Skip Navigation
Wearing socks *is* a social construct
  • They said the child was using to "get out of anything and everything", including wearing socks, which implicitly argues it to be a bad thing.

    The child is more or less saying that because something is a social construct, that means that they do not have to follow it.

  • Wearing socks *is* a social construct
  • Just because something is a social construct doesn't mean it's a bad thing to be ignored.

    Being alive is a social construct. Humans decided that some things counted as alive, and other things did not. Nature doesn't care if a bunch of chemical reactions are happening inside a cell, or in a glass tube. It has no objective definition of "alive".

  • Don't buy that cute Switch 2 Piranha Plant camera - it's rubbish
  • On the bright side, the camera/Switch doesn't use a proprietary connector, so you can plug a lot of cameras into the thing, and it will generally work.

    It's not like the DS days, where if you wanted to plug a microphone in in addition to your headphones, they had a special connector for the mic part.

  • A T. rex with feathers? Scientists say dinosaurs were likely different from what most of us picture
  • Exactly, scientists have been saying this forever but evil oversized bipedal crocs sell.

    It honestly feels like a marketing issue more than anything. A non-zero amount of people think modern dinosaurs are "boring" because they don't look like Jurassic Park.

    Compared to big fluffy unicorn pigeons that eat each other.

    Like people would happily be swooped by a magpie if given the chance.

    A knee-high raptor who will happily leap up and bite chunks off of larger prey whilst they're still alive and kicking seems like it would retain much of the terror.

  • Got it right
  • He's also very particular about the factory and the chocolate it makes. Candy with a hint of gloop sounds about as appealing as Gloop fudge, and Wonka may just chuck out the whole batch.

    Wonka didn't defy the laws of reality just so he could cut corners in the factory.

  • Trump in wake of Iran attack: ‘Everyone, keep oil prices down’
  • "Drill, baby, drill!" has always been an immensely stupid rallying cry, even if you don't care about the environment.

    But a funny one, if it was in an Austin Powers movie.

    Fun fact #2: Not all oil is equal. Refineries are designed to process certain grades of oil into specific products, and different parts of the world have different grades. Refineries also often blend oils from different parts of the world to get the characteristics they need for their process.

    And the infrastructure to do that doesn't currently exist. Even if they could drill overnight, they don't have the pumps, platforms, and refineries set up.

  • Sad 😔
  • I feel like people overblow the Elon Musk reference. Even putting aside the plot twist, it's been nearly 200 years from now, and they had the whole nuclear apocalypse in the early 2000s, which would only further muddle things.

    People today praise Thomas Edison, and he was not that much better in many respects.

    It's entirely reasonable for someone in the 23rd century to lose some of the details that we might have today.

  • Sad 😔
  • You say that, but we seem to be at least on track to a better 2050 than they had.

    We've not had a eugenics war, drug-controlled supersoldiers, nuclear conflagration, nor a mutant genocide campaign, and we may not get the second and fourth.

  • [Feature requests] Reopen thread if the app is closed while editing

    Voyager takes after the Apollo app in this regard, where if the app is closed while text is being edited, it'll bring back the unsaved draft, but it'll pop that into the next reply window you open, even if it is a different thread entirely.

    Being able to reopen the same thread and resume editing would make it much easier if you're switching to another app to look up a reference or a link, and Voyager gets destroyed by the OS. It'd also help refresh your context if you can't remember what it was you were writing and why.

    0
    What happened to Kbin.Social?

    While kbin.social's site mentioned that they were migrating to a new provider, and as a result, the site might be experiencing some issues, kbin.social has been serving up a similar HTTP 50x errors, and that migration message for well over a month, if not more.

    What happened?

    11
    How do you ask for a haircut?

    While ordering a crew cut is easy, since it's on the menu, what about other kinds?

    Can you just go "I'd like a men/women's haircut" and leave it at that, or do you need something more specific, like saying you want a Charlestone done by a No. 3 to the sides, and a 4 up top?

    44
    What would inorganic species call themselves?

    I've been using "mechanoid" as a classification (similar to humanoid, etc), but a friend pointed out that it's both too generic, and that said inorganics might just consider it biology, with organics being the weird outlier.

    11
    Why is "Dear X" considered more formal than "To X" in e-mail/writing?

    You wouldn't start off an e-mail with "My Dear X", or "Dearest X", since that would be too personal for a professional email, so "To X" being more impersonal seems like it would make the letter more professional-sounding, compared to "Dear X".

    24
    What caused the change in electronic terminology?

    What caused the shift from calling things like rheostats and condensers to resistors and capacitors, or the move from cycles to Hertz?

    It seemed to just pop up out of nowhere, seeing as the previous terms seemed fine, and are in use for some things today (like rheostat brakes, or condenser microphones).

    23
    [Stupid Question] Why cut/bulk in cycles instead of doing it all in one go?

    You often see people in fitness mention going through a cut/bulk cycle, or mention one, with plans to follow up with the other. Why is it that cutting and bulking so often happen in cycles, rather than said person just doing both at once, until they hit their desired weight?

    6
    Was the Federation right to grandfather in Earth's laws against genetic modification?

    One of the recent laws in Trek that gets looked at a bit, is the genetic engineering ban within the Federation. It appears to have been passed as a direct result of Earth's Eugenics Wars, to prevent a repeat, and seems to have been grandfathered into Federation law, owing to the hand Earth had in its creation.

    But we also see that doing so came with major downsides. The pre-24th century version of the law applied a complete ban on any genetic modification of any kind, and a good faith attempt to keep to that resulted in the complete extinction of the Illyrians.

    In Enterprise, Phlox specifically attributes the whole issue with the Eugenics Wars to humans going overboard with the idea of genetic engineering, as they are wont to do, trying to improve/perfect the human species, rather than using it for the more sensible goal of eliminating/curing genetic diseases.

    Strange New Worlds raises the question of whether it was right for Earth to enshrine their own disasters with genetic engineering in Federation law like that, particularly given that a fair few aliens didn't have a problematic history with genetic engineering, and some, like the Illyrians, and the Denobulans, used it rather liberally, to no ill-effects.

    At the same time, people being augmented with vast powers in Trek seems to inevitably go poorly. Gary Mitchell, Khan Noonien-Singh, and Charlie X all became megalomaniacs because of the vast amount of power that they were able to access, although both Gary and Charlie received their powers through external intervention, and it is unclear whether Khan was the exception to the rule, having been born with that power, and knowing how to use it properly. Similarly, the Klingon attempt at replicating the human augment programme was infamous, resulting in the loss of their famous forehead ridges, and threatening the species with extinction.

    Was the Federation right to implement Earth's ban on genetic engineering, or is it an issue that seems mostly human/earth-centric, and them impressing the results of their mistakes on the Federation itself?

    9
    What's the food like on your world?

    Can humans eat it? Do they have food at all? What do they have as a staple foodstuff?

    10
    Was the USS Discovery upgraded completely, or does it still keep its original technology?

    Inspired by a bit of discussion over on discord, where there was an argument over whether the USS Discovery had been upgraded by the 32nd century Federation.

    On the one hand, the Discovery did undergo a vast overhaul, being fitted with an upgraded power/propulsion system, detachable nacelles and the works, however, we also know at the end of Discovery Season 3, that Burnham resetting the Discovery's computers effectively put much of the ship back to the 23rd century baseline (or as much of one as it could return to). We're also shown that the Discovery still uses microtapes in its computer room.

    So was the Discovery upgraded completely to 32nd century standards, or is it still a 23rd century ship underneath the 32nd century paint?

    5
    The Federation should not have been surprised that their holograms developed sapience

    We already know from TOS that Mutlitronic computers are able to develop sapience, with the M-5 computer being specifically designed to "think and reason" like a person, and built around Dr Daystrom's neural engrams.

    However, we also know from Voyager that the holomatrix of their Mk 1 EMH also incorporates Multitronic technology, and from DS9 that it's also used in mind-reading devices.

    Assuming that the EMH is designed to more or less be a standard hologram with some medical knowledge added in, it shouldn't have come as a surprise that holograms were either sapient themselves, or were capable of developing sapience. It would only be a logical possibility if technology that allowed human-like thought and reasoning into a hologram.

    If anything, it is more of a surprise that sapient holograms like the Doctor or Moriarty hadn't happened earlier.

    19
    Bringing technologies back from the future ensures that the Federation won't develop their present counterparts

    We often see technology from the future brought back to the present, whether as a case of a chance encounter, or something more.

    However, it’s also fairly uncommon to see those technologies pop up against after they’ve been introduced. One such example is the ablative armour generators that Admiral Janeway fitted to the Voyager, being prototypes from a future Starfleet, which are seen in that episode, and then never again, even in shows that are set after the time she left.

    The reason for this might be that the Federation does not want to run the risk of being accused of violating the temporal prime directive (or accidentally running afoul of it in some other way), and shelves that particular technology entirely.

    From their standpoint, it would be rather difficult to separate a technology that the Federation developed of their own accord, compared to one that they might have developed from being inspired by, or reverse-engineering a piece of future technology, so they shelve it, rather than risk the trouble, never developing the preliminary steps to reach that future technology.

    The only anachronistic part of this is the Doctor’s mobile emitter, which is a variant of 26th century technology, and was developed into Picard, but that can be explained by it being reverse engineered from 26th century technology, by someone in the 20th century, technically making it technology from the past. Since it is Earth technology from their own past, they might be able to get away with iterating on their own version without risking trouble with the various temporal enforcement agencies.

    9
    InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)T1
    T156 @lemmy.world
    Posts 14
    Comments 1.4K