Urist

joined 1 year ago
MODERATOR OF
[–] Urist@lemmy.ml 3 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

If anyone wants to grasp the basics: here is some fun reading (leading on to some beautiful math). Changing the idea of parallelity leads to hyperbolic geometry and other fun stuff. :)

[–] Urist@lemmy.ml 1 points 4 days ago

Magic beans taste soo good.

[–] Urist@lemmy.ml 3 points 4 days ago
[–] Urist@lemmy.ml 2 points 4 days ago (2 children)

What became of the second spidey?

[–] Urist@lemmy.ml 58 points 4 days ago

I obviously downloaded a car after seeing that obnoxious anti-piracy ad.

[–] Urist@lemmy.ml 2 points 5 days ago

My gf asked me. 😁

[–] Urist@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 week ago

The original comment says that these clauses should be made illegal, to which the comment I responded to objects. Objecting to change based on arguments that are only valid within the paradigm that exists before said change is nothing but a logical fallacy.

It is demonstrably false that the change has to entail the problems conjectured by the comment I responded to. Thus the counter argument is shown to be both reductionist and wrong.

[–] Urist@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 week ago (2 children)

It is not besides the point because there exists an alternative to the whole ordeal of arbitration clauses and suing. That is what I pointed out.

We all joke about how americans sue for the most stupid shit, but (besides different mindsets following from the same reason) you do it because your system allows for it and provides no alternative course of action.

[–] Urist@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (4 children)

Uhm what are you talking about? Why would I want to sue my surgeon?

EDIT: The reasons why I would not sue my surgeon are:

  1. It is not a private legal matter, but a matter of adequate services rendered.
  2. The question of liability can be better answered by a specialized team of doctors that review my case than a jury.
  3. Legal action is an obstacle made to disenfranchise those that cannot afford counsel, which is why the US loves it and we generally don't.
  4. We have laws that demand reasonable judgement. Hence I cannot make a claim for damages due to some unrelated reason and they cannot evade guilt by the same tactic.

If the surgeon did something illegal, this would be a different matter.

[–] Urist@lemmy.ml 15 points 1 week ago (6 children)

Otherwise, no doctor would ever touch any patient ever again.

Demonstrably false. In a public healthcare system it is also possible to have publicly funded patient injury compensation systems. Source: Live in Norway and we have both.

[–] Urist@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 week ago

They really are not. For instance in Norway they generally do not wear firearms. High social mobility, historically at least, has meant less organized crime, even if that is all but being destroyed as we speak.

I would rather say that soon they will be the same as elsewhere, due to the historical social democratic policies being reverted by neolibs.

[–] Urist@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 week ago

Yeah, kind of. Moderation is tricky and moderating moderators is even worse. I got banned from !worldnews@lemmy.ml for being a "white moderate". Was it censorship of non-leftists? No. I am a communist, not a moderate.

There is one rogue mod there banning people right, left and centre and that is a problem, but not one of plain censorship. I would rather say it is frankly the problem of having a bad mod who does not understand their role. I imagine the same happens on .world and other places, albeit under different guises.

view more: next ›