nickwitha_k (he/him)

That’s incredible. I knew that QR had error correction capabilities but didn’t realize that they were THAT good.

Beautiful.

AI (while consuming immense amounts of energy, generated by fossil fuels and potable water): “I’m helping!”

This is a solid reason.

Also acceptable: The best, post-apocalyptic, dystopian, esoteric-technology-themed webcomic in the Fediverse featuring anthropomorphized unix-like operating systems.

Yeah… It is pretty crazy that a PAC explicitly intended to give influence to a foreign country is legal in any way.

I suppose it does depend on which definition one is using. The more academic definition puts them as contrasting with monarchies. With that, the DPRK and other autocracies world not be a republic, not due to a lack of democracy but due to a lack of representative-based government. “Representative” here meaning multiple individually who are ostensibly representing the public interest (frequently, this is someone that they fail to do).

What makes a republic democratic or not is HOW the representatives are appointed. In a theocratic republic, they could be appointed by the state church, for example.

Just a technicality: Not all republics are democracies. A republic could be an oligarchy or a theocracy. The main division is between monarchy and republic.

She probably won’t give a shit about social pressure. She was appointed because she is corrupt/corruptable.

Oh you should be good then. When I fully converted, I was using an Intel Atom Acer Aspire One netbook. The thing could barely handle XP. When I switched to Linux Mint (then, eventually a now extinct lightweight distro), the system was blazingly fast by compare. I could even run my Windows-specific work tools better than in Windows.

Linux is great for old and low spec systems.

They were acquired by Axel Springer SE a few years back. Axel Springer has a noted far-right bias.

Incest is, by definition, sexual relations between people too closely related. The question here is whether or not first cousins should count as incest.

I suppose I should better clarify terms here:

• incest is a social/legal term
• inbreeding is a biological term

It would make sense for the legal definiton of incest to encompass situations where harm is likely, whether it be social, psychological, physical, or biological, due to relation. So, it would make sense for first cousins to fall into a “possible” category.

But next time you debate with someone opposed to homosexuality, ask yourself if they think their revulsion to it is a visceral, instinctual response.

While you have a good point on perspective, I would say that evidence points towards homophobic behavior being conditoned and inbreeding-phobic behavior being instinctual. Homosexual behavior is seen with statistically-significant frequency throughout the animal kingdom. Familial recognition and its use in mate selection (and rejection) and other behaviors is seen even more widely, occuring in even insects, plants, and microbes.

Well, I’m really not comparing the two, I’m comparing the arguments. But that being said, where are you coming up with the claim that the majority of first cousin sexual attraction is pedophilia or sexual abuse?

I should likely have been more specific in scoping that. I was referring to the superset of cases of incest there, rather than the subset of cousins. I would have to look at data in that subset in order to make a factual statement.

I don’t think that you deserve downvotes for this because I don’t think you’re necessarily incorrect. I do absolutely feel cognitive dissonance here. I have a visceral, what I think is instinctual, revulsion at the concept of incest. But, if there is love, consensuality, and no one is being harmed (including possible offspring), I cannot in good conscience say that they do not have a right to be together, regardless of how I feel. It takes overriding that feeling to state as such, which isn’t comfortable and is, by definition, cognitive dissonance.

I do not, however, think that the comparison to homophobia or other discrimination against LGBTQ+ people is a good comparison. The majority of relationships that LGBTQ+ people engage in are consensual and do not cause harm to anyone. The majority of cases of incest involve sexual abuse and frequently pedophilia. Offspring of close relatives are at high risk for significant biological and social harm (in cases of abuse add psychological harm).

Beyond the potential biological issues, the biggest problem tends to be coercion and consent. The majority of incestuous encounters are abusive and involve a power dynamic that makes informed consent impossible.

Now, if every party is an adult and capable of informed consent, it is possible to test for likelihood of genetic defects based upon the parents’ genes. So, I can’t think of a non-subjective objection if, for example, they met for the first time as adults and didn’t know of such relation. Still pretty weird to me but I don’t think it’s anyone’s place to interfere with healthy, loving relationships.