I got you https://share.inquirer.com/o92LoO

As a white American male, not once have I considered my own “white American” culture. Kind of hard to wrap my head around the idea. Maybe because I don’t at all relate to what I would consider “white America” - like country music, corn fields, guns, fear of others, etc. So, yeah, there’s a diversity of white American culture across the country.

I also don’t have any emotional connection to the places my ancestors were born. So, at the same time, I reject stereotypical white American culture and my own heritage.

My culture is my family, my friends, my community and the things we do to pass the time and to strive to be better neighbors. It’s not based on color, or nationality, or heritage. It’s more about zip code than anything else.

But I recognize I’m in the minority. A lot of my friends are really into football and tailgating, etc. That’s not something I’ve been able to go all-in on. It seems cultish to me and I like to keep my head above ground.

Personally, I’ve never had a strong desire to fit in or belong to a group. I enjoy the freedom of flexibility and decision making based on my own lived experiences rather than the experiences of others.

To your point about ethnic events, the greatest thing about the US is the diverse culture. I would hate to be part of a monoculture like you find in the vast majority of other countries. It feels a bit like indoctrination to me.

Doesn’t matter if anything is legal or not (see: deporting aliens). This administration is doing whatever it wants to stop what it doesn’t like then allowing it to play out in court. Like a super villain, this is Trump’s “super power”.

I think that’s up for debate. There are people who don’t want government involved in their daily lives. These - livable wage and such - are nice things to have but aren’t the core responsibility of any and all governments. I don’t think “manages society” is the right phrasing either. And FWIW, “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” is not in the US constitution so there is no legal requirement for the US government to provide this. The DoI also said all men are created equal then they went on to say black men are worth less than white men.

I think a responsible representative government would weigh the realities of contemporary society and make adjustments to adjust for injustices and inequalities. They may also take larger things into consideration such as why a business determines to operate in one country or another and offer subsidies that promote job creation (rather than inflationary tariffs). I mean, there’s a lot and I don’t want to get into everything here.

My point is, what’s the role of not just the US government, not just a federal or national government, but any and all government - other than “to govern”? I would argue it’s preventative harm reduction.

When the first version of government was created, was it to make the daily lives of people better or was it to provide protection for those who couldn’t protect themselves? Not rhetorical. We all need to agree that point 1 is XYZ. Then we can get one with discussing things like livable wage, social security, health care, education, etc. Actually, on paper, I think the concept of the US is fantastic. A core government that covers broad universal functions while each regional division can focus on its own. The issue from here is that state boundaries are, for all intents and purposes, irrelevant today.

My other point, to bring it back to this story, is the the role of government should not be to pretend groups of people do not exist, hide them in the shadows, and ignore the atrocities others are inflicting upon them - our be the one committing those atrocities. So, if we start there with a solid idealogical foundation, we can more easily observe said atrocities and hold elected officials accountable. Universally, outside of party affiliation.

Then, once a foundation is agreed upon without any argument, we can move on to things that have nuance and are worthy of debating details and directions.

I just don’t think we’ve reached step one yet. Perhaps because a lot of people are very, and rightfully, concerned about steps two through a million.

I think we’ve lost sight of what the role of government is or should be. Though, to be fair, I’m not sure it’s been agreed upon.

Isn’t the role of government to provide protection / prevent harm? To create a space for fair opportunity and to level the playing field and adjust for injustices?

I mean, just because you don’t like someone or something or something makes you uncomfortable or doesn’t align with your beliefs doesn’t mean that thing doesn’t exist nor should the government be in charge of abolishing it. In fact, if you have such strong opinions about something, it’s very likely that this is something the government should be protecting from you.

I just don’t think this is a liberal or conservative claim. It should be a universal fact that’s applied to all. And, I think, any government or politician who fails to protect a single person should be removed from the job they’ve shown they’re not capable of performing.

I guess we’ve given up on holding our politicians accountable and transferred any power we had to the oligarchs and corporations.

Using an alarm to wake up. Actually, I got rid of all electronics in my bedroom aside from lights.

I had a coffee situation many years ago. I was having heart palpitations (skipping a beat) while sitting at rest and my doctor said the 20 ounces of coffee I drank was way too much. I have never believed him but I did cut back just in case. In recent years, I’ve observed that the more I get some regular amount of exercise in, those palpitations go away. I started going for walks and also noticed my at-rest heart rate drop noticeably. And, while few to begin with, anxiety attacks went away. I usually drink a 10 ounce cup of coffee in the morning - freshly ground, aeropress, black. A bit more on the weekends. Never past 10am.

The next issue I have regarding better sleep is breaking my habit of being enthralled with digital content. I read too much on my iPad at night. Been trying to read physical books and magazines more but the dopamine addiction is rough.

Additionally, I’ve been from trying to be more proactive and get shit done asap to leave more time for being bored. I believe boredom leaves time for creativity and leisure and better sleep. There’s just far too much to distract us from existing as calm and creative human beings today.

I’d be interested to hear from the youngest generation (15-20 YO) to hear if they care about this at all.

I’m approaching 50 years old and had been an early adopter most of my adult life. Growing up from the 1980s through 2000s, there was a near-mainstream narrative that we were living in a unique era of emerging technologies. It was exciting and we were anxious for anything new.

It seems to me that nothing is really new and there is nothing exciting, if not interesting, about technology today.

I’ve actually been stripping down the technology from my life as it’s become too distracting to get things done and has prevented personal growth and the formation of memories. For one example, I recently subscribed to a print magazine because I prefer a tangible object that I can associate with in and of itself (and choose to own and collect).

Looking at analog trends like vinyl records and film photography and cassette tapes, it seems like people are at least trying to incorporate tangible objects into a modern lifestyle. Then you have the trend of the dumb phones which indicate people are becoming more aware of the detriments caused by an always connected lifestyle. Thankfully, some car manufacturers are returning buttons to their cars in response to owner feedback about everything being a touch screen.

I mean, I’m not a multi-trillion dollar organization with different departments studying the feasibility of future products but I do wonder if something like AR glasses are already more of our past than our future.

I think there’s a more than reasonable desire for a device to help you through your day - especially in foreign countries. But do you think you want that to be glasses or something else?

Lastly, this reminds me of the prediction from Michio Kaku in Physics of the Future about augmented reality contact lenses. Should we at least accept AR glasses as first step towards contact lenses? Do you think society would accept these 20-40 years in the future?

deleted by creator

The only people who should be worried about this conversation are therapists and philosophers.

Our culture is fucking with people’s heads by making them have to question shit like this. Words are made up (you should look up some definitions). Our emotions are not. No one should be judging anyone for whom they find attractive and no one should feel shame or pride for having a preference.

So why would people who are attracted to cis people (of a particular sex) and not trans people (of the opposite sex-assigned-at-birth to the sex they’re attracted to) necessarily be transphobes.

This is not a thing. At all. Just because I prefer red apples over green apples does not instill a phobia or hatred of green apples.

The LGBT movement, as with nearly all movements, is about education. It seems you may have skipped over the prerequisites jumped right to LGBT 201.

Yes, “It’s obviously a nuanced subject, and human sexuality is complex” and the point is that no one should be casting societal assumptions upon or judging anyone. The point is to mind your own business and support government legislation that protects marginalized groups from the ignorant and those who lack empathy. “Do no harm” shouldn’t be regulated to practicing doctors. We’ve all lost sight of the “treat others as you want to be treated” Golden Rule. So, mind your own business and treat others with the same respect you believe you deserve.

If you are personally struggling with your own sexuality, I would strongly suggest you seek guidance from a professional rather than pondering aloud on the internet and expecting validation. If you are struggling to understand the sexuality of others, I would suggest you stop trying and embrace the uniquenesses found in every corner of this planet.

Gotcha. I probably could have phrased that better.

I stopped going because they lock everything I want to buy behind a window.

I know that’s not explicitly related to this article but it pisses me the fuck off because I am literally an eight minute walk to a Target and would go there all the time if they weren’t so dead set on making the experience the worst ever.

It’s evident that they’re pushing people to make online purchases (where they can show you ads and get your info from an app) to pick up in store or have delivered.

They’re also pushing customers to use the self check out system. This costs them less money than employing a person. Well, when the self check out machine breaks or people are buying a lot of stuff or when it’s a busy holiday or weekend, the line is stupid long and there’s no choice other than to walk out of the store (which I have done three times).

Target needs to hire more people and to pay them a fair wage. This will reduce theft due to staff walking the aisles and increase the sense of shopping on a planet that’s inhabited by human beings. The place is a shit hole ghost town that feels like a dystopian nightmare.

I mean, this has been an issue for four years. At first, I had assumed that they were intentionally trying to devalue their brand. Now with this DEI thing, I am convinced.

Fuck you, Target.

Also fuck self check outs. They were novel at first but they fucking suck cock. I will not go to a store that doesn’t have the option to engage with a human. The last time I gave it a shot, the very first item I scanned was rejected. I put all my shit back in my cart and the one person there to “help” asked what was wrong and I said never again will I ever use self check out. It’s a failed system. It threatens people’s jobs. It doesn’t help you do anything. It doesn’t save time.

Sorry. Downvote me. I just really hate today’s retail environment.

Not worrying about how others perceive you and having something interesting to share with others is not contradictory.

I don’t have to like you or agree with you to listen to something you feel passionate about to share. Have you heard of YouTube?

If you’re weird and you have nothing interesting to share, if you lack the confidence to speak with others, then I’m not very likely to give you much attention.

Learning something “so others will like you” is exactly what I’m suggest you do not do. You should learn something so that you have personal confidence in something. The more you become proficient in something, the more confident you’ll become overall. Accomplishing goals and overcoming obstacles breeds confidence. It may help your social interactions if that thing is less niche and more universal but not exclusively.

This is why people ask others what they do for a living. They want to hear you speak about something they presume you’re passionate about. There’s a hope to engage in a conversation or to learn something from you. If you have some niche hobby or job and you’re good at it, people will listen to you. You may even find people come up to you at a party to hear more about what you feel so strongly about.

Don’t ever do something solely because you think it will make others like you more. If you’re not doing it for yourself, you’re not able to put all of yourself into it. You’ll never own that thing. You’ll just be renting it for others.

There is no inherent arbiter of good or truth.

If the trust in expertise is tarnished, reshaping reality is left to the uninformed.

Work first on being a good human.
That will make you a good (and attractive) man or woman.

The archaic concept of masculinity or femininity itself is wretched.

People worry far too much about what others think of them and what mold they should fit into. Be yourself. Be a good, caring, empathetic person with convictions and passions and hobbies. Become proficient in one or more things so others find you interesting. Learn how to do things without the aid of technology. Read books. Travel as far as you can. Give a shit about yourself and your community.

If you’re struggling to fit a mold that society is telling you you should fit into, you’re already lost. That doesn’t mean you can’t find yourself. It means that mold probably isn’t right for you. And there is nothing wrong with that. If others have a problem with you not being what they expect, that’s their issue to resolve. The sooner you’re able to let go of societal concepts, the more free you’ll be to be the best version of you.

Don’t confuse being a good man and being a good person. It’s the same thing. There is nothing you can do to become more of a man that won’t make you more of a person.

How does this cause you harm or prevent you from praising your god?

Perhaps more curious, why the fuck would you become a doctor if you’re opposed to science and helping people? Don’t doctors have to swear (presumably to god) to do no harm? This guy should have his license revoked.

I hardly ever get spam calls. Today, I got a call from a government robocaller and a call asking for someone else whom I’m pretty sure had my number over five years before me. I thought these were legit but now, reading the comments, I’m not so sure.

People are way too willing to give out their phone numbers. So many apps and websites require a phone before ever signing in. I will not use any service that requires a phone number.

Because so many things rely on phone numbers now, when I got my new number in 2020 I lost access to a number of things.

2FA SMS verification can be spoofed so it’s not a secure method.

The only spam calls or messages I get are from government reps. Apparently “for government use” is not illegal and it’s practically impossible to get taken off the list. If anyone has a tip for this, please let me know.

Hence, “Trannis” /s

Wow. Only took 26 years.

This Mother Jones article really made things more clear.

Trump, a president who rules like a mob boss while claiming vast new powers, is transforming the government into a tool of reward and punishment.

Excuse me? Are you trying to say that side-loaded apps are more free of ads than those in app stores? What motivates a developer to release an ad-free side loaded app while refusing to submit it to (or failing to get it approved in) an app store?

How is this specifically an iPad issue and not an app developer issue?

I’d like to know, because I don’t have a Google device or account, how the Google Play Store is superior to the Apple App Store when it comes to ad or subscription supported software.