@fushuan@lemmy.blahaj.zone
Fushuan [he/him]
Huh?
member since 8 Jun 2025 18:55
comments
- on comics for sad rules in c/onehundredninetysix@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 12h ago
-
on Japanese companies like Nintendo, Capcom, and Konami are healthier because they have smaller teams, don't have frequent layoffs, and don't pay executives $30 million, says expert in c/gaming@beehaw.org · 2d ago
offered a buyout for several months of salary to quit.
That’s actually what I understand a layoff is. The company must compensate for some time in relation to the antiquity of the working relationship.
You might be referring to a firing? That’s when the company doesn’t need to compensate you because you fucked up or something. Where I live, Spain, firing someone is very hard but laying someone off isn’t.
-
on Japanese companies like Nintendo, Capcom, and Konami are healthier because they have smaller teams, don't have frequent layoffs, and don't pay executives $30 million, says expert in c/gaming@beehaw.org · 2d ago
I was in Japan two months ago vacationing, and I asked the local guide about the work culture. He told us that although the fame is real, there were some high profile suicides during COVID due to toxic work conditions and that there have been some reforms in the field that have improved the situation a lot. By how much I can’t say, but in case you worked before then maybe the situation is better than what you remember? Hopefully.
-
on Queer discourse rule in c/onehundredninetysix@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 17 Sep 2026
My brother in Christ, have you know language? It evolves constantly. New words are created and old ones stop being used all the time.
Sure, but why create new words that 99.3% of people would have to look up rather than just say, “I’m attracted to feminine people.”
You are getting annoyed in a comment chain about sexuality where the first use of the term was in a comment where the meaning was explained. You don’t need to look it up because they explained it right there, and if that’s exhausting maybe don’t engage in the discussion? Their comment is way more on topic than yours, just saying.
Exhausting? Really? It doesn’t affect your life in any way, you can choose not to engage with the topic. I recommend you to try relaxing your views on this topic and removing it importance given the context in which it was used. It feels like you are linking other instances where you saw or you were told that people used terms in a way where it disrupted conversation with this one, but again, in this instance it was very on topic and definitely not disruptive, this was not the best comment chain where to express your frustrations.
You did the equivalent of going to a video gaming convention and complaining why everyone is talking about computer games instead of just playing sports. If someone was playing videogames in an outing and killing the vibe maybe you could tell on him, but the convention definitely wasn’t the forum, and this isn’t.
Edit to actually answer your question lmao: because labels are fun, everyone likes labels. Humans tend to label everything from time immemorial. People enjoy creating labels for themselves. If going to a post about sexuality and reading comments about people discussing labels is exhausting, please leave :)
-
on Queer discourse rule in c/onehundredninetysix@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 17 Sep 2026
I don’t think they would use the term in a dating scene when interacting with people unless is on topic.
Why do you even need that label?
Why not?
The obsession with applying increasingly specific labels to people doesn’t feel healthy.
It would seem unhealthy to do so to others, but they are defining themselves in a space where specifically that is being discussed. That’s not obsession.
These specific types of labels are only for people’s imaginary future partners
Hard disagree. I agree with you in that when you find a partner you either like them or you don’t, and they don’t need to know much more that you like them.
These terms are for the person to understand themselves better so they can interact more efficiently with others, not a template that others need to know to interact with you.
I like women, but I don’t care much about what they have between their legs. That’s technically straight, but I’d say that a lot of straight people wouldn’t accept that, so I like to think I’m flex straight. I wouldn’t point it out to my partner unless we were talking about sexuality to begin with, but this is a post about sexuality, it’s very on topic to think more deeply about this stuff.
-
on Queer discourse rule in c/onehundredninetysix@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 17 Sep 2026
The definitions I’ve known are that bisexuality is that you are attracted to all body types and pansexuality is that you are attracted to people.
So, one is more physical and the other is more social, but there’s no slander to either, no?
I for example wouldn’t say ace biromantic, I’d define it as ace panromantic since bi has more of a physical vibe. Idk, it’s not so deep.
-
on Bob rule in c/onehundredninetysix@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 8 Sep 2026
I will do this, but also stop asking me through. I’m at the 4th row, I’ve been here waiting 1h while people were on the next stadium in the festival. Sorry not sorry.
-
on Manifestación para matemáticos in c/onehundredninetysix@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 5 Sep 2026
But you haven’t picked english in your profile either. I agree with you but then communities doesn’t have a language set either. It doesn’t work right now so please don’t tell people to tag their posts, they will effectively disappear for everyone.
-
on Chemistrule in c/onehundredninetysix@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 5 Sep 2026
Alex is the best name. Short, known and it works in both binary genders, so it’s the perfect non-binary name.
-
on Manifestación para matemáticos in c/onehundredninetysix@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 5 Sep 2026
No one tags english correctly tho, I bet you don’t have english only posts tagged. The language system is non functional.
-
on aposematism rule in c/onehundredninetysix@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 4 Sep 2026
But but, pastel goths?
-
on rule in c/onehundredninetysix@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 3 Sep 2026
But… All of the issues you raised can be changed. Not every LED is bright blue, that can be properly adapted. The technology of light emission isn’t at fault for the parameters the car builders input for it.
Haven’t you seen house LED bulbs that have changeable light colour, temperature and intensity? There’s no reason car manufacturers can’t bound their illumination system properly not to blind people. I’m not denying the issue, I agree with the validity of all the issues you raised, I’m just trying to point your ire to the actual cause.
-
on rule in c/onehundredninetysix@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 2 Sep 2026
I know you are joking but who even says that… LEDs are one of the most energy efficient light there is. Anything else will basically cost more… People are stupid.
-
on rule in c/onehundredninetysix@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 2 Sep 2026
but why? the intensity of the light can be regulated and is one of the most energy efficient lights there is. You can get the same intensity than the lights above with leds, it’s just less taxing on your battery.
-
on shared rule ❤️ in c/onehundredninetysix@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 31 Aug 2026
But don’t forget to share the joy too. That part is important.
-
on U.S. Citizen Who Deleted Phone’s Data Says His Prosecution Puts Privacy at Risk in c/technology@lemmy.world · 26 Aug 2026
Don’t lie, just don’t talk.
-
on U.S. Citizen Who Deleted Phone’s Data Says His Prosecution Puts Privacy at Risk in c/technology@lemmy.world · 26 Aug 2026
That would have been a completely different situation though. Even if the pass was written in a note inside his phone case, it’s not illegal to have it, right? If your computer has a button that wipes it and a cop presses it, you aren’t liable, right?
The issue here is that he told the cop that that button switches the computer on, which is a lie and it shows intent on destroying evidence.
-
on Google buys Spirit Airlines data for AI training for just $10 million — purchase includes hundreds of millions of emails, Microsoft Teams chats, billions of flight pricing records, and anonymized pass in c/technology@lemmy.world · 20 Aug 2026
GDPR should in theory prohibit them from putting it for sale in the first place in a bankruptcy scenario, but if they are bound to disappear, there’s no one to go after so idk…
I’m mentioning European regulations in a post about an American airline company just because you said any, and yeah, I’m bound to disagree there.
In any case, I already didn’t trust any American company since they can be subpoenaed and they are bound by law to give all the data to the government, which looks as or more evil than the general evil American company rn.
-
on LMAO in c/linuxmemes@lemmy.world · 17 Aug 2026
The post (not a meme) is about not being able to import odt into Pages, and the solution being having to first export to docx. Yeah they can just use libreoffice but that’s not the point.
-
on LMAO in c/linuxmemes@lemmy.world · 17 Aug 2026
The issue is that working with docx files in libreoffice is less ideal than working with their native format.
-
on Woman Calls Out Doctor Wearing Smart Glasses During Consultation Where She Had To Take Off Her Clothes: 'They Need To Be Banned' in c/technology@lemmy.world · 13 Aug 2026
I was around when smartphones were introduced to the market, I had to learn how to use them and teach everyone on my family, and I don’t recall the concern. Maybe I was too young to care.
In any case, I’m not against what you are presenting here not the technology itself, I’m just telling you why the trust is being broken. As you described it with phones, context matters, and the fact that the main glass producers right now are who they are is a massive factor on public perception.
In fact, I use glasses and it would be cool to have some AR on them. I hope that the huge negative perception of these glasses push others to create more security/privacy aware glasses and expand the market so people that have real use for them like blind people can make use of the technology without being subjected to the negative perception of the RayBan Meta glasses.
-
on Woman Calls Out Doctor Wearing Smart Glasses During Consultation Where She Had To Take Off Her Clothes: 'They Need To Be Banned' in c/technology@lemmy.world · 13 Aug 2026
You are not understanding the trust issue.
By default, patents trust doctors with their bodies so they don’t expect the doctor to do shady stuff like record them with a hidden camera. However, the moment they see something that suggest they might be recording,then the hidden voice awakens and questions everything the doctor has done in a new, not so trustworthy way.
It’s not that patients think that doctors who wear those glasses won’t have a hidden camera too, it’s that doctors who have those glasses might also have a hidden camera, it’s the fact that they have those glasses that opens the patient to other shady possibilities.
As others have said, trust is broken.
-
on Woman Calls Out Doctor Wearing Smart Glasses During Consultation Where She Had To Take Off Her Clothes: 'They Need To Be Banned' in c/technology@lemmy.world · 13 Aug 2026
Smartphones haven’t been called “pervert boxes”. It’s the implication of what someone that would buy and wear the glasses would also be able to do.
We implicitly trust doctors just because doctors are generally trustworthy for body things. At the same time, the pervert glasses are called pervert glasses because people have used them for that stuff and we implicitly distrust people that wear them because of the implication.
So if I see a doctor with pervert glasses on even go they are not recording, I’m immediately distrustful of their phone too. The trust of them being a doctor is immediately broken.
I hope I was clear, it’s not if the phones can more easily record or not, it’s the current general perception of those glasses and how it warps peoples perception of others.
-
on Woman Calls Out Doctor Wearing Smart Glasses During Consultation Where She Had To Take Off Her Clothes: 'They Need To Be Banned' in c/technology@lemmy.world · 13 Aug 2026
You are not understanding the trust issue.
By default, patents trust doctors with their bodies so they don’t expect the doctor to do shady stuff like record them with a hidden camera. However, the moment they see something that suggest they might be recording,then the hidden voice awakens and questions everything the doctor has done in a new, not so trustworthy way.
It’s not that patients think that doctors who wear those glasses won’t have a hidden camera too, it’s that doctors who have those glasses might also have a hidden camera, it’s the fact that they have those glasses that opens the patient to other shady possibilities.
As others have said, trust is broken.
And was wrong then too. Extremely. Techbros existed back then too.
This is bringing real criticism of a group and blaming it on another group. It’s bad.