hmm, I'm interested in what @shapis@lemmy.ml take on this would be.

It is indeed the "no ethical consumerism" argument and as I said it's an interesting conversation to have.

I wasn’t arguing against your general premise. I specifically called out the lack of flexibility in your statement and what that implied to me.

That isn’t the case for me though. It isn’t for you either. It isn’t the case for the vast majority of people.

Maybe the Inuit had to 300 years ago. You have a Walmart near you. Be real.

And this is the exact kind of privilege and/or lack of imagination I was talking about.

It wasn’t about word choice as much it as what that word choice implied.

It suggests you don't understand how limited the choices can be under poverty, or how widespread it is.

I wasn’t positing it as a gotcha, I am "being real" when i say there are very real circumstances (for a non-trivial amount of people) that don't adhere to your ideal.

Assuming Walmart was your example because it's what you know and not because America is the only place that exists, physical distance is far from the only factor.

Assuming you have a home, even if you lived next door, that's not even close to a guarantee you'd be able to afford a continuous level of food that matches your ideal and also reaches a level of healthy nutrition.

The easy example is literal starvation, where it's not possible to secure enough food of any kind, let alone the kind that adheres to your premise.

This isn't an obscure thing from 300 years ago, this is a reality, today.

I wasn’t saying you were wrong, i was saying your argument possibly comes from a position of privilege and if you think this is a 300 year ago problem, I was correct.

edit: clean up

In modern society, almost all personal choices have victims, it's all connected.

If you want to argue the degree of separation between the choice and the victim that's an interesting conversation to have.

If your personal choice has victims, claiming it’s a personal choice ceases to be a valid reasoning to do it.

If you truly believe that statement applies 100% of the time (in this context), that implies a lack of imagination, mental flexibility and a level of privilege that taints anything else you might say with the idea :

"If they can't think of a single scenario where that statement doesn't apply, how much thinking are they really putting in to the rest of what they say"

For some, eating meat is life and death, through no fault of their own.

There can be vast differences in reading comprehension and contextual tone recognition.

As an easy example think of the many degrees of neurodivergency.

Secondly, British sarcasm and indeed a lot of British communication in general comes from the intention to be deliberately vague, so as to bake plausible deniability in to the responses given.

It can be inferred, but it's not a guarantee.

That being said this guy seems to just be a prick trying to walk back something that blew up in his face.

huh, never heard of that one, I’ll add it to the list, always good to have backup options.

In reply to to other points further up:

Android isn’t Google.

Yes it is, both the Wikipedia and the official website both state this.

I don't mean to get in to a slap fight but it's not really a subjective issue, android is still owned/run by google.

Though they didn't create it iirc, it was bought while it was still quite young.

Have you ever installed android before? By default, it’s without gapps.

Also not true, the official android comes with GMS and the Play suite (services, store etc).

Though there are places where some of the Play suite apps are not allowed to be bundled (iirc china does this), the default is still to include them.

Given that you're mentioning lineageOS then i'm assuming you mean the AOSP which afaict does indeed come without the GMS + normal google bs.

While both are "official", I can't think of any reasonable metric where the AOSP (and it's forks/derivatives) would be considered the the default.

Which phone is that?

The only correct amount of ram is the amount that covers your work load. Full stop.

Incorrect, as you immediately point out in the second half of the sentence.

Yes windows could use less ideally.

The correct amount of RAM is the amount that covers your workload and the baseline overhead of supporting components, in this case, an OS.

As a general rule, windows uses significantly more RAM for baseline.

But we can’t keep pretending that 8 gigs of ram is remotely fucking acceptable for ever.

Agreed, but we can push back on them pretending that it has nothing to do with their (subjectively shitty) choices.

The rest of your reply aside, I do disagree with one point in particular.

Where is your linkedin or github profile showing projects before ~2022?

A github public profile and linkedin history are not reliable indicators of comparative programming competence.

I.e it's entirely possible to be a competent programmer and also not want to participate in self marketing or promotion.

They are sometimes indicative of the soft skills that go along with being a programmer.

Same here.

Him also being ridiculously hot is a welcome side benefit.

Non standard actions in response to stressors is a known possibility with some neurodivergent diagnoses.

Calm responses to subjectively large issues or dangerous situations as well as subjectively oversized reactions to seemingly normal stimuli (sound being a common example).

I get the impression that's supposed to be some kind of gotcha, kinda seems like projection though.

If you don't want to (or feel like you can't) engage on a point, no one is forcing you, it says enough that this is your response.

Just like with police. A minority of bad cops give all cops a bad name.

Except motorcyclists aren't an inherent part of a purposely oppressive system that routinely does horrific things as a core part of its working.

If a motorcyclist calls another out for bad behavior they don't (usually) have to risk their life and livelihood to do so.

ACAB comes from the idea that it's not possible to remain in that group as a subjectively good person.

I get it, you hate motorcyclists, possibly for good reason but the idea that a genuine equivalence exists between them and police is absurd.