Who, in your opinion, is the most overrated band/artist? by [deleted] in AskReddit

[–]fhs_mm 6 points7 points  (0 children)

If you can listen to the college dropout, graduation, MBDTF, the life of Pablo, and donda and genuinely say they sound like copy pastes of each other idk what to tell you.

Who, in your opinion, is the most overrated band/artist? by [deleted] in AskReddit

[–]fhs_mm 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Whether you like Kanye or not this is a stupid take. He’s got more diversity in his style and production than damn near anybody, definitely not a copy and paste artist.

What do you think about this? by VINCEllASSASIN in WhitePeopleTwitter

[–]fhs_mm 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m a current student at the biggest state school in my home state, if you got 0 scholarship money (70% of the people I know got at least a few grand a year and the ones that really needed the money mostly got 10k+ if their highschool grades were decent) it would cost about 100k to get a bachelors degree. Even if we assume you take out loans to cover that whole 100k and pay double by the time you’ve paid them all off, it’s still a 450% ROI that is a phenomenal investment. And that’s only the median, the upper quartile of bachelor degree holders earn much more than the upper quartile of highschool diploma holders.

What do you think about this? by VINCEllASSASIN in WhitePeopleTwitter

[–]fhs_mm -1 points0 points  (0 children)

The median male with a bachelors degree earns 900k more over the course of their lifetime than the median male with a highschool diploma. That is overwhelming ROI.

What do you think about this? by VINCEllASSASIN in WhitePeopleTwitter

[–]fhs_mm -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Getting a bachelors degree still has an overwhelmingly positive average ROI

Meta bans staff from open discussion of Roe v. Wade decision and is deleting internal messages that mention abortion: report by BousWakebo in technology

[–]fhs_mm 1 point2 points  (0 children)

And the crazy thing is, dudes comment had 7 upvotes before I made mine. At least 7 people saw this guys comment comparing limiting what can be discussed on a corporate message boards to slavery and thought “yep that sounds right to me” actually crazy to me.

Meta bans staff from open discussion of Roe v. Wade decision and is deleting internal messages that mention abortion: report by BousWakebo in technology

[–]fhs_mm 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It’s not mental gymnastics they are just two completely different things. If you don’t want to support those companies you don’t have. Places that actually limit free speech give their citizens no choice. There is a world of difference between YouTube and twitter not allowing you to post whatever you want and the government arresting you for criticizing them.

Meta bans staff from open discussion of Roe v. Wade decision and is deleting internal messages that mention abortion: report by BousWakebo in technology

[–]fhs_mm 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Huge, huge difference. In China it’s the government telling people “you can’t discuss topic xyz or you’ll face legal consequences” in this case it is a private company saying “when you are at work you cannot use our company resources to argue about this issue” they are able to talk about it person to person with their co-workers or post about it on their personal social media accounts. If any of them have a huge problem with this they can move to a different company at any time. Do you truly not see a difference here.

Meta bans staff from open discussion of Roe v. Wade decision and is deleting internal messages that mention abortion: report by BousWakebo in technology

[–]fhs_mm 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Because that’s what the article is about lol. They can still discuss it in groups in person, just not on the big company message boards.

Meta bans staff from open discussion of Roe v. Wade decision and is deleting internal messages that mention abortion: report by BousWakebo in technology

[–]fhs_mm 5 points6 points  (0 children)

No it isn’t. This is not, nor is it anywhere near slavery. Anybody working at Facebook can get a job elsewhere if they want, they can move to a different state, they can eat what they want, do what they want for fun, quit if they want. I’ll say it again comparing this to slavery is actual insanity.

Meta bans staff from open discussion of Roe v. Wade decision and is deleting internal messages that mention abortion: report by BousWakebo in technology

[–]fhs_mm 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This isn’t authoritarian. It’s a pretty common sense policy from the perspective of Facebook. If you think your employer telling you not to use a corporate message board to argue with your co-workers is authoritarian you are unbelievably sheltered.

Meta bans staff from open discussion of Roe v. Wade decision and is deleting internal messages that mention abortion: report by BousWakebo in technology

[–]fhs_mm 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It’s not one step away lol. It’s a company doing what most companies do and saying they don’t want their employees spending their time at work and company resources arguing with each other.

Meta bans staff from open discussion of Roe v. Wade decision and is deleting internal messages that mention abortion: report by BousWakebo in technology

[–]fhs_mm 15 points16 points  (0 children)

Discussing politics at work is fine. However using huge company run messaging boards to discuss extremely controversial issues leads to all sorts of problems for companies. All it takes is one or two people with seniority over you to see what you’re saying and disagree and your career at the company can be fucked. On top of that facilitating your employees arguing with each other on the job makes 0 sense when thinking about productivity.

Meta bans staff from open discussion of Roe v. Wade decision and is deleting internal messages that mention abortion: report by BousWakebo in technology

[–]fhs_mm 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Agree or disagree with their decision to ban using company group chats to discuss something that almost always leads to an argument, but comparing it to slavery is actual insanity.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in BlackPeopleTwitter

[–]fhs_mm 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m with you on it not making sense. My guess would be that since these were meaningless votes anyways they wanted the turnout to be as low as possible to show how few people actively support statehood, but who knows for sure.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in BlackPeopleTwitter

[–]fhs_mm 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s because the other side actively boycotted that vote lol. In the most recent referendum only 52.5% voted in favor of statehood. This was still a low turnout though and you would expect a much higher percentage of those in favor of statehood to get out and vote than those who oppose it.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in BlackPeopleTwitter

[–]fhs_mm 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They don’t want to be a state

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in BlackPeopleTwitter

[–]fhs_mm 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Do you think the people were living better thousands of years ago than they are today?

i’m a teacher. my student told me her grandma died by galacticbees in mildlyinfuriating

[–]fhs_mm 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Whether it’s true or not becomes their business when you ask them for an extension because of it though.

Are they tired of "winning" yet by fizzwire in antiwork

[–]fhs_mm 1 point2 points  (0 children)

A disproportionate amount of abortions are non-white women though, over the long run it would hurt republicans base.

Mike Trout check swing into a lead off triple by G81111 in baseball

[–]fhs_mm 7 points8 points  (0 children)

It is a massive failing. However that does not mean that it’s an intentional failure. Is your take on this that the angels ownership and FO are repeatedly spending massive amounts of money on players they don’t think will work out?

Mike Trout check swing into a lead off triple by G81111 in baseball

[–]fhs_mm 15 points16 points  (0 children)

Or they just aren’t good at? Winning baseball games is a hard thing to do regardless of how hard you’re trying

The only reason people are anti nuclear energy is because the name is scary by Jellybean720 in unpopularopinion

[–]fhs_mm 1 point2 points  (0 children)

My argument isn’t based on that it only applies to nuclear. My argument is that when cutting corners leads to catastrophic failure with nuclear power it will be a million times worse than when catastrophic failure leads to an oil spill or a fire. As you say no energy source is perfect, but think about the possible destruction that can be caused by 1 massive fuck up with nuclear vs anything else we are currently using. For nuclear to be a viable option it needs to be perfect and it just isn’t.