vaguerant

joined 9 months ago
sorted by: new top controversial old
I would still download a car if I could. 🚗 in c/technology@lemmy.zip
[–] vaguerant@fedia.io 5 points 8 hours ago

I'm not even really trying to scold folks who pirate, I do it too, I just don't bother to grandstand about it. BFD I'm pirating 30 year old video games. Y'all think if I bought a 200 dollar used one on Ebay the original studio sees a dime of it? C'mon now.

Right here is where you're essentially in agreement with the meme. You recognize that walking into a used game store and shoplifting their copy of the game is objectively worse than downloading an additional copy of the game, where you haven't harmed somebody else to get yours.

I don't think the argument is that "Piracy is completely and entirely victimless in all cases," but that it's a false equivalency to equate piracy with theft. They're not the same thing, is all.

🏆100 Highest-Rated TV Shows (Based on Aggregated Data) in c/television@piefed.social
[–] vaguerant@fedia.io 16 points 1 day ago

Certainly, but I don't know how to tie those back to a Batman '66 reference.

Evolving to Fly (2016-09-02) in c/pbf@discuss.online
[–] vaguerant@fedia.io 7 points 1 day ago

It's true, I've seen Jeff Goldblum do it.

How to spot fake AI photos in c/fuck_ai@lemmy.world
[–] vaguerant@fedia.io 21 points 1 day ago (1 children)

9:39 "Please understand that social media is not a place to get news and information."

Now I don't know what to think about this video I just watched on social media.

🏆100 Highest-Rated TV Shows (Based on Aggregated Data) in c/television@piefed.social
[–] vaguerant@fedia.io 33 points 1 day ago (2 children)

The Penguin is the #30 show you must see before you die? Holy recency bias, Batman!

Is this irony? in c/funny@sh.itjust.works
[–] vaguerant@fedia.io 4 points 5 days ago

Neat, thanks for explaining!

Latina Regrets Voting for Trump After Her Sick Father Is Detained by ICE and the Internet Has No Sympathy in c/leopardsatemyface@lemmy.world
[–] vaguerant@fedia.io 59 points 5 days ago (12 children)

You should read her words rather than just the intro to the article quoted in the OP.

'I made that choice. And now I'm watching my dad suffer because of it,' she responded.

She has admitted it. That's not a free pass to make bad decisions, but most of the quotes in the article are about her trying to change and do better.

'I'm learning everything I unlearned,' she said. 'And I'm going to fight for people who don't have a voice.'

'The guilt I carry is heavy, but I won't stay silent anymore,' she added.

'We all make choices,' she said. 'But we can make better ones next.'

I definitely have conflicted feelings about this: it's like when some former white supremacist changes their mind, gets the swastika tattoos removed and speaks out in support of anti-racism. They don't deserve a medal for saying "Whoops, I fucked up" after fucking up extremely hard, but is telling them to fuck off serving the greater good, or just giving us an opportunity to feel superior?

Is this irony? in c/funny@sh.itjust.works
[–] vaguerant@fedia.io 4 points 5 days ago (2 children)

The "stone" with the words in it has a suspiciously uniform appearance. I wonder whether it might be concrete and the letters pressed into it while wet, in which case basically none of it is true.

Staying on message in c/starwarsmemes@lemmy.world
[–] vaguerant@fedia.io 17 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Badmé Amidala.

Retrospective Discussion | Doctor Who (2005) | 1x04 "Aliens of London" in c/doctorwho@startrek.website
[–] vaguerant@fedia.io 2 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Agreed on all counts. Most of what occurs around the farting aliens is pretty solid, but they're not at all entertaining. They also play into some ugly tropes about fat people being disgusting. Oddly, I don't feel a lot of the episode is particularly appealing to children outside of the Slitheen. It's got some fairly "adult" stuff with Jackie, all the political goings-on, and multiple fairly long segments of people just watching the news.

There is that one odd moment of Rose telling the Doctor "You're so gay!" as they discuss the slap. It's hard to take much offense to it coming from the famously-gay Davies, but it's at least unexpected. Davies explained the inclusion in an email exchange with a fan:

Davies on Rose calling the Doctor "gay"Hi Alun,

Good point. It was a complicated moment which required a great deal of thought.

The simple answer is: that's how people talk. And although that's simple, it's very powerful. I can't imagine a proper drama which is couched in terms of how people should talk.

Second, the word is changing. This is an irreversible process beyond anyone's control. It seems to me that we're becoming people who complain about the use of the word gay, much as people used to complain about the word gay, because it no longer meant 'happy'. No words stay staticl.

But most importantly, you're right - there's a vital political issue burning away here, and you do nothing about those issues if you ignore them. I've put it right at the heart of BBC1 primetime. Put it this way: let's imagine a viewer who has, roughly, yours and my sensibilities. Let's call him A. Now, before that comment, there were millions of kids using the word 'gay' as an insult, and what was A doing about it? Probably nothing. Yes, there are activists out there, but most people don't, so A was left passive. Nothing changes. On the other hand, Rose says 'You're so gay', A objects, and - here's the crux - A DOES SOMETHING. He gets up off his seat. He tells his nearest and dearest that he objects. He might even go so far as to contact the author, to complain.

Fantastic. Good television isn't television which makes you smile all the time and agree. If it makes you stand up and object - especially where you weren't expecting it - then that's a brilliant and powerful thing. That's why it's important that the word comes from Rose; lovely, kind Rose (who's exactly the right age to be using that word in that context). If a villain had said it, then he's a villain, and therefore an idiot, so there's no problem. When the good guys say it, as they do, then that causes a problem. And that problem is good.

It's agitation. And it works. If one parent - watching a family show - objected about the usage of 'gay' in front of his or her kids; if one teacher thought that was wrong, that this pernicious insult has invaded even Doctor Who; if one man has gone to the effort of contacting a writer in order to tackle a vital subject, and will then take that debate into other areas of his life, then that is absolutely excellent. If Rose had said nothing, less would happen. You can't always make your point in life by saying the right thing and being nice (not in my opinion anyway, and unfortunately, I'm the writer!). You have to provoke.

And there's a long game at work here. Let's imagine, say, viewer B, who is an idiot. And B chuckles along in Beavis-and-Butthead style at Rose's comment, agreeing; he thinks, I like this show, I hate the gays, Doctor Who is good. Fine. So he keeps watching. And in a few weeks time, the Doctor gets a strapping, heroic male companion... who is clearly and resolutely bisexual. Viewer B's head implodes. My work is done.

Funnily enough, I was queueing up in Tesco's today, and the 12 y/o girl behind me in the queue called her 11 y/o brother a gayboy, in a venomous tone of voice. I turned round and said, if you call him a gayboy one more time, this gayboy is gonna smash your face in. Unsubtle, yes. I threatened a girl! But it worked. Activism isn't easy, but it's needed, so I'm delighted you wrote.

I'm glad you're enjoying the show, I hope you keep watching.

All the best,

Russell

tl;dr: That's how people of the time talked, not how he felt they should talk. He then goes into some contradictory arguments: that the word is changing and complaining about it now is no better than the people who complained when it changed from meaning "happy" ... but also that it is wrong and he included it in the episode in order to deliberately spark opposition to its use.

It eventually devolves into him "today" threatening to smash a 12 year-old girl's face in for calling her brother a "gayboy". I don't much know what to make of it. Is it activism for a 42-year-old man to threaten a child with violence? Weird stuff.

Zohran Mamdani’s victory marks the end of Israel’s central place in U.S. politics in c/progressivepolitics@lemmy.world
[–] vaguerant@fedia.io 11 points 6 days ago

Also he was primarying Andrew Cuomo, who previously resigned in disgrace over a slew of sexual misconduct allegations and an impeachment. There's plenty of reasons to vote against Cuomo that are completely unrelated to Israel.

Son of Norway’s crown princess suspected of 23 offences including rape, police say in c/world@lemmy.world
[–] vaguerant@fedia.io 1 points 1 week ago

Yeah, he was reportedly conceived in a casual encounter. His parents weren't in an ongoing relationship and the father didn't remain very involved in either of their lives.

16
Orphan Black: Do the characters get any easier to like after season 1? (spoilers) (fedia.io)
 

I know I'm very far behind, but I just finished season 1 of Orphan Black. It's clearly good and I like large parts of it, but several of the main characters are written to be kind of awful people, in-universe. I don't know how much I'd enjoy watching a show where I don't like about 30% of the characters.

Obviously, Helena is super broken from a terrible upbringing and to some extent can't be blamed for her unconscionable actions, most egregiously the murder of her surrogate mother, Amelia. But I've seen TV shows before and it's pretty clear that she's going to be redeemed in "future" seasons. I guess some of this will involve reckoning with her actions in season 1, but you know ... as of right now, she sucks.

Then, Alison basically murdered her best friend by watching her get strangled by the garbage disposal. There's mitigating factors in that Alison sincerely believed Aynsley was monitoring her, etc., but ultimately she just let her die because she was kind of nosy and mean. That also sucks.

Throw in Art the corrupt cop, who seems like he's going to become an important ally of the team, and these unlikeable people are really starting to add up. It might just be 2025-ray-vision making corrupt cops who cover for other corrupt cops less appealing as protagonists, but oof, that's not such a fun time.

Also, just about everybody's sexual dynamics in the show are sketchy as hell. I'll spoiler this part because it's about sexual assault.

tw: saIs everybody in this fucking show raping somebody? Most of the sexual relationships depicted are between people who are lying about their real identities. Paul and Beth, "Beth" (Sarah) and Paul, Delphine "Beraud" (Cormier) and Cosima, Donnie and Alison. Some of this is 2025-ray-vision again, but there's a hell of a lot of rape by deception going on here and I really don't like it.

I understand that these characters are clearly supposed to be morally grey at best, but right now I just actively dislike a lot of them. Maybe they really turn it around, or maybe you're just supposed to dislike them, I don't know. But I'm not eager to start on season 2 and spend more time with these people who all suck.

133
Watch Peter Dutton lose his seat, live (www.abc.net.au)
 

A few days ago, we saw Canada's Conservative opposition leader Pierre Poilievre lose an election and his own seat. Can we make that twice in a week?

Current numbers (6.1% counted) have a 5.1% swing to the ALP, resulting in a 6.8% lead for Labor's Ali France over Liberal leader Peter Dutton.

124
Liberal Bruce Fanjoy topples Pierre Poilievre in Carleton | CBC News (www.cbc.ca)
 

Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre is projected to lose his longtime rural Ottawa seat to Liberal Bruce Fanjoy.

19
Suffering from minor party confusion? Some links I found helpful (fedia.io)
 

Hey auspol. It's about that time again: you know, the one where you have to sit around researching about 15 minor parties that sound distantly familiar to figure out what to put as your bottom preferences.

This year I found my way to a couple of blogs which offer brief and unabashedly biased reviews of the minor parties in the federal landscape. These are not new, I'm just late.

Both blogs are written from a relatively progressive-left perspective, at least by Australian standards. Inside the spoiler below is what they say about themselves:

Summaries of bloggersBlatantly Partisan Party Reviews

I am not, nor have I ever been, a member of a political party. I review from the perspective of a small-g green democratic socialist. I am trained and work as a political historian of Australia and New Zealand. This background guides my reviews, which originated as—and remain—notes to inform my own vote. I do not aim for any false neutrality or objectivity, and I share these remarks in the hope they are useful to others trying to navigate Australia’s plethora of micro-parties. It should be obvious but these are my personal opinions, which should not be construed as representing the views of my employer nor of any other organisation with which I am affiliated.

Something for Cate

I’m Maz. In no particular order I’m left of centre, a grandparent, a writer, trans, pansexual, a mental health lived experience worker, agnostic, supportive of unions, and supporter of the Arts. I’m committed to holding governments and media accountable and, while I can’t promise complete objectivity, I can promise to deliver the same treatment to every party and independent in this election.

I’m Loki. I’ve been in several political parties and never found one left enough for my liking. I’m a bisexual cis male, and likewise agnostic, pro-Union and pro-arts. I try not to approach anything uncritically, whether I agree with it or not. I firmly believe that objectivity is a goal that can be striven for but never actually reached. That said, in that quest I will seek, strive and not yield.

While I obviously recommend you come to your own conclusions about the parties, it can be nice to hear what other voters think of them, especially when it's some shit you never heard of before.

Something for Cate especially includes coverage of unregistered groupings, which are a deep black box of nothing to me most of the time.

28
What's your read on Milchick and Kier's comedy routine in the S2 finale? (fedia.io)
 

Spoilers, obviously.

In the finale, we get the back and forth comedy argument between Seth Milchick (Tramell Tillman) and an animatronic Kier Eagan (voice of Marc Geller, animatronics by Ben Stiller).

I'll quote the exchange below:

Kier: Hail your earthbound steward, your very own flooooooooooor manager!

[audience cheering]

Milchick: Thank you, Kier! And may I say, you're looking very handsome, sir.

Kier: Thank you. I'd say the same of you, if not for my favorite core principle.

Milchick: Probity?

Kier: No ... Vision!

[audience laughter]

Milchick: Well, it's truly special to host a man so illustrious, so sapient, so magnanimous--

Kier: My, you're verbose. Good thing you didn't write the first appendix. It would have burst!

[audience laughter, Milchick visibly discomfited]

Milchick: It's an honor to receive your barbs, Mr. Eagan. The legacy you've left behind is truly and irrefutably larger than life.

Kier: You mean my company?

Milchick: (coldly) No. I mean this wax statue that's five inches taller than you actually were.

[audience chuckles, awkward silence]

Kier: (darkly) Thank you for that feedback, Seth.

Milchick: Thank you, Kier.

This is clearly a prepared routine. It has setups and punchlines and Milchick is visibly reading most of his lines from note cards. However, the performance obviously goes some way off the rails in the back half.

Who wrote this routine? Who performed Kier's lines in-universe? Has Milchick rehearsed this routine or does he only know his own note cards? Is Milchick's height roast part of the script or improvised?

I'll post my thoughts in a separate comment.

16
Severance Aftershow: Season 2 finale explained by Dichen Lachman, Tramell Tillman & more (www.youtube.com)
 

The title undersells it a bit, they also got Jen Tullock (Devon) and Gwendoline Christie (Lorne from Mammalians Nurturable). Weird to hear Dichen Lachman's natural Australian accent.

TV Insider has been running a Severance Aftershow on YouTube for all of season 2. Full playlist

23
A look at Firefox forks - LWN (lwn.net)
 

By Joe Brockmeier
March 4, 2025

Mozilla's actions have been rubbing many Firefox fans the wrong way as of late, and inspiring them to look for alternatives. There are many choices for users who are looking for a browser that isn't part of the Chrome monoculture but is full-featured and suitable for day-to-day use. For those who are willing to stay in the Firefox "family" there are a number of good options that have taken vastly different approaches. This includes GNU IceCat, Floorp, LibreWolf, and Zen.

If you're interested, you should read the whole article, but below are the summaries of the four tested browsers.

IceCat is probably a good choice for folks who are more concerned with the free software ethos and privacy than with functionality.

Overall, Floorp is an interesting project with some nice enhancements to the Firefox UI. However, the development roadmap seems a bit more haphazard than I would like—switching back and forth between Firefox rapid release and ESRs, for example. That may not dissuade other folks, though.

For the most part, users would be hard-pressed to spot many differences between LibreWolf and Firefox at first (or second) glance, so a screen shot of LibreWolf seemed a bit unnecessary. That approach is likely to appeal to many users who are uneasy with things like telemetry and Pocket, but don't want an entirely new browsing experience.

Currently, Zen isn't fully baked enough for me to consider switching to it. Others may be more adventurous in their browsing habits than I am, though. I can say that it has stabilized significantly since I first tried it shortly after its first public release. The project does bear keeping an eye on, and the Mozilla folks could do worse than to copy some of the ideas (and code) that the project is experimenting with.

16
A look at Firefox forks - LWN (lwn.net)
 

By Joe Brockmeier
March 4, 2025

Mozilla's actions have been rubbing many Firefox fans the wrong way as of late, and inspiring them to look for alternatives. There are many choices for users who are looking for a browser that isn't part of the Chrome monoculture but is full-featured and suitable for day-to-day use. For those who are willing to stay in the Firefox "family" there are a number of good options that have taken vastly different approaches. This includes GNU IceCat, Floorp, LibreWolf, and Zen.

If you're interested, you should read the whole article, but below are the summaries of the four tested browsers.

IceCat is probably a good choice for folks who are more concerned with the free software ethos and privacy than with functionality.

Overall, Floorp is an interesting project with some nice enhancements to the Firefox UI. However, the development roadmap seems a bit more haphazard than I would like—switching back and forth between Firefox rapid release and ESRs, for example. That may not dissuade other folks, though.

For the most part, users would be hard-pressed to spot many differences between LibreWolf and Firefox at first (or second) glance, so a screen shot of LibreWolf seemed a bit unnecessary. That approach is likely to appeal to many users who are uneasy with things like telemetry and Pocket, but don't want an entirely new browsing experience.

Currently, Zen isn't fully baked enough for me to consider switching to it. Others may be more adventurous in their browsing habits than I am, though. I can say that it has stabilized significantly since I first tried it shortly after its first public release. The project does bear keeping an eye on, and the Mozilla folks could do worse than to copy some of the ideas (and code) that the project is experimenting with.

view more: next ›