Me too. And to be honest, the simple idea of a contact constantly sitting on my eyeball makes me squirm.

I’m in the process of being diagnosed as an adult, and I feel very validated as I relate to this very much.

Yikes

Reasons I’m too squeamish for contacts #407

It’s an article about funny orange man sitting in a garbage truck on a web forum. I reject the question. It’s not that deep. Go repost with an article you prefer if you’re that bothered.

It’s really not that deep

The censorship on Tiktok is crazy. The AI based comment removal is completely arbitrary - for example, I once had a comment removed for calling a public figure a walnut. Meanwhile, the comments are absolutely packed with the most vile comments. In particular, for content relating to my country there are thousands of comments openly celebrating and glorifying the deaths of migrants and some seriously explicitly racist rhetoric. It leads to people using silly workarounds to content filters that must be trivially easy to identify automatically, but aren’t, raising the question of why bother with such extreme censorship in the first place?

Good luck to em

Goodbye, sweet prince

Metal album when

I’ve given an example of a potential extraneous factor. That’s not the same as a hypothetical case being used to dismiss fringe cases that we know for a fact happen.

I literally just reworded the same point but ok

The existance of cases where you can be 99.9% certain of guilt does not eliminate the existence of fringe cases. We know for a fact that people HAVE been executed despite being innocent. That’s a risk you must accept if you support capital punishment.

It’s not a false dichotomy because it IS a dichotomy. It’s a binary decision. You either legalise capital punishment and accept the risk of executing someone innocent or you don’t legalise it. That is the choice.

But this is a case of all or nothing. You either say the death penalty IS acceptable or it ISN’T. There is no in between. So highlighting a case with certainty doesn’t address the issue of cases with less certainty.

Even then, there is some hypothetical scenario that could at least mitigate guilt. For example, drink spiking with some kind of drug. I’m not saying that’s what happened or I think that happened, my point is 100% certainty is an impossible bar.

With respect, it kind of misses the point to highlight a case where guilt is basically certain. That’s not my concern. My concern is the fringe cases with more ambiguity. I think that if there’s even a 1% chance that an innocent person is executed, the risk isn’t worth it.

Sure, you’ve invented a fictional scenario that has never happened but appears quite certain. But even then there are external factors you can’t account for such as duress.

That’s kinda what it comes down to for me though. Can you EVER be 100% sure? Even if you’re 99.5% sure, odds are sooner or later you’ll execute someone who was innocent. And in my opinion that one single lost innocent life means the practice is unjustifiable.

I wonder how many people who disagree with me are pro life.

My understanding is that “persons” refers to people in discrete groups, where what separates those groups is pertinent to the topic being discussed.

For example - ‘indigenous persons’ refers collectively to indigenous people, but acknowledges that there are separate subgroups of indigenous people within that. You could equally say “indigenous people” and it would be correct but you lose that nuance by not acknowledging that there are internal divisions within the group you are referring to.

Not saying that’s the dictionary definition, but that’s how it’s generally used in my field.