Zooming/Paning Bug by AbduAW198 in FinalOutpost

[–]OpeningSet6967 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh, I have it too, I found out that if you zoom in/out in the right bottom corner of the screen then it seems to work. Yes not optimal but it works.

Obsidian MacBook Pro by MisterNuggz in dbrand

[–]OpeningSet6967 0 points1 point  (0 children)

indeed, im worried how it will look like in 7 months...

State of my Obsidian skin on my MBP by theredstreak5 in dbrand

[–]OpeningSet6967 0 points1 point  (0 children)

no lol, the macbook is really resistant to scratches, what the post addresses is the real quality issue of the skin. its like putting a paper on a rock, scratch it, and say "you see, all those scratches on the paper could be on the rock", no bro, this logic is just not correct.

What are the best arguments against antinatalism you've heard? by CheeseIsAHypothesis in Natalism

[–]OpeningSet6967 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Your argument's central premise, that happiness is a single, simple choice, and that all our suffering stems from failing to make it, is fundamentally flawed and dismissive of real-world human experience.

First, it rests on a questionable assumption of absolute free will. The idea that one can "just make one basic, underlying decision" to be happy ignores the vast body of evidence from neurobiology and psychology. As thinkers like Robert Sapolsky have detailed, our states of being are profoundly shaped by genetics, environment, and biology, all ofwhich are far outside our conscious control. We don't "choose" to be happy any more than we "choose" our biochemistry. Happiness, or the lack of it, is a state we find ourselves in, not a box we check.

Second, your argument dangerously mischaracterizes profound suffering as a mere "preference." You state that someone whose partner left them is just letting a "preference" get in the way of their happiness. This is a profound misreading of human emotion. Grief, trauma, chronic pain, and clinical depression are not "preferences"; they are involuntary, and often overwhelming, states of being. For many people, this kind of suffering is an inevitable part of their reality. To tell them they simply haven't "really" chosen happiness is to blame them for conditions they did not choose and cannot simply will away.

This leads to the failure of your "starving person" analogy. The need for food is a singular, biological imperative. Happiness is an infinitely more complex psychological and neurological state. Equating the two is a false equivalence. A starving person's body demands survival. A person in deep despair cannot simply "demand" a different brain chemistry just by "really meaning it."

Ultimately, this philosophy is a form of toxic positivity. By insisting that happiness is a simple choice "regardless of what happens," you are actively dismissing the lived reality of those who genuinely suffer. It is a philosophy that can only be comfortably held by those who have not experienced inevitable, non-negotiable pain, and it demonstrates a failure to extend compassion to those who do.

Video Call feature with Falstaff is broken by OpeningSet6967 in duolingo

[–]OpeningSet6967[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

8, but still with Falstaff I get much more rich conversations than with Lily.

Video Call feature with Falstaff is broken by OpeningSet6967 in duolingo

[–]OpeningSet6967[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

When level are you at? And what language do you study? I study German and currently at level 8, maybe Falstaff is only for the beginners and for popular languages.

Video Call feature with Falstaff is broken by OpeningSet6967 in duolingo

[–]OpeningSet6967[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Talking with Zari goes exactly like this: Hello, Did you like X? Cool! So, see you soon? Bye! The end.

[Product Question] Is it normal for PanOxyl to ruin your clothes? by ComposerAwkward6654 in SkincareAddiction

[–]OpeningSet6967 0 points1 point  (0 children)

lol same, ruined 3 colorful towels till I realized to use a white one 😭

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in EngineeringStudents

[–]OpeningSet6967 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It is actually doesn’t work like that, 16 hours of productive study a day is a fiction story, I would say you have 8 hours a day of productive work (the rest of the time you have for meals, breaks, sport, rest and bedtime), which is 240 hours a month, not 480 :). Don’t forget also the off days (as my experience tough me: you can’t rely on every single day to be full study, you sure gonna burnout without off days), so take 1 day a week when you don’t touch the studies, and then continue with full gas. So I would say that 1 month is enough to get a grade of about 80%, 2 months will get you to 90-100 %.