BambiDiego

joined 1 year ago
[–] BambiDiego@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago

I get that, I think the difference is Mr. Beast never admitted to being a dick and presented himself as "fun and kind", whereas Louis expressly and repeatedly says "I think I'm doing a good thing, verify if you want, fuck you if you disagree, I don't care about your opinion."

I've had both kinds of people as bosses and employees, and I would absolutely work with the second kind again.

[–] BambiDiego@lemmy.world 34 points 3 days ago (6 children)

Louis is self-admittedly an asshole, but he's a fair asshole and his people stick by and swear by him, even after they leave.

I respect him and truly feel he's honest, especially when he has so many receipts.

I'd rather an honest asshole than a kind manipulator.

[–] BambiDiego@lemmy.world 19 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Maybe this in Julian calendar?!

That means we only have 247 years left!! REPENT!!

[–] BambiDiego@lemmy.world 23 points 1 week ago
  1. Trusting YouTube and TikTok over... Hmmm, I don't know, the US census, US department of Labor, dozens of scholarly studies, hundreds of reputable modern American sociologists, anthropologists, and other educated people who've come to a general consensus, seems like a bad start to form an educated opinion.

  2. The average human is sorrowfully terrible at understanding scale. "It's not just a few people, it's many" is a vague statement. What is many? Compared to what? "Almost 500 THOUSAND cases of cholera were reported last year!! Half a million people!! It's going to kill us all!!" Yeah, but that's 0.0000625% of humans. More than twice that many people die from accidents while playing sports for recreation. It doesn't mean we don't help people with cholera, and it doesn't mean we ban sports globally; to use that as an example of a greater issue is just disingenuous or ignorant.

"Many" doesn't mean most, it doesn't even mean a considerable percentage. Many could just as easily be an insignificant percentage.

[–] BambiDiego@lemmy.world 9 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I like your question! To me it starts with a real apology without excuses. Real apologies are generally short and put one in a vulnerable situation, like

"I'm sorry for spreading these lies, they aren't true and I did it from a place of ignorance"

No "I didn't mean to," no "I'm not racist, I'm mixed," and so on.

[–] BambiDiego@lemmy.world 39 points 2 weeks ago (7 children)

She's not expressing remorse, she's selfishly scared for herself.

Remorse requires accountability, not excuses and projection.

She made a racist, hateful, hearsay statement and now that it might affect her she says she can't be hateful because she's "gay and biracial." That's the definition of dodging accountability.

[–] BambiDiego@lemmy.world 28 points 2 weeks ago (6 children)

Because they have Air Conditioning.

The thing they should have had for the last 40 years. With record breaking heat year after year it should be hazard pay without ac

[–] BambiDiego@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago

You didn't misremember, it was a scholarly discussion point that spread too far before it got debunked, like how some people still believe the "gum stays inside you for 7 years"

[–] BambiDiego@lemmy.world 13 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I was talking with my girlfriend and Tar Shampoo came up, and I said "I don't even know exactly what that is used for other than dramatically killing off a horse" and she hung up on me.

[–] BambiDiego@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

But what if they mutate?!

[–] BambiDiego@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

It's a common thing in many countries. It's, among other things, a liability issue.

If your "country #1" company does business in "country #2" then what laws apply to them?

In order to distinguish clear lines what "country #2" requires is a representative for the company to be in the country. If the company breaks "country #2"'s laws then the representative is liable for it.

Generally to be a representative you have to have a measurable stake in the transaction, you can't just be a random Jimbo, so it usually falls to a law firm (or an entity that works with one), mainly because if you need people to help your company follow the law, then they should know the law.

If the company breaks the law, the firm has to deal with that, so it's a risk for them.

In this case, X needed that representative, either they couldn't or wouldn't find one, therefore Brazil said "we can't hold you accountable to our laws, so get out of our country."

I'm super, MEGA, oversimplifying, and I'm no expert, but this is my best understanding.

view more: next ›