She could’ve fallen off the stairs or had a heart attack, it doesn’t absolve Hamas of their generous contribution to the death of this person.

Absolving and defending kidnappers is such a disgusting take

What the hell are you talking about good and evil for?

Have I so far defended Israel’s response? No, and I don’t actually agree with their response either. The proper approach wasn’t to escalate and as they are in the position of power they have that choice. That still doesn’t mean I’ll go in threads defending actions that have lead to baby murdering, something so vile and heartless that only a blind ideologue could ever defend it or use it as a “but they were worse” argument.

Blind ideologues might hate it, but sometimes the two sides are shit, and in the case of IDF and Hamas, they both are, and Palestinians are in between. That still doesn’t give anyone the right to kill children.

No you are ridiculous for thinking what you wrote isn’t somehow interpretable as that.

You write:

no need to justify this, the scale of dead kids is still tipped HEAVILY towards Palestinians

95% of all victims of this conflicts are palestinians. lets stop pretending the numbers are similar.

But somehow this isn’t a justification on literal dead children. Yeah sure buddy. Could’ve lead with “well there’s no excuse, but there have been far more dead Palestinian children in this conflict”, instead you wrote that drivel. That’s why I’m saying you’re both side-ing literal baby murder.

“well we’re really just evening the dead baby numbers” with the implication that that even remotely makes this justifiable.

No, I’ll never support anyone who murders babies, be it whatever side or reason. You coming in here and defending baby murdering screams “both sideing” baby murdering as something that’s even remotely defendable. It isn’t, do some self reflection, same to whoever felt the need to upvote such messed up worldview.

For years I’ve been arguing for the plight of Palestinians, but to hear such disgusting arguments from someone who holds the same goal (freedom of oppression for Palestinians) and spouting that without shame is on par with those who deny the apartheid policies of Israel (I’d argue it’s worse, but at this point it’s the shit Olympics of opinion, and they’re all on the podium).

Pretty standard really. You don’t want contributions to the codebase come under questionable copyright concerns, or the original creator to revoke the code 4 years later causing huge headaches potentially.

You typically have to sign these types of CLA’s whenever you need to contribute to any serious project. I’ve had to do it for Google and Microsoft recently, and I’ve done it for various other open source projects as well.

Still that shouldn’t concern users/gamedevs as they don’t contribute to the engine code typically. Only if they want to upstream changes back into the engine publicly they would need to sign it ofcourse

we should be shooting: the millionaires who hire the poachers

Damn, I was looking forward to eating them. :(

But you’re entirely right. Obviously the poachers do the hunting, but there are people rich enough out there that put a price on rhinos to begin with, they are the real problem. They wouldn’t be hunted if there was no incentive.

Playing dumb is used by bigots as a shield to continue their bigotry unimpeded. Not allowing any room for them to play dumb is the only way to reach those kind of people.

I’m aware, I’m on her side in this matter to be clear. She’s right to call out “dude”, and in fact it’s a disrespectful term anyway to say to non-friends.

Personally I try to use ungendered terms as much as possible online, and will call out weird assumptions on gender as well. English at least has it great on that front as using genders is a choice in that language (unlike some other European languages I know…).

Though it’s neat you all have the pronouns in the user, and I will of course use the pronouns when available/known.

I agree with her that dude is gendered (and generally disrespectful to say to non-friends anyway).

But it’s clear we disagree on the examples’ connotaton. I can’t really make it more clear that I think there’s a negative connotation to the example used, I can’t however force you to accept that. At the risk of looping the comments perpetually I will wish you the best with this one and leave it at that.

To be clear, I don’t think she had any malice in mind when using that argument, just that I wished a different example would be used than scaring the (assumed) straight guy with “do you fuck a dude?”, as if he was gay and said yes, that would’ve been a fine answer, but not really have an impact (gays can still be transphobic/against pronouns, those idiots exist sadly).

I agree with that, she clearly isn’t, as her pronouns clearly indicate. I’ve made that pretty clear in my first comment as well, I guess you missed it. That’s not what I’m talking about however.

My comment is about using “fucking dudes” as a negative example, I’d have preferred if a different example would be used rather than scaring the straight (I assume he is) their possible internal homophobia to realise dude is a gendered term. As there is nothing wrong with fucking a dude, he could be fully okay with that, and that would be fine.

As the poster’s pronouns are close to her heart, my sexuality is also close to mine, and fighting negative connotations surrounding that is something I can’t stop doing, I do hope you see that.

I didn’t disagree with that, in fact I agree with her response in that regard as I’ve written.

If that specific argument came from anyone but a hexbear user I would’ve thought some pretty unkind things about the person on the other end, as of now I just think it’s an accidental comment that wasn’t intended, but I can’t not point it out as it’s the exact language that would be used to scare the gays back into the closet when I was in school. “Oh you better not do that, you might look gay”, one I’m all too familiar with.

There were plenty of other analogies that didn’t involve gay, or fucking men as an apparent negative thing

No, it wouldn’t be a problem if he said he fucked dudes.

I know it wouldn’t be, but making the argument that “you don’t want to accidentally sound like you’re gay” is not the counter argument you might think it is, which is why I was asking her about her intent with that.

“DO YOU FUCK DUDES? AnomalousBit?”

Do you go around telling other people that you fuck dudes?

Would it be a problem if he went around and said he fucked dudes?

I’m confused, are you using gays as an insult here? That’s messed up if so, so I hope that’s not what you meant.

I do agree on your comment about the usage of wrong pronouns though, you shouldn’t have had that happen.

In Europe they use vans. But context matters, the guy in the picture is clearly not using this for work. Some people do need heavy vehicles for work, this guy clearly doesn’t.

I don’t think the root poster meant there never was a need, just that often people like the pictured truck will claim it’s for work while they clearly don’t need it.

Maybe we shouldn’t treat adults like babies? Your complaint is tantamount to demanding to babyproof every surface in a house where only fully formed (and hopefully capable of critical thinking) adults live.

As long as normal usage doesn’t give messed up answers, then all’s fine tbh. You’ll always have users be able to break your app, which is why there’s the popular saying “If you make something idiot-proof, someone will just make a better idiot”

Unless you really think there’s someone out there unironically adding bleach to their recipes (in which case they don’t need an AI for that… but education…)