Giver of skulls

Verified icon

  • 0 Posts
  • 236 Comments
Joined 102 years ago
Cake day: June 6th, 1923
  • Skull giver@popplesburger.hilciferous.nltoNo Stupid Questions@lemmy.world•Should people get preferential treatment because they have kids?
    102·
    11 days ago

    In practice, kids provide more good excuses to work around unrealistic expectations, like needing fifteen minutes to pick up something. There’s a good emotional excuse in “I need to take my kid to the doctor”, much more than “the Elden Ring expansion came out”. If your boss is being unreasonable, you’ll need something good to dissuade them. Unfortunately for everyone involved, kid stuff just happens a lot less predictably and a lot more during office hours than (your own) adult stuff. Kids get sick more, do more dangerous things, are more vulnerable, and have weirder schedules than adults. They also can’t really get around by themselves up until a certain age, and at certain age ranges they probably shouldn’t be going to doctor’s appointments without adults either, even if they can get there by bike or by public transport themselves.

    As for kid stuff happening during the day: that’s just how kid stuff works a lot of the time, unfortunately. Doctors and schools are open for only so many hours a day. It’s not like parents get that time off, they need to do chores they’d rather not be doing when they’re away from work. However, if you need to see a doctor or pick up medicine, you shouldn’t be restricted to super uncomfortable times because you’re not a child.

    I don’t see why a kid would be more important than a disabled spouse, or any spouse for that matter. If there’s a family concern where you need to be present, kids shouldn’t get preferential treatment. When it comes to things like being available in your free time or being put forward as a backup, your time should be as valuable as anyone’s time. However, something to consider is that in some occasions parents will negotiate their contracts to be exempted from certain things, often at a cut in pay or with something else to make up for it; in those cases your time is legally worth less than theirs, but that’s down to contract negotiation.

    As for being fired and other stuff where dependents may suffer, I think that’s only logical. It often doesn’t matter which team member gets fired for economic reasons, so a compassionate boss should probably fire causing the least amount of suffering. Someone’s going to feel the pain, but unless there’s a good reason to fire someone else, a single person having their life upset by getting fired will be preferential to a family of four having their life upset.

  • Skull giver@popplesburger.hilciferous.nltoNo Stupid Questions@lemmy.world•TW: suicide / gun violence
    24·
    11 days ago

    Many suicides being opportunistic is why a small barrier or a sign added to a bridge or railway can prevent a lot of suicides. Most suicides aren’t really well thought out, they happen because the victim happens to see an opportunity right at the wrong time. Making them walk around a barrier can be enough to dissuade them from trying (that day, at that spot).

    It’s no wonder so many Americans kill themselves using guns. They’re deadly, death is instant when done right with no suffering, and they’re accepted to have laying around. Knives and pills will also do the job but they’re not as quick and easy, and often become quite gruesome and painful ways to go if not stopped in time. That said, preferred methods of suicide are different for different groups of people, for instance with men typically choosing a rather violent yet effective methods while women typically choose less violent (but easier to survive) methods.

  • Skull giver@popplesburger.hilciferous.nltoAndroid@lemdro.id•Android 16 gets ready to let Gemini control everything from alarms to video (APK teardown)English
    2·
    12 days ago

    The EU doesn’t use SMS or RCS. The anti gatekeeper legislation requires a minimal amount of users which RCS is never going to reach.

    Also, if you don’t trust RCS, I don’t see why you’d trust Google or your carrier. Google is the only RCS provider with any decent uptake and they exist purely because of selling user data. Other RCS servers has been shutting down for years because nobody used their carriers’ servers. And even if they did, the messages would be just as plaintext, unencrypted, and searchable on a whim by governments as RCS is now, because only Google’s layer on top of RCS, containing all that delicious metadata in plaintext, is encrypted. Hell, RCS is in such an unmaintained state that Google is hosting RCS for carriers because they’ve actually bothered maintaining an RCS server all these years and almost nobody else has.

    WhatsApp sucks but it’s heaps better than RCS when it comes to privacy. And at least third parties can communicate over WhatsApp soon, whereas RCS is restricted to telcos.