain can be destroyed, just like a hard drive can be destroyed. Sure, the atoms are still there, but the "you" inside of them is as good as gone.

I didn't count, but I believe these three

(in case the reader wanted some random guys opinion)

I'm not of fan of how the watermark is cut off, so here's the full original image.