Indeed, though I was just rephrasing the question from the person you were replying to.

Responded to the wrong comment, apologies.

IMHO the harm-ROI for veganism is pretty huge.

I believe that you believe that, its also possibly true, I’ve not looked in to it enough to form an actual opinion in it.

I’m also fairly certain out perspectives on comparative options in this regard is going to be different.

It’s neither super difficult nor costly to become vegan and all the knowledge about food and nutrients that you may learn is a helpful skill in general.

This, i've argued against a few times now (in other threads), the level of knowledge and access you have to the things needed for a healthy and sustainable vegan lifestyle are not universal, by any stretch.

I'm not arguing that it isn't relatively accessible to some, just that the level of ease is very subjective to circumstance.

i agree with all of that.

Genuine question though, is it propaganda?

I mean it's essentially:

"Police install draconian system to to target the crimes of the peasants, while continuing to ignore the rich, system working as intended"

Edit: wait no, actually i just saw the 'Address fears' section, they are clearly pretending this is the only problem.

as i said, nuance.

The second part is describing a social contract of sorts, conditional assistance , which would put it squarely on the side of "expecting it to be reciprocal", situationally at least.

I don't disagree with this, but it's a really big difference from your original reply.

So you waste your time for the sake of it? I’d say something about not being able to reason someone out of a position they didnt use reason to get into in the first place but I guess its repetitive.

I stated exactly what my reasons are for engaging,

I think the word you are looking for is recursive, i could be wrong though.

You can spend your time as you want but the trolls do build their world by the responses of others. It makes them more real and let’s useless conversation bog down better ones. They are seeking answers they know they won’t get to make it seem like their world is more figured out for waving away other thoughts.

Genuine question, why would i care how they build their world ?

If they want to build a mental echochamber, who am i to deny them their delusions ?

The argument about bogging up otherwise useful conversations has merit though, I’ll consider that going forward.

Though, my side of the argument is still written as a good faith reply so there might be benefit in seeing actual replies, if only from one side...hmm..i'll think on this.

I dont know. I dont get any joy out of arguing the minutia of nonsense. It feels like it just fills my own head with it and doesnt make me more empathetic to understand that.

It's not really joy and i'm not really arguing the minutia expecting coherent replies, as i said it's interesting to me to try and understand different kinds of people, it helps me better communicate in situations where the other party is conversing in good faith.

I'm not really looking to build empathy for that either, perhaps some pity in some really tragic cases where you can see they are truly struggling, but those aren't usually trolls, just people struggling with people things.

A lot of the time the useful bits aren't in the bad faith nonsense itself but how it's structured, the way in which the "logical" pivots occur, the word choice or something else that isn't the actual content itself.

I get that it might not be like that for everyone.

Personally I am upset to find that someone doesnt want to talk but use me as a springboard for their own stuff but oh well.

I think we might have fundamentally different perspectives on what a conversation can be, but in this case I wasn't expecting genuine engagement, so I’m not upset or disappointed to find out there wasn't any.

I'm also not worried about them being upset by my approach, because bad-faith trolls deserve no worry.

That's a sound argument, mostly (in the quote, i mean)

If the technical implementation of how they would try and force age verification was the problem people were concerned about, this take would be very useful.

Physical locks on glass doors are easy to bypass, doesn't mean you won't get shafted if someone just so happens to catch you in the act.

If third party age verification is legally mandated the implementation being technically difficult (or easy to bypass) doesn't stop it from being illegal.

Being a condescending prick works better if the position you take is unassailable, you do you though.

Nobody said autism is bad (in the chain im replying to), but here we are.

Two statements that never happened with two corrections that aren't needed apparently.

Sounds like you have an idea of what it means to you and are trying to foist that upon others.

The lady doth protest too much, methinks.

...... just to be clear, you think "South East Asia" refers to it's location relative to europe and not it's relative location to the rough centre of Asia ?

So, south america is called that because it's .... south of europe ?

/r/onetruegod would like to know if you have some time to discuss ..well...the aforementioned one true god

Isn’t this what bootstrapping is for? Manually set up the system to the point it can be taken over by ci/cd

Indeed, was just wondering if there was some industry standard i was missing that was a bit more managed.

No worries if not.

citation? (the stats, not the wiki for observer bias)