dugidugout

> I guess "it's all relative", "it depends on your point of view" for you. Maybe you're softer than you think.

Not to take a side, but they clearly took a position on how it is not relative. It is your reference to other periods of history that is doing the relativism here.

I think their broader point is, after you've typed all that, what is there to do?

Merely suggesting everything is evil and everyone is prejudice and I dont want to see that, leaves us with evil and prejudice... it is only when you've postured past the relativism (as I suspect you do wrt to your examples) that anyone can act.

You actively chose to click on an article titled "An Arrogant Way of Killing (2016)". Your decision to prefer something is your responsibility to uphold. Sure, there could have been some disclaimer, but frankly, you lamenting this is nothing more than a distraction from the article... dealing with the realities of being presented with dead bodies.

Further, this actually is solvable with tech... write a script to quarantine posts that match a filter list (killing is obviously a candidate), then offshore the curation of the containment to some 3rd worlders to vet any human bodies present. It would be a very fitting exercise for you if not a bit tongue-in-cheek!

Finally my idealized living can be achieved and I can play mahjong until I sleep!

I spent some time crafting that response. Unfortunate for me. Thank you for the follow up, I do agree with this.

A term is all you need?

> I've chatted with people who will refuse to read a story because they think the cover art was generated by AI (even though they don't really know; they're just guessing). "It's AI slop."

There is beyond enough literature on offer for me to read in my lifetime. I'm not certain what this new age of expression will bring us, but the genie is out of the bottle. It is obvious to me that viewing llm output is distinct from the fusion I am part of traditionally when reading, even in the case of a shoddy translator. So for me personally, I will be attempting to continue reading in the same spirit traditionally. Anything contemporary I am reading, I will more fittingly treat as introspection or a window for dialect.

“Today’s old world won’t get in our way,” said the machine, enigmatically. “It even came to our aid. History has ceased its flow; no need to refer to it any longer."

They are not being pedantic here, they are establishing a meaningful difference in words to help distinguish a shared phenomena. I think the original comment was unnecessary and certainly bigoted, but I would need more to say racism. The "grammar" guy clarified twice the semantic difference they personally observed (note they did not labor on syntax like you wish to suggest).

All that said, I make this comment as I believe the other commenter's worry is on display im this comment here...

> Again you seem more concerned with grammar than, y'know, condemning racism, prejudice, or bigotry. They're all equally bad and closely related concepts

These are _not_ all equally bad. Prejudice is foundational to understanding, there is no escape from this. In this understanding, we should treat particular postures of prejudice more serious than collapsing any "bad prejudice" under the same label.

I don't know, that sounds like a question of taste. :)

Because value in this case is particular to the engagement of a player.

Most playing a video game know nothing of programming let alone the specific architecture or development process, so I am not sure how you would expect them to express feelings about the code.

Narrarive or script is still in the same artistic consideration though, so say if the game was a sort of meta exploration of the code, this might expose the same sort of "value" over code.

The article was both fun and honest.

Thanks for sharing!

Interpreting facts always involves argument, so that's not evidence of mean spirits. Do you include yourself in 'most people'? If not, why assume you're the exception?

That is quite an ugly posture and without any bit of substance. What was this meaning to add? I'm genuinely wondering.

Were you not "[being] cute" yourself? I don't like it, but they did have to goad you into giving some substance.

What point are you making here? The author of the review doesn't seem to be affiliated with any keyboard. Are you suggesting the distributor of the MoErgo Glove80 provided the author with this image and/or a general narrative?