cupboard

Pretty much, the first thing the interviewed couple mentions is that they're building an elevator in order to keep living in their home as they grow older (and assumedly become impaired due to age).

Why do I do this to myself.

On Reddit, your account would be banned for contributing to an anti-social atmosphere after two dozen corporate accounts red-flagged this image and reported it to the PR staffer currently operating as the subs moderator.

This implies every post of this kind gets the user banned on Reddit. That is verifiably false. If that were true or even common enough, these posts wouldn't be as incredibly popular on Reddit as they are. Shifting your argument so you can pretend we agree is insane behaviour.

And no, I had never called you a liar until this point. I don't assume people are liars - extreme world views often lead people to have biased interpretations of reality, but that doesn't make them inherently evil or liars. Now you are lying, though.

There's really no point in continuing this, but again, I use Reddit. I see these posts all the time. I'm not saying no one ever gets their posts removed or banned from communities or whatever, but they're insanely popular to the point someone like me who uses the platforms every few days sees it all the time.

I use Reddit. This joke is still insanely popular even on the generic default subs. No one cares enough about this to shut down /r/gaming or /r/funny. Reddit is already pretty bad in reality, there's no need to fantasize about it being even worse.

This has the same vibe as the hundreds of posts that appear on there every single year around the Tiananmen Square massacre anniversary saying stuff like "Reddit is owned by Tencent!!!!1! and they're banning everyone who mentions Tiananmen Square!!!!11!!!!" despite there being literal thousands of posts about the massacre on the platform.

I get that Lemmy's kneejerk reaction is naturally that the big corporation's CEO is wrong and evil (he IS an asshole, at least), but drunk passengers on planes is an actual issue.

I have a couple of close relatives who've worked as air hostesses for Ryanair for years, and they mostly like the job except for summer flights from a specific European island country in which there's a big tradition of drinking a lot and big groups of men doing "guy trips" to my country either for specific football games or for the beaches. These usually involve an almost permanent state of drunkenness, getting into fights with locals, trashing places.

O'Leary's claim about inebriated people being hard to identify is partly bullshit from what my relatives tell me - they say that even when they can notice these groups are already drunk when boarding, Ryanair's staff isn't really comfortable policy wise in preventing them from boarding. Plane staff may refuse them alcohol on board but by then they're usually already in a state of general lack of control. I assume the company doesn't want to strenghten boarding rules in order not to lose these groups as customers, and staff gets shafted in the process. But these people shouldn't be getting this drunk on a plane (or in general).

While I've almost always read bad online reviews for McDonalds in the US, I think the experience might differ a lot in other places around the world, for context on what I'm about to write and why I think many people think the price is the worst offender.

Believe it or not, I've always had a good experience at any McDonalds I went to service wise. Over on this side of the pond they're seen much more positively in general, I think. Their food is pretty good by fast food standards, and it's way more consistent quality wise than pretty much every other fast food place. In the last few years they've also turned most of their restaurants from the typical fast food restaurant decor to cozier and actually comfortable places to hang out in, which is pretty cool.

BUT, the prices just don't make much sense anymore. The price for a basic menu is currently near the price point of an actual restaurant meal. At shopping centers over here there's usually always a couple of "somewhat fast" local food restaurants - I don't know what to call them, kind of an in between between what you would call fast food and what you would expect from a "slow" fancier restaurant - and it's actually become cheaper to get a normal menu there than at McDonalds. The one big attractive of McDonalds and fast food in general used to be price - but if it's currently cheaper to get a full plate of great much better food, why would I ever go to McDonalds unless I'm really in a hurry? They seem to be counting on people still going there out of habit, but I think there's not nearly as much of a fast food culture here, so I've started noticing that McDonalds around me have much fewer attendance than they used to.

It's amazing that people criticize Windows security with .exe's and then install packages from external repositories with the security of "trust in the repository".

As with almost every case of these sorts of comparisons, these are likely separate groups of people holding separate groups of opinions.

I don't use Arch anymore, but when I did I found that the AUR was really useful to quickly install niche applications that would take ages to be approved on to an official repository. Often those would be made by the application developers themselves or members of the community. I would personally vet the packaging script myself, but I'm sure many wouldn't - and that's fine. As with most software, there's some trust involved and often you assume that if you're installing from a reputable repository it's going to be fine. If people aren't vetting the installation scripts and are installing from random repositories, that's really their problem. I'm glad the possibility existed and it's the one thing I've missed in distros I've used since then.

I also feel like it "breaking all the time" was part of the stereotype itself. I stopped using Arch because it was stable for almost 3 years and part of the point of using it in the first place was learning Linux by fixing stuff that broke - except that stuff never broke so I grew bored of it.

This isn't anything new. There's a whole lot of people on the Fediverse who throw the word Fascist around willy nilly but who will happily make use of Fascist rethoric in regards to those who they see as political enemies.

They seem to think that the bad thing about Fascism isn't the authoritarianism, political violence, censorship, etc, but the fact it's a "right wing" government behind those - those would all be perfectly justifiable means to an end in the name of a left wing movement.

I see this happening more in american politics than over here, and I think it's in part a lack of knowledge of history, but also never having had an actual fascist regime in the country's recent history. My parents were tortured by the political police. I have a bunch of family who lived under an actual Fascist regime, and colleagues from other countries with a recent history similar to mine, and I notice that people in general, even in the far left, are way more careful about how they use the word Fascist. American internet "leftists" - which I put in quotes because many don't seem to actually hold any left wing views - love LARPing about living under fascism and that somehow excusing every thing they claim Fascism is bad for - against their political enemies.