Most of the time when people say they have an unpopular opinion, it turns out it’s actually pretty popular.

Do you have some that’s really unpopular and most likely will get you downvoted?

  • PM_ME_VINTAGE_30S [he/him]@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    3 years ago

    Fuck ALL advertisements. Yes, even “unobtrusive” ones, especially yours. If I want your shit, I will find you. If I appreciate your shit, I’ll pay you for your time. If you want to connect, I’m all ears. Otherwise, fuck off capitalists, fuck off advertisers, and fuck off useful idiots who want to waste my finite lifespan in this miserable universe showing me ads.

  • CheeseBread@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    3 years ago

    Pansexual, polysexual, and omnisexual are all microlabels and are all subsets of bisexual. You don’t need more labels than gay, straight, and bi.

    Edit: I forgot about asexuals. But I specifically only care about bi subsets. They’re dumb, and you only need bi

  • Blaze@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 years ago

    Lemmy.world holding such a prevalent place in the Lemmy/Kbin part of the Fediverse makes it a major single point of failure.

    They should still be the newcomers instance, but communities and users should migrate to other instances to increase the resilience of the Fediverse.

  • loffiz@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 years ago

    USA is an oligarchy. I can imagine americans disagree. But perhaps not lemmies.

  • Lettuce eat lettuce@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 years ago

    People who are strongly against nuclear power are ignorant of the actual safety statistics and are harming our ability to sustainably transition off fossil fuels and into renewables.

  • qevlarr@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 years ago

    Remember to sort by controversial. Top comments are always going to be the popular opinions.

  • joystick@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 years ago

    Got removed on reddit for this, but I think the mentally ill homeless should be placed in state institutions where they can get professional help.

  • frozen@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 years ago

    Being fat is a choice the vast majority of the time, and I have a huge bias against big people.

    I used to be fat (250ish lbs (110ish kg) at 5’8"ish (172ish cm)), and as much as I would like to blame my shit on anything else, the person feeding me, the person sitting at the computer for hours, the person actively avoiding all physical activity was me and no one else. After I got diagnosed with some weight related shit, I turned my entire life upside down, am at a much healthier 150 lbs (68ish kg), and feel so much better, both physically and mentally.

    I’m aware of my bias, and I make every active effort to counter it in my actual dealings with bigger people. Especially because there are certain circumstances, however rarely, where it may not actually be their fault. But I’d be lying if I said my initial impression was anything except “God, what a lazy, fat fuck.”

    Edit: Added metric units

  • dosse91@lemmy.trippy.pizza
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 years ago

    AI is to computer science what black magic is to science.

    Seriously, what do you get after you’ve spent days and days to train a model? An inscrutable blob that may as well be proprietary software written for an alien CPU; studying it is damn near impossible, understanding how it works would require several lifespans, and yet it works, and we trust these models and use them to get solutions to problems that would normally be impossible to handle by computers using “real” computer science. And one day, this trust will bite us in the ass, not in the form of an “AI rebellion” but with every system that uses AI becoming unreliable because of situations outside its training.

  • Call me Lenny/Leni@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 years ago

    Ironically I foreshadowed one of these on one of my recently previous comments. The Greeks/Spartans are wayyyy overrated as far as history goes, as in I couldn’t not understate how overrated they are. None of their claims to fame are wholly true in the least. For example, they were said to have invented democracy, but every two rulers was a tyrant who justified their tyranny with the fact Zeus himself was a tyrant. He and the other gods were always justified in that “they’re the gods, they can do what they want”, which would make sense if they were creator gods, but legend has it Zeus fought the creator god… and ate him… for power, and then presided over the gods for eternity, because apparently the democratic process (which didn’t include women, immigrants, or non-home-owners anyways) does not befit the gods and so you have a mentally ill, Typhon-obsessed role model at the helm. They spend their days indulging themselves at the expense of others in such an extreme way that they make it sound like asexuality didn’t exist, because it was the Greek view that human nature was the same for everyone. And this tyranny they tried spreading all over the world because they thought it was what democracy was, which brings us to Alexander the Great, the world’s most undeserving “great” conqueror. Imagine trying to enact revenge for a conquest on your land that happened more than two hundred years ago, having the historical records lie to inflate you, and once you get even with your enemies, decide that while you’re at it you should conquer people further East, all while being unable to actually properly care for the lands you conquered.

    I am currently taking history and get tired of seeing people say “the Greeks were the best”. When the Ottomans invaded Greece, the love was so great that people volunteered from random nations to travel to Greece to fight the Ottomans. I don’t care for the Ottomans, but where was this love for, say, Iceland, who had a better democracy? Or the Iroquois who also had an actual democracy? Online and in movies, Greece gets all the exposure.

    • Xenxs@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 years ago

      It’s not theft, IF the government puts that money to good use e.g. health care, education, maintain roads, utilities, …

    • untakenusername@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think it is, but it can balance out the theft imposed by the ultra wealthy its all about the nuance of the wording ngl

      the govt takes ur money - this is theft monopolies and duopolies take ur money for basic goods and services - this is theft

  • rbesfe@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 years ago

    Dismissing social norms because they’re “only social constructs” is ridiculous, because all social constructs are a product of our biological brains. Gender norms exist because sex chromosomes affect brain chemistry, not because some evil global patriarchy cabal in 200,000 B.C decided they should.

  • takoman@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 years ago

    I don’t believe in prison for punitive justice. Prions should be used to keep society safe from dangerous people, not punishing them imo.

    • cynar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 years ago

      Prison serves 3 purposes, or at least should.

      The first is a deterrence. This is quite a yes/no thing however. Longer sentences, or worse conditions don’t increase its effect.

      Second is re-education. This is where most effort should be focused. You need to simultaneously break the bad habits causing issues, and implant good ones (in the form of skills, and improved social situations). The aim is to make them a productive member of society again.

      Last is containment. Some people either cannot or will not function safely in society. These people either need to be contained indefinitely, or killed. Given the unreliability of the justice system, the latter is a dangerous route to walk, and often more expensive.

      I’m personally of the view that we should all have free (tax funded), access to retraining courses and resources, along with physical, mental, and social health systems. Prison should mostly be focused on the enforced use of these. They are contained while they retrain and get the help they need. They are then released in a better state than they went in. It’s the most cost efficient option. The Scandinavian countries already use something similar (for convicts), and it seems highly effective.

    • Jerald@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 years ago

      I can see where you are coming from but heck, after a criminal is caught, it’s not in state’s interest to punish him except for making an example out of him so other people won’t think of committing the crime.

      • KombatWombat@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 years ago

        Deterence is not a great strategy for preventing crime. Criminals don’t actually do much cost benefit analysis before committing a crime; they will consider the chances they have of getting caught, but not the severity of the punishment. Rehabilitation programs are worth considering over punitive justice so long as they are more effective at preventing recidivism, which is certainly an interest for a state.

        • DogMuffins@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 years ago

          Is this survivorship bias?

          “Criminals don’t consider whatever about committing crimes” doesn’t seem representative of people in general.

          I agree that deterence is not a great strategy, it’s just an odd way to phrase your point.

  • macrocarpa@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 years ago

    The rise of feminism has seen the steady devaluation of the contribution of men in those areas of society where they should be most active. Rather than celebrate and recognise what’s right, the focus is on attacking what’s wrong.

    The majority of men are lonely, isolated and uncared for. Many feel unvalued, unsafe and vulnerable. There is less community support for men than there has been in the past, less institutional support, and a continued decline in the tolerance of men being in shared places. The minimisation of value in societal roles is yet another way that men are cut off.

    This seems to escape the vision of feminism. There is always claim of ideological alignment, where the empowerment of women directly benefits men, but when it comes to any form of concrete action that helps men that need help, or celebrates men that contribute - it’s nowhere to be seen.

    Men kill themselves. They kill themselves. In their thousands. Leaving cratered families, trauma, guilt from the survivors, many of whom are female. Because they feel valueless, helpless and can’t see a purpose to going on.

    Accountability goes both ways. In demanding support from men, feminism must support men.

    • YaaAsantewaa@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 years ago

      The majority of men are lonely, isolated and uncared for

      Suicide rates are down amongst the youngest, the highest suicide rates are from people over 50 and specifically, white people over 50

  • Lauchs@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 years ago

    Generally, social justice is at best, a distraction from real issues, albeit with very good intentions.

    (We talk about human dignity, representation in film etc but not say, the fact most of our stuff is made by children who occasionally burn to death making it. If I were one of the billionaires running things, I would be overjoyed that people were so distracted about what a comedian said versus how our entire economic model is structured.)