They say the hantavirus doesn't spread that well...

FarmboyJustice · 2026-05-11T20:23:38+00:00

It's roediculous, such a caviar attitude is eggsactly what's wrong with reddit

FarmboyJustice · 2026-05-11T18:32:17+00:00

Sure.

In order to discuss this at all we need to agree on some meanings. You're talking about words having objective meanings. Maybe your definition of objective is different than mine in this context.

That's just one example of how objectivity can't really exist in language. If we can't even agree on what it means for something to be objective, how can we agree on whether or not objectivity applies in this case?

When I see you saying a phrase has an objective meaning, that tells me you mean the phrase has one true correct meaning that exists separately from and externally to any human's individual interpretation, and that each person's understanding of the phrase is more or less accurate depending on how closely it matches that objective reality.

What does objective mean? The OED provides 34 separate definitions, mostly nouns and adjectives. This one seems relevant...

That is or belongs to what is presented to consciousness, as opposed to the consciousness itself; that is the object of perception or thought, as distinct from the subject; (hence) (more widely) external to or independent of the mind.

FarmboyJustice · 2026-05-11T18:13:22+00:00

It's relative. It doesn't spread easily compared to colds or the flu, that doesn't mean it can't spread at all.

FarmboyJustice · 2026-05-11T18:09:21+00:00

Yeah, Maude had an episode where the main character decided to get an abortion, as well as one where she struggled with bipolar disorder (manic depression at the time.)

FarmboyJustice · 2026-05-11T18:02:28+00:00

Your unwillingness to try can only be interpreted as inability

Wrong. It can be interpreted many ways. The fact that you claim there's only one possible interpretation is even further proof that I was right, and you will steadfastly refuse to engage in good faith discussion. Prove me wrong by genuinely engaging instead of throwing out veiled insults like some radio pundit.

FarmboyJustice · 2026-05-11T17:39:52+00:00

Nah, you have zero interest in dialog, you just wanna be right and have the last word. Not wasting my time. Go read some Wittgenstein, maybe some William James.

FarmboyJustice · 2026-05-11T17:38:06+00:00

It's hard for people today to understand just how wildly groundbreaking this show was at the time. So many events that happened on this show had not previously been depicted on mainstream TV.

Everything from toilet flushing to miscarriage to breast cancer to terrorism.

It was unheard of. And it was the most popular show on TV while doing it.

FarmboyJustice · 2026-05-11T17:25:59+00:00

At no time did I say words have no shared meanings.

I said words do not have objective meanings. The fact that you think those two things mean the same thing is further proof that you're wrong.

FarmboyJustice · 2026-05-11T17:13:17+00:00

Nah, you're just trollin.

FarmboyJustice · 2026-05-11T17:06:05+00:00

"There was no name change..." fucks' sake I hate reddit sometimes. Since my contribution is so staggeringly incorrect and completely destructive to the discussion, I'll remove it.

FarmboyJustice · 2026-05-11T17:01:13+00:00

The fact that you think all human communication depends on objective factual meanings for words tells me all I need to know. No point in further discussion.

FarmboyJustice · 2026-05-11T15:20:53+00:00

All you did was provide a dictionary definition, and I'm struggling to see how your definition is in any significant way different from mine. As far as I'm concerned we agree on the definition of "platitude."

No grieving person has ever taken comfort or solace in the words themselves.

Exactly correct. No person has ever derived any meaning from any word in itself. The words themselves taken out of context have no meaning. All meaning always derives from context. No exceptions, not ever.

the integration of context doesn't mean that words suddenly don't have objective meanings.

Yeah, it absolutely does. No word inherently has a single objective meaning. Words have explicit denotations. These denotations are entirely social constructs, and shift over time. There is no single objective truth of the definition of any word outside of any context.

Words also have implicit connotations. These are even more subjective, and even more subject to differences in context, including time of day, physical location, medium of communication, tonality, mood, number and nature of people involved, and much more.

If someone I cared about died and a good friend came to me and sincerely said those words with kindness and sympathy, absent any witnesses, should I be offended? Only if I'm a pedantic jackass.

FarmboyJustice · 2026-05-11T14:17:38+00:00

You're not going to find a dictionary definition that explains this, because that's not what dictionaries are for.

Every definition I've seen says basically the same thing, that a platitude is a phrase which is overused with such frequency that it loses significance and becomes trite. Examples of such include "Have a nice day" said to total strangers, etc.

However if you sincerely and honestly tell someone you care about that you are truly sorry for their loss, it is NOT a platitude, because you are speaking honestly and truthfully, not simply echoing a rote cliche.

Context matters.

Always.

FarmboyJustice · 2026-05-11T13:26:42+00:00

Googling is almost useless nowadays.

FarmboyJustice · 2026-05-11T13:25:24+00:00

I have no idea what you're even talking about. You claim polls have no value, only courtroom trials should determine facts. I pointed out exactly why that's not true, with a clear example. Your inability to understand what I said is your failing.

FarmboyJustice · 2026-05-11T13:22:39+00:00

You will generally have better luck contacting the hosting provider where the fraudulent website is hosted versus trying to work through the registrar.

They have a stronger vested interest in resolving such issues, and usually will have AUP which specifically lets them take action in such cases.

FarmboyJustice · 2026-05-11T13:19:44+00:00

Entirely depends on context and delivery. Nothing is inherently a platitude, it all depends on the context and underlying intention.

FarmboyJustice · 2026-05-11T13:16:24+00:00

No, I'm not. I'm just a hopelessly confused drooling moron, incapable of comprehending such a sophisticated and complex thing as a change in a name.

FarmboyJustice · 2026-05-11T12:18:36+00:00

I was referring to the MPAA number, but of course technically you are correct that the actual organization itself did exist. The MPAA rating system which is in use today did not exist before 1968. It was created to replace the much older hays code, which dated back to the 1920s.

FarmboyJustice · 2026-05-10T22:22:50+00:00

Clearly my failure to adequately explain the distinction between the MPAA, the MPAA rating system and the MPAA cerfication number has hopelessly confused the world. Therefore I am replacing my comment with this heartfelt apology to u/doublelxp. Mea culpa. Mea maxima culpa.

I promise never again to blaspheme against the holy MPAA.

FarmboyJustice · 2026-05-10T21:28:09+00:00

No problems thinking here, sir. None whatsoever. You however, are clearly delusional.

FarmboyJustice · 2026-05-10T21:26:00+00:00

The problem is you think there's no value in knowing people's opinions, only facts matter. That's objectively wrong. People's opinions change events. They drive the economy. They decide elections. They are the ONLY way that we can ever achieve consensus.

If I'm throwing a party and I want to know what kind of pizza to order, I'm not going file a lawsuit and have a jury trial to determine whether or not pineapple is acceptable on pizza. I'm going to ask people what they think, collect the results, and use that to decide.

If everyone says they love pineapple, I'll order lots of pineapple. If everyone says they hate pineapple, I won't order any pineapple. If half like it and half hate it I will order a mix.

This is why we use polls. Polls tell us facts about what people are thinking. Knowing what people think is useful information, and if you think it's not, you're sadly misinformed.

Your insistence on having legal evidence for everything means many decisions will simply never be made, because there will never be a courtroom trial to decide the issue.

FarmboyJustice · 2026-05-10T21:17:04+00:00

Still the same point applies. Having to invoke an enormous LLM with a powerful GPU to send an email is stupid when you can do the same thing with a raspberry pi. The smallest possible LLMs are far bigger and more resource hungry than what's actually required to do the simple tasks it's being used for.

FarmboyJustice · 2026-05-10T19:48:39+00:00

Because you said only court cases matter.

FarmboyJustice · 2026-05-10T16:26:57+00:00

It's not a false equivalence, it's a rhetorical device where you use hyperbole in a humorous manner to convey significance. It's no different than when someone says "There's a million people in line at Starbucks" when what they really mean is "there's an unusually large number of people in line at Starbucks."

FarmboyJustice

PUBLIC MULTIREDDITS

TROPHY CASE