I’m not claiming to have evidence backing me up, but I fear the idea that addiction is under your control may be higher among the educated populace may not be affected by being more highly educated because they’re bought into meritocracy and the idea of improving oneself. ‘Just do this’ platitudes etc. from the crowd that believes everything works like a controlled lab experiment they did in AP Bio

Oh, I should clarify. They exist, but nobody uses them. So they’re useless, like asking a ‘genuine’ question and then disagreeing with answers you don’t like.

You may have legitimately misunderstood that I meant better format than normal forums. I’m using lemmy, I know it’s the same layout as reddit

None of the niche communities I am interested in exist on lemmy. Maybe they will eventually, maybe they won’t. It’s more or less useless beyond doom scrolling. I miss reddit because I miss having all of my useful forums in one place with a better thread format, and I didn’t need to remember a bunch of accounts to participate in something like /r/tipofmytongue or /r/bikewrench periodically. Lemmy is just a political news space with memes and that’s not going to attract everyone.

Well, maybe the first generation or two wouldn’t suck if they had consulted people who use wheelchairs and know how they should be designed. Too bad they thought the same way you do and said ‘why bother’!

To be clear, just because the LSD experiments happened does not make them reasonable. It sounds like you’re justifying future terrible mistakes based on past terrible mistakes that you learn about in a fairly neutral and sanitized way in school.

If Stephen King wants to share his accumulated wisdom for free with millions of readers, hopeful artists, random people on the street who’ve never heard of him, what is the best way to reach them? Start a blog that will never show up in any search results behind the pages of machine-generated SEO junk about how they have answers for “Stephen King blog”, right? Because then he had zero impact but retains the moral high ground.

You’ve never heard of someone buying music on iTunes?

It depends on the societal framework. That would be anti-worker in the U.S. because you’d be sentencing some people to death, since the U.S. doesn’t have guaranteed livable wages or livable safety nets for those out of work. Given the assumption that you can make ends meet, mandating a cap on the hours spent working for someone else’s benefit and missing out on your own life is pro-human.

Does it matter what they claim they’re going to do differently in the future when they’re burning indefensible amounts of coal right now?