Im not entirely sure i understood everything but is donation the solution you’re looking for?

Thanks for asking, answers are useful to me too :D

From what Internet tells, it’s in the Calculus Affair, but I cant remember for sure

Most of the ones I used are in french, either puns on celebrities’ names or cultural references My favourite one is Captain Haddock saying “I do find that funny” with a very serious face

Haha you’re right I do Thx for sharing this :D

Im 25 so slowly leaving the young person sphere, but I do have CDs and I did buy some at concerts.

Im a metalhead, so it was mostly for metal bands, and maybe this is specific for this genre, but every show i went to, I saw CDs being sold. I think out of 20-25 concerts, i bought 5-6 CDs, that i mostly listen to in my car. Two of them were signed by the band, so this was one more reason to buy it.

When I don’t listen to metal, im into folk, rap or electro. I do have some folk CDs, that i listen to with my parents. But for rap and electro, everything happens online. My brother released a first rap EP, and printing on a CD was a very distant option for him and his crew, like ‘this would be cool but that’ s too much for now’. On the opposite, my friend who have a metal band immediatly started a crowdfunding to get their first EP printed on a small scale

I get that people may be bored of politics, this is legitimate. I disagree that it is a Lemmy’s problem though. Imho, decentralization and leaving Reddit are political decisions, opposing the up hand of big companies on social medias. So it seems to me that it is in the nature of Lemmy and Fediverse to be politically oriented. And even if you disagree that it is in their nature, maybe we can agree that it is logical that they tend to gather politically motivated peoples, as apolitical folks will probably stay on mainstream medias.

Thank you captain !

We mostly drink beer or shandy, and we use caps as minis, you can have multiple colors for teams and write letters/numbers inside to identify them But it requires to drink before any fight happens, so we always keep some stored from previous session, just in case For the food, thins that can easily be shared so pizzas like you mention, crepes, or raclette in winter

I see what you mean, in your case as well as mine, Reaper is far more powerful and so far more adequate to our needs But people do not always search for powerful software. Sometimes they only want something easy to learn, with only basic tasks but well performed and entirely free. When you have these requirements, Audacity is better

Not at the moment, from what I know

I get that there is lot more nuances than russo-ukrainian, but imo there is a lot more similarities than you seem to imply : both Russia and Israel claimed that the land belonged to them before, that they should get it back, and use violence to kill local people who tried to resist or move them. The only difference is that Israel did it with the help of western countries and partially according to their laws, so they get like an aura of legitimity, but the acts remains quite close.

I do not like when people basically do not accept violent behavior but accepts them when they are allowed by some law or authority.

(Also yes Hamas is doing bad things and should be held accountable in some way, just like Ukraine to my eyes. But still, for me it remains obvious who kills more, who steals more, who oppresses more)

Eh, what you say is interesting actually. Still, imo it does not change any of what has been said prior to that, you still made a scene to complain about people “making a scene”, and you still complained “we have the right to talk” while defending someone saying trans should stop talking.

This being said and put apart, i can identify two points in your comment.

1. You do not think people should care about trans rights, because in your opinion they are not threatened, and they should be considered as anyone else.
2. You have a huge problem with children having access to medical transition. (Not said in a bad way, but given that half your message is about this very precise point of the whole more diverse notion that are transgender and transsexuality, and that it is “all (you) have to say about”, it really seems the main, if not the only, issue for you).

For the 1st point :

• There are two types of violence. let’s call them blind violence and targeted violence. First one can strike anyone, anywhere, both you and trans people. Second one can only strike targeted peoples and communities, like trans, and maybe groups of people you belong to, or are considered to belong to (religions, origins, etc.). It’s very difficult to prevent blind violence, by it’s very nature. But targeted violence is more easy to prevent, precisely because it’s easier to identify potential targets and potential criminals. Targeted violence is also more massive. That’s why people try to care about communities which are targets of violence, as trans are, and as many other are, sadly.
• You make a difference between trans rights and your own rights. What about that trans rights are your rights ? You have the right to change gender, you have the right to have medical help about that, and so on. Trans do not have more rights, you have the same as them. Just because you do not need it does not mean it’s not your rights. You don’t know where your life will lead you, maybe you’ll need it at some point.
• You seem to have a specific definition of “diverse”, which i don’t understand. I cannot really guess why you do not find Lemmy “diverse”. If you consider that “diverse” means a place where you can say you don’t like trans, well first you actually can, and then it’s not really what i would call diverse. To me, diversity is different from freedom of speech. Diversity -> you can produce “positive” things, meaning they have a meaning on their own. Freedom of speech -> you can produce “negative” things, meaning you can disagree with someone/something. To sum it up : imo criticism isnt diversity, it’s more on the freedom of speech spectrum. And in any case, you can criticize a lot here on Lemmy.
• I dont really know which are the “issues we should be up in arms about”. If your true goals are freedom, happiness and healthiness, well the actual fate of trans people should be your concern, because they are the target of specific violence so more violence than the average (happiness–), the right of switching genders is at stake in many countries (freedom–) and their handling by health professional is also in danger (healthiness–). There are others matters that are as important, and we can even say more important, i would agree on that. But why on earth would you argue that everything is going fine for trans people and that they should shut up, while on the same time saying you are defending happiness and freedom of speech ?

For the 2nd point :

• As i said, it seems very specific. Kid surgery is a hot topic, even in trans communities, and that is not at all what is the most important in trans struggle. So it seems a bit unfair to focus that much on it.
• You should not call medical transition “cosmetic surgery”, because it’s not what it is, it’s actually considered therapy, as it is meant to prevent bad effects on your health. Your body is not the only thing to consider, your mental health matters too. If you can help a kid avoiding suicide and madness thanks to medicine, it is therapy, not cosmetic surgery. (You can be against this kind of therapy though, but you dont need it to be considered cosmetic surgery to be against).
• As i said before, all kids remain equal in rights in this case. they all get access to the same therapies, and all are banned from cosmetic surgery.
• One of the problem people try to avoid by changing sex is gender dysphoria. Gender dysphoria is the fact of having mental issues due to your body. So it is both a physical and a psychological problem, your body is in the heart of the problem, so changing it is one of the solutions.
• Still, you can say that for any ethics reasons you should not change a kid’s sex. I do not agree but yeah, sure, that’s your opinion. Is this one disagreement really enough for you to defend that trans should stop talking about their issues, that they are the real problem and that you are the good guy by telling them to shut up ? I mean, from a logical point of view, it’s obviously wrong, you cannot pass from one to the other. But i even struggle to understand how a single point like this can make you that much tired of hearing about trans. I must confess that i strongly suspect that though this is all that you have to say, it is not all you think, and that you have many more disagreement that you wish to keep for yourself.

Im sorry my answer is so long, i already shortened it as much as i could. Sorry if this a problem for you. Two things i want to acknowledge “quickly” :

• Being trans is not something you want or choose, as a lot of what you said seems to imply. It’s not just what you think, it’s what you are, and you have very little power about it, like our cis identity (i presume you are cis, sorry if not). This plus the fact that our societies are more hostile towards trans people makes it logical that they should deserve a specific medical care, because they cannot change how they feel by the only power of their will.
• All what you said is your point of view, and i respect that. I advise you to try and consider though, that it might hurt peoples. Not a lot of course, but that’s the problem with systemic hate : even little and peaceful disagreements, when put together, can become a huge moral burden. Of course the solution is not for you to shut up. Continue to express yourself. But if you just think about how it can hurt people, i truly believe that it can help you expressing your point of view while caring for the people it could hurt, and so making it less hurtful. And if you feel too overwhelmed by anything else, or too lazy to think about this, well, i happily admit that it’s not a huge deal, there are bigger problems out here.

Yeah, i kinda agree with you, social media violence is “not” violence, or at least a lesser violence. This was my point : trans are the target of true violence, while being tired of hearing about them is not being target of true violence. This asymmetry may be the cause of that much people disagreeing with you.

On the up/downvote origin, you are right, i did not knew it. Everytime i have seen it used, and so everytime i used it, it was as a like/dislike option. You genuinely are the first person i see complaining about it, so i considered you wrong on this, my bad. But the idea still remains in a different way : though you are technically right, maybe you still can consider that using up/down as like/dislike is a common thing to do.

On the Facebook point, i do not know. It is rather a “like” system than a “like/dislike” : there isn’t really a way to disagree with a statement (the “angry” emoji being the closest, but it just conveys that you are angry, not if you agree with the com or not).

Well, let’s take it as a personal opinion then. Now here’s mine : people seeking attention by complaining about supposedly attention seekers are double losers, first because of my judgment, and second because of their own judgment.

Do we really know ? Maybe they believe in our gods ? Maybe they believe in their god, and it’s the true one ?

I mean, you mocked them using the exact reasoning you criticize them for, like “making a show of being hated -> attention seeker”. But ok, let’s forget about that. You may consider that you are actually mocking communities that are the target of true violence, not just downvotes. Like they get hurt, killed, harassed, even by administrations and systems ? Maybe that’s the reason for your downvotes. And did you realized that this is really the main use of downvotes ? Just a quick way to react. If you agree/like, upvote. If you do not agree/dislike, downvote. It’s very simple really. Either you don’t get that, either you are mocking people for using tools the way they were intended to. Both ways seem dumb to me. If you want a place that do not allows this quick reactions that are up/downvotes, well maybe switch for other platforms that are not designed around it ?

Wtf is this argument ? Are you at the same time validating “Ugh trans people are attention seeker, they think they deserve it because people hate on them” and “Hey look at us, we are the heroes of this story because people on internet disagree with us” ? I know i already replied to your other comments, but it’s funny it’s the same in both case : you just do what you criticize other people for supposedly doing

Eh, in general i agree with you, but i think in this case it could be considered as “ironic”. Like someone complains “I’m tired of hearing about trans in public spaces, pls keep it for yourself, we dont care”, and someone replies “Im’ tired of hearing complaints about trans in public spaces, pls keep it for yourself, we dont care”. I think we all agree that the argument is not really good in any case, but as the second one was a reply, maybe we can see it as an application of first comment’s logic to itself.

Ok, if you want some info here is a little summary :

• Banning people condamned for bullying/hate speech from every social media they used for it
• Blocking websites (mostly porn) without judge’s approval, both physically and by forcing navigators/DNS to block it
• More ID checking to “protect minor”

And if you want details :

The current proposition of law is a melting pot of many Internet security subjects :

• preventing children to access porn
• punishing websites that host pedo porn harder
• punishing deepfake and ai generated montage (and montages in general)
• preventing hate speech and violent speech in all social media, including chat applications
• regulating the market of cloud storage providers
• regulating gambling and real-money video games
• preventing phishing

They have different actions at their disposal :

• Fines for website admins who do not comply
• Forcing websites to check people’s identity to prevent minor accessing harming content
• Forcing websites to ban some accounts suspected of illegal activity
• Forcing websites to try and block a suspected person (not the user) from using/creating any accounts on their website (for max. 6 months to 1 year)
• Forcing navigators, DNS providers and Internet compagnies to block any access to a specific domain for max 3 months, if this domain does not comply in (short) time to the administration instructions
• Forcing websites to mention the name and adress of any person or company that host their content
• Forcing apps markets to remove an app that does not comply to the administration instructions
• It would be mandatory for vpn ads to always display a message that says something like “Pirating contents harms artistic creation” (does not have a lot to do with the rest, but it find it interesting anyway)
• It would be mandatory for any content sharing website to stock datas enabling the identification of anyone who participated in the content creation
• Easier police raid in places where content is hosted (no judge approval needed, they just get notified of the raid)

Now, i did not hear from this subject a lot, mostly for the pornography part since we probably soon will have to show ID cards to watch porn. I remember that everytime there are more or less violent protests, government says it originates from social media and that they have to control social media to prevent violences. Most politicians i heard on this seem to not fully understand what is at stake, which is kinda usual.

I’m confused too, but my interpretation so far is that some people are choosing piracy because they want to get a fast and easy access to the things they’re looking for, and that the protest is making things harder so they are just mad because it’s not easy anymore