True, but then you have that whole weird… few seconds of being able to move your eyes and possibly make facial expressions while your head rolls around thing haha.

And yes, a properly sharpened, weighted and … drop heighted… guillotine will lop off your head every time.

Takes a fair amount of strength and finesse to chop someones head off on a block. IIIRC, there are more than a couple recorded instances of bad executioners having to make a number of swings to totally off somebody’s head. Bleeeegh.

A correctly done hanging snaps the neck instantly and is nearly certainly less painful and drawn out than lethal injection. You are basically totally brain dead within I think under 10 seconds.

Obviously an incorrectly done hanging is horrible as you asphyxiate in an extremely painful physical position.

Technically lethal injection methods vary, but the last thing I remember reading about them was… they do not actually render you unconscious and then inject the stuff that kills you.

They render you /paralyzed/, and then inject the stuff that kills you, which more or less make you feel as if your blood is on fire, and this can take up to 2 minutes before it flatlines your heart… brain probably takes longer to die, all in extreme agony.

If you need to be able to do unions and you are doing it in javascript, you are being absurdly inefficient compared to setting up a postgres db, but i wont be able to convince you of this because of basically nonsense brainwashing from your corporate conditioning.

EDIT: Note to self, do not use lemmy while hangry.

Yep Im wayyyy off base here.

Ah yes, javascript, the database language.

Jesus fucking christ I am so glad I don’t work in the corporate tech sector anymore.

Youre right, I got my eyeball parts confused.

You could.

Good luck with resetting your account credentials though.

Also: Please for the love of god do not apply this logic to cornea scans.

Huh, I hadn’t read it. Everyone I know / knew who identified as bi in the 00s or 10s explained it to me as I said, and that does seem to be the general public understanding of the term by anyone Ive talked to in person in the last 5 years or so.

Ive also had self professed pan people explain bisexuality to me as I originally described it as recently as 2 years ago.

Ah, yes, I have. I shouldn’t have phrased it as equal attraction, perhaps, ‘willingness to sexually engage with either sex’.

Though isn’t the Kinsey Scale now woefully out of date anyway, as it comes from research in the America of 1948 and 1953, only considering essentially men and women, and hetero and homosexuality, when it is now understood that gender is actually distinct from sex?

Hrm, every self professed bi person I’ve ever met described themselves the way I described them as, likewise with every pan person.

Didn’t realize the the definition of bi had changed.

Today I Learned, I guess.

I’d call that polysexual, if it means attraction to 2+ genders, though I get that the term comes from back before gender itself was really widely critically analyzed.

And of course polysexual would be confused with polyamorous.

But yes, you are correct this is the modern definition, so I guess I am bi then.

But I’d never like identify openly as bi, because, again, everyone I’ve ever met /not on the internet/ would think that means I like dudes and gals.

Uh lets see…

Flips Open Republican Talking Points Playbook, dumps out some ash from Rush Limbaugh’s cigars

Oh! Taxing the wealthy discourages job growth!

But sir the numbers don’t actually add up even if you-

Shut up kid, this’ll work.

Its not bisexual, assuming bisexual means in this context a biologically born man who is equally sexually attracted to gay men and straight women, or bi men and bi women.

It also is not pansexual, as there’s clearly /I don’t actually have equal sexual attraction to literally anyone/ going on.

I am actually like this too, have been for a long time.

Now, I do not want to presume to speak for this person, so the rest of this is just me.

Maybe they can chime in and agree or disagree.

Absolutely not attracted to men, of any kind of presentation.

But… I’d love to fall in love with a woman who could peg me, or a transwoman. I’d fellatio a transwoman’s unit no problem. But not a gay man, or a bi man.

So… by that, we’ve got what used to be called basically a kinky guy?

And while I am an lgtbq ally (or arguably member), Ive always been comfortable with my own male body, and basically present as a cis male.

So, its some new kind of sexuality/gender there is not really a name for yet.

At least for me, it isn’t femboy, as I have 0 interest in being essentially a feminine cross dresser with very submissive personality traits and cutesy uwu affectations.

I have nothing against femboys, but I personally would not be interested in a romantic or sexual relationship with one.

God I still cannot believe how obviously bullshit that all was and how many fucking idiots parroted it hook line and sinker.

Wait, so, the Cloud is actually just a bunch of other computers, called servers, and the only real innovation is basically a load balancing system?

Next youre gonna tell me I wont be able to stream lagless video games and also do competitive multiplayer on my Google Stadia, pff, like youre some kind of expert or something.

/s

Yeah, this is pretty funny from that perspective.

Aha, youre not the first person to point this out to me, though you are by far the most polite and least rude.

I know how to do markdowns in lemmy.

I just stylistically like using / encapsulation as a form of emphasis, usually to indicate a tone shift to a more serious and louder tone if you were reading this in your head or aloud.

Ive found that italics and bold and strikethrough all have different sets of contextual uses that usually evoke slightly different interpretations from most readers, so i kind of just made up my own thing.

Italics usually convey either a tone shift down to a softer or near whisper, which can be used for ironic inflexion effect, or to just actually denote an actual whisper, or i often also use it if im writing basically a monologue or dialogue and then want to indicate that some kind of action happens.

Bold text ive found doesnt usually actually imply seriousness or even loudness to most people, but instead actually something more like a boastful and prideful tone.

I also use it in more serious discussions to focus on key phrases, figures or words that are pivotal to either my argument or the argument of another.

And then of course theres ALL CAPS which usually denotes basically a tone of quite loud, quite agitated, anger, when used sparringly, … or basically that youre either insane, or very old and cant read small caps well, if its used not sparringly.

I dont really know what to say other than, no, historically we are very, very good at accidentally /as well as intentionally/ setting off metaphorical powder kegs, in situations where large segments of the population believes in the inherent stability of society, either ignorant of or in spite of actual history.

Specifically in regards to cold war era nuclear weapons… beyond the cuban missile crisis having, very, very easily gone out of control, take some time and look up the numerous instances where, due to basically either an overzealous command being issued, or a rational decision being made with imperfect information led to an actual order to use a nuclear weapon that was actually stymied by a single individual disobeying a direct command.

Or look at the numerous instances that basically a mechanical failure, intelligence failure, maintenance failure, something like that, led to a nuclear weapon basically being accidentally used, where it was basically down to dumb luck that further failures, or heroic actions from unsung heroes, prevented a nuclear blast from going off that could have easily spiraled into a full fledged nuclear exchange.

But more to the actual point of discussion: Saying that nukes exist and we have not obliterated each other yet, so that implies that a totally different scenario with totally different relevant factors at play is not likely to result in a mass armed civil conflict of some kind… thats basically not even a useful analogy.

EDIT: also for what its worth, im not the one who downvoted you. I generally only downvote people who are extremely abusive or very obviously unable to actually understand the words people say and then also refuse to understand them when explained another way, things like that, at least in the context of fairly serious and complex topic like this.

I actually think its more important that people be able to have a genuine discussion involving disagreement, and also for others to view such discussions, than it is to be angry and downvote some words i dont agree with, but seem to be written in good faith.

Welp, Im a 34 year old man whose misspent and regretable couple of youthful years on 4chan basically scarred me for fucking life.

And I fell into the age old 4chanesque assumption that you were another current or former anon.

At least I can be honest about it, I guess.

embarrassing

There are actually… or at least were actually people that refused to use Apple products…

…because the Apple With A Bite Out Of It logo signifies functionally the mark of the beast, as it represents being willing branded by the symbol of the forbidden fruit that eve took a bite out of and doomed humanity for the sake of knowledge to be able to challenge god with.

I dont personally know people like that, but i have absolutely met people who, if you put a vr helmet on them and loaded up say the most recent DOOM game, they would be so shocked and horrified they would actually think the device was a cursed unholy contraption that is an /actual/ portal to hell.

The heavy emphasis on over the top imagery and violence in early shooters is a lot more understandable when you realize the main market demo was basically nerdy white kids rebelling from their very much more normalized extremist christian worldviews in the 90s.

Totally off topic but… dear god… HotDogFingies?

Thats like… NuggieMuncher 9000 or NoWaifuMeCryfu.

Best of luck on the intermet, uh, fren.

Yes, I am aware of all of this.

Here’s the crux of your argument:

There is no chance that the commander of the Texas National Guard unit would order their soldiers to fire on federal agents unless they’re a complete idiot.

So uh, this can’t happen because it would be dumb if it did.

I agree it would be dumb if it happened.

Doesn’t mean it can’t.

Doesn’t mean the situation is not a powder keg, doesn’t mean that if basically one exceptionally stupid command, conflicting with a far less stupid command from another authority, is acted on, it could escalate rapidly.

Again, these kinds of /which authority will be recognized in case of conflicting commands, by which individual commanders and sometimes even soldiers/ are a defining element of civil conflicts around the world throughout history, and they are simply not predictable at an individual basis when in an extremely polarized, tense and complex situation.

Your argument is basically just: this would be dumb if it happened, so its unlikely/impossible.

Again, yep, itd be dumb.

Again, viewed through a lense of history of civil conflicts, especially a Chinese lense, it actually certainly qualifies as a very obvious situation to be highly concerned about.

The comparison with Ukraine and Russia was not chosen because the similarities of the situation leading up to armed conflict, but simply to illustrate that a lot of people can believe an armed conflict would not happen because it would be dumb if it did, and also to provide an example that sometimes, in war, surprises can happen that astound even the experts, as well as the general public.