this post was submitted on 02 Jul 2024
68 points (93.6% liked)

Asklemmy

43970 readers
713 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] mlg@lemmy.world 83 points 4 months ago (3 children)

Hot sauces should be required by law to list their Scoville range (SHU) on their packaging.

[–] don@lemm.ee 22 points 4 months ago

Fuckin facts, yo, I’m tired of searching up the sauce to try to get a gauge of wherever the fuck the sauce actually is, as opposed to its marketing wank wanting to convince me I’m chowing down on neutron star, despite it really being around room temp unflavored jello.

[–] TehBamski@lemmy.world 17 points 4 months ago

100% agree. I want to know whether I'm increasing, decreasing, or maintaining my heat threshold.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Contramuffin@lemmy.world 59 points 4 months ago (5 children)

Parents' jobs aren't to protect their kids. It's to make sure that their kids are sufficiently prepared for the world when the kids grow up.

There seems to be this rising trend of parents being overprotective of their children, even to the point of having parental controls enabled for children even as old as the late teens. My impression has always been that these children are too sheltered for their age.

I grew up in the "age of internet anarchism," where goatse was just considered a harmless prank to share with your friends and liveleaks was openly shared. Probably not the best way of growing up, to be fair, but I think we've swung so hard into the opposite direction that a lot of these children, I feel, are living in their own little bubbles.

To some degree, it honestly makes sense to me why the younger generation nowadays is so willing to post their lives on the internet. When that's the only thing you can do on the internet, that's what you'll do

[–] RozhkiNozhki@lemmy.world 22 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I have recently learned that the new helicopter parent type is the snowplow parent - these are the ones that not only shield their kids from the world, but also fully manage their lives for them. I work for the University of California and seeing how absolutely helpless these kids are is scary.

[–] Contramuffin@lemmy.world 11 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I'm in the UC system as well. It's both concerning and amusing how much college students nowadays go to their parents for permission on minor things. I get it, to some degree. Respect for your parents and all that. But some degree of autonomy would be helpful at that age

[–] mozz@mbin.grits.dev 14 points 4 months ago (1 children)

If you’ve spent any amount of time among people who went to / are in college in their early 20s, and people who were working in their late teens and early twenties, it becomes clear that college arranges for the students to have a managed-for-them life to a degree that I actually think is severely harmful to them. It’s basically a big day care. Education is fuckin fantastic, I’m not saying it’s not, but the nature of the way your life is organized within it to me I think is very bad for people.

Like yes you know integrals, very good, but e.g. I spoke to a guy who had not paid his phone bill for months, who somehow still had phone service but was genuinely very confused about how the bills he was getting now could have gotten as high as they were. No matter how many times I tried to explain to him, I couldn’t get it across. I finally just gave up the endeavor.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] breadsmasher@lemmy.world 12 points 4 months ago (7 children)

Parents jobs arent to protect their kids

I get you don’t mean this so broadly but you lose all nuance with this statement.

Protect them from every minor mistake or risk that could ever possibly happen, and smothering them? Sure.

Someone about to stab your kid? Protect them from predators? Protect them from various risks and hazards in life which every parent should be teaching them?

  • dont get into strangers cars
  • dont let strangers into the house
  • look both ways when crossing the road
load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone 58 points 4 months ago (4 children)

If you let your cat outside in the Americas (or anywhere cats haven’t lived for thousands of years) unsupervised I’m going to assume one of the following is true: you don’t care if your cat dies, and/or you don’t care about wildlife. Even if you live in a place with zero predators, why the hell are you trusting a CAT with road safety?

Saying this as someone who grew up with parents that let our cats live (and die, a lot) that way. And as someone who has seen two friends lose cats to coyotes in the past year. And also interrupted an attack on someone’s pet by a coyote. It’s been a bad fucking year here for coyotes.

[–] boogetyboo@aussie.zone 21 points 4 months ago (2 children)

In Australia I can't tell you how frustrating this is. People are so fucking selfish.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] reversebananimals@lemmy.world 48 points 4 months ago (3 children)

If your political opinion begins with "why don't we just..." then its a bad political opinion.

If we could just, we would have already just. If you think you're the only one with the capacity to see a simple answer - newsflash, you're not a political genius. Its you who doesn't understand the complexity of the problem.

[–] boogetyboo@aussie.zone 31 points 4 months ago (2 children)

My partner lacked political engagement until his 30s for reasons so he occasionally has these hot takes. But he expresses them to me and I do feel bad because he's not coming at it from an arrogant perspective. It's ignorance, some naivete and also exasperation at a whole lot of shit things.

I have to gently explain to him why XYZ isn't that simple or black and white, or why his idea doesn't work - and the answer to that, 9 times out of 10, is 'because money/rich people/greed/lobbyists/nimbyism'.

I'm just slowly chipping away at his innocence and it feels bad.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] prex@aussie.zone 13 points 4 months ago

Adam Savage had a bit where he pointed out there is practically zero times when to you should start a sentence with "why don't you just". My first instinct is to patiently listen & respond but I'm slowly turning into "why don't you just stop, think & rephrase that"

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] grue@lemmy.world 38 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Suburban homeowners are the real "welfare queens."

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] treadful@lemmy.zip 38 points 4 months ago (5 children)

My hot take: You shouldn't downvote comments you disagree with in a thread asking for hot takes.

[–] multifariace@lemmy.world 24 points 4 months ago

I have always upvoted comments I disagree with if they are using good arguments. I save downvotes for hate and bad faith.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Postmortal_Pop@lemmy.world 35 points 4 months ago (4 children)

No one authentically hates the word moist. There's no evidence then anyone disliked the word before Friends made an episode about it. Everyone since that has either been parroting that episode or someone who, in turn, parroted the episode.

Either these people saw it and decided it was an interesting facet to add to their personality, or it was the first time they've ever consciously thought about how a word feels and sounds and that shattered their ignorance and spoiled a perfectly good word.

[–] tkk13909@sopuli.xyz 13 points 4 months ago (2 children)

There was a Friends episode about it?

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] zcd@lemmy.ca 26 points 4 months ago (1 children)
[–] Pronell@lemmy.world 17 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Humanity is a lost cause. Still worth fighting for.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] cygnus@lemmy.ca 25 points 4 months ago (1 children)

The vast majority of people whining about the current political landscape have done absolutely nothing IRL to remedy this (tangibly supporting good candidates, running for office themselves, etc.)

[–] CyberMonkey404@lemmy.ml 10 points 4 months ago (2 children)

supporting good candidates

Oh yes! Good candidates!.... Who are those, again?

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] mub@lemmy.ml 25 points 4 months ago

Places of religious worship and formal teaching (e.g. churches, and Sunday schools) should be treated like bars and porn. You need to be an adult to access bars and porn because children do not fully understand what is happening or the consequences of being there. Churches (etc) are the same and there should be a legal age limit.

It should also be socially unacceptable to talk about religious opinions in front of kids, just like most people don't swear or talk dirty, etc.

I agree with schools teaching kids "about" religions, just like sex and drugs. Teaching facts is good, preaching (aka indoctrination) is not.

[–] NataliePortland@lemmy.ca 22 points 4 months ago (4 children)

Lemmy is left leaning but downvotes anything that suggests poll numbers are slipping for Biden, or if people are unsatisfied with his performance. It’s news! Are y’all just downvoting it because you don’t like it?

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] probableprotogen@lemmy.dbzer0.com 20 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Children should not be exposed to advertising at a young age (below 11/12 years old)

[–] intensely_human@lemm.ee 10 points 4 months ago (2 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] toomanypancakes@lemmy.world 19 points 4 months ago (3 children)

There's no ethical way to kill someone that's done nothing to you and doesn't want to die, and that's not just for humans.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] csolisr@hub.azkware.net 17 points 4 months ago

@TehBamski Most entertainment is produced in abusive environments, promotes positively evil people to become famous, and twists the legal system through in such a way that it enables surveillance and erodes ownership rights. But barely anyone is willing to boycott it.

[–] toastal@lemmy.ml 17 points 4 months ago (20 children)

If your free software communications can only be done thru US-based, proprietary options, then you are not free software. To think open source is ideal for your project, but not the tools surrounding it misses the point of trying uplift support & usage of these free sorts of projects (& this isn’t even starting with the privacy & lock-in concerns). Instead of coding around flaws in Microsoft GitHub or building Discord/Slack/Telegram bots, actually build & upstream integrations into the free options as you would like to see folks do unto your own project. Not saying you can’t have these services as an alternative, but as the only option (or the primary option to IIABH) should be shamed & definitely not considered the norm.

Also Matrix is pretty shit, where all the clients/servers run too heavy, & eventual-consistency means self-hosting storage often ballots into ‘too expensive’ which has led to de facto centralization the project cannot fix by design. Meaning Matrix is a better, but still bad chat option.

load more comments (20 replies)
[–] Gloomy@mander.xyz 16 points 4 months ago (8 children)

Beeing honest about mistakes you make is way better than trying to deflect or lie about them. This is true in professional and in social settings.

Own up to your mistakes, try to correct them and be open about you fucking up. Most people will respect that more than you trying to be Mr or Ms Perfect.

[–] meekah@lemmy.world 18 points 4 months ago

How is this a hot take

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] Nemo@midwest.social 16 points 4 months ago (14 children)

Drinking, driving, smoking, voting, consent, ability to enter contracts including marriage, joining the military:

Raise it all to 25 and be done with it. At 25 you're an adult, before that your body and brain are still developing.

[–] morrowind@lemmy.ml 36 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

If you want someone learn something like driving well, you teach it to them when they're developing, not after.

And for the love of all that is holy, please do not give even more political power to old people

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] 13esq@lemmy.world 22 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (3 children)

If I can't vote until I'm 25 then I don't want to be paying tax until I'm 25.

No taxation without representation.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Funkytom467@lemmy.world 15 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (10 children)

Thinking people in their late teenage years and young adults aren't mature enough to do some of those things is just a big tell of how bad we educate them rather than their brain not being "developed".

Consent is the most obvious example, teenagers are gonna have a sexual life no matter what you want them to do. Removing consent just remove yourself from the responsibility of educating them and entice them to stay hidden.

Driving is also just necessary to anyone working, again being safe just need to be taught, plenty of adults are just as immature and stupid.

The same can be said for drinking or smoking, prevention is so much more effective than restrictions.

However, for voting or joining the army that's when i agree. Because the system is built to prey on them, making sure they stay uneducated and vulnerable. So only then does having restrictions make sens to keep them safe.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] corroded@lemmy.world 10 points 4 months ago (2 children)

I tend to agree, but I would set the age lower. A person can graduate high school at 18, get a 4-year degree, and still be 3 years away from "adulthood" by your definition. There are plenty of professionals in the first 3 years of their career who are contributing members of society. Shouldn't they be able to drive to work, sign a rental contract, etc? I've been in my career for over 20 years, and I have always worked with young people who may be lacking experience but are still productive employees. I think you'd be cutting out a significant portion of the workforce by excluding those in early adulthood.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)
[–] BurnSquirrel@lemmy.world 15 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (3 children)

Here's one I get a lot of flack for that I don't bring up much

I think people trying to cook up gun control laws are targeting the wrong guns, in going after semi auto or military rifles, when they should be going after cheap handguns that have been available forever. The majority of gun deaths are suicides, and that's almost always done with a hand gun, but even if you control for that the majority of homicides with guns are done with hand guns.

Hand guns are usually relatively cheap. They are very easy to conceal. Its very common for people to walk into a bar with a holstered hand gun and make a series of bad decisions. Its too common for people to get in road rage incidents that escalate into something tragic because of a handgun in the glove box. People leave them around their house and treat them as toys that kids end up finding.

AND I would argue that handguns are not in the spirit of the 2nd amendment. They are not fighting weapons. They are for fun, personal protection, or making people feel tough without having to do any real work. They have little range and lesser power. There are are no troops in the world that deploy with handguns as a primary weapon. US military officers get them but that's more about tradition.

Yes, I'm aware that shooting incidents done with rifles would be more deadly, but the fact there would be much fewer of them at all would be a net benefit in a society that banned or severely restricted hand guns.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] intensely_human@lemm.ee 13 points 4 months ago (9 children)

Me tossing leftovers in the trash does not in any way interfere with hungry people getting food.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] Today@lemmy.world 13 points 4 months ago (6 children)

Breakfast tacos at home are better than breakfast tacos out. This is true of many foods because you choose each ingredient (type, brand, ..) that you prefer and prepare it in your preferred way (more done, less oil, ...).

Climate change is making turbulence worse.

Straws are mostly unnecessary, so metal washable straws are dumb.

Plastic bag bans are dumb because they sell boxes of plastic bags.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] janus2@lemmy.zip 12 points 4 months ago (3 children)

Most drugs should be over-the-counter. The especially dangerous or addictive ones maybe just require counselling with a pharmacist first. But I'm more concerned about people not able to access the medication they need than I am about idiots removing themselves from the gene pool by OD.

People in my dumbass country would rather 10 people with a genuine medical need suffer as long as 1 addict can't get a fix, and it's so many layers of bullshit.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] CableMonster@lemmy.ml 12 points 4 months ago (12 children)

You are bad at parenting if you give your child a smart phone or social media.

load more comments (12 replies)
[–] 1boiledpotato@sh.itjust.works 12 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (3 children)

Every human is an egoist. You too.

Everything you've ever done was for your own purpose. Everything we do, we do it cause it makes or will make US happy. Even if a person is kind to others, they are because it makes THEM happy. Even ascetics do what they do, because in their mind it will grand THEM happiness in the future.

So realize that you and everyone around you do what they do, because it makes THEM happy and live you life so it will make YOU happy

[–] Moobythegoldensock@lemm.ee 14 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Nah, being happy that others are happy isn’t egotism, it’s being a functional social creature. Making a charitable decision at your own expense is a good thing, and feeling good about the decision or being congratulated by someone else does not negate that.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] therealjcdenton@lemmy.zip 12 points 4 months ago (5 children)

Tears of the Kingdom is a terrible game, it's a mod of BOTW but with more ways to skip the exploration so you don't get to memorize the map like in Elden Ring or Fallout.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] knightly@pawb.social 12 points 4 months ago (2 children)

[Country] isn't real, it was made up by [its founders] to [dodge taxes / dominate neighboring city-states / measure dicks with [Other Country]]

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›