flamingarms

Yeah, this thread has been fascinating. It's the most basic concept and people are wild'n out. My last comment at the bottom of this thing I think will summarize it well for anyone who reads through it all. I think the biggest concern is why people are so resistant to understanding the additional power/control and systemic shit within racism. I use "gravity" as an example, but when it comes to racism, these are people's lives. And I'd hate to think how invalidating it would make someone feel to hear this "no" and "check the dictionary" shit in a conversation outside of the Internet.

Thanks for the writeup! I'm looking for options for single-origin coffees because I don't have much of anything local to me. Might have to check this roaster out.

I'm still relatively new to coffee, so maybe you could help me out with something if you have a minute for a reply. I got some coffee from a local roaster and noticed a super uneven roast. This roaster has confusing labels on things, at best the coffee is sourced from a single country seemingly, so it was probably a blend. Would a roaster roast different beans differently and then blend them? I've always assumed that the roaster is buying the beans blended because it's cheaper. My assumption then is that their roasting is just really inconsistent. I want to make sure I give them the benefit of the doubt though, in case roasters do typically do their blends like that. Either way, I'm looking to switch to single-origin to develop my knowledge and palate more; I've just always been wondering since I bought from them.

Yeah, you're right, it'd make a biiig difference if we ever got to play a first party title at launch. I was transferred to the highest tier when it rolled out, but I haven't actually used it that much. The back catalog hasn't really caught my eye much, I don't have use for the streaming (or the Internet for it). My subscription runs out in March or something, and I may let it lapse like you. Would be the first time in...years...I don't know how long. I'm just not seeing additional value for the price hike.

I think for me the issue is the price and the niche usecase. I could just prop my laptop/tablet up and use remote play, if they expanded remote play to do this same thing. So it feels like for the price, we're getting a device that is a Frankenstein of a controller and tablet, but can only be used for streaming PS5 games locally. Feels like something that will have zero resale value too, ya know? So it's just the value proposition for me.

Same! Haven't read them in ages, but this makes me want to find some again. Looks like the first game was pretty bare bones and didn't get great reviews as a result. Hopefully this one will improve on that; I'd love a good Asterix beatemup.

If you'll afford me a long comment, I have an example that I think will explain my confusion. If you check the Oxford dictionary, you'll see it define "gravity" as a force. Let's say someone says "gravity is a force" in a thread much like this. I and others clarify "well, it presents as a force in some respects, but very much not like one in others." People respond "No, it's a force." I clarify further how that's not entirely the case. "Check the dictionary." Yes, but the dictionary is just trying to summarize a very complex subject in physics and is not a replacement for the sciences. "No one is equating the dictionary and the sciences, but people still use the dictionary definition."

I understand that; indeed that's how this thread formed. What I don't understand is why, when I say that gravity is not entirely a force, it is met with a rejection of that clarification and nuance. Gravity is not entirely a force; it's way more complicated than that. Racism is not just prejudice; it's way more complicated than that. I'm confused why this is such an issue.

The dictionary is not a replacement for the social sciences, friend. It seems like you have a narrative in your head about why I am arguing this point, but I'd like to point out that your argument is currently standing on "but the dictionary though" in the face of decades of research.

I don't know who that is; first time talking with them as far as I know. I don't mind engaging with someone until they seem disingenuous; but yeah, that's where I've reached with that person. A short reply of "check the dictionary" is not the sign of someone wanting actual conversation. Guessing you've had a similar run-in with them.

Forefinger of the man farthest to the left looks split to me too.

Lol mate, you're being willfully obtuse. As you already know, there is knowledge beyond the confines of the dictionary, and the dictionary is merely attempting to summarize a very complex subject. If you'd like to broaden your perspective, you can turn to the research which is where I'm pulling my definition. If you'd like to understand why it's so important to include those other things I mentioned in the definition, there's plenty of reading opportunities to explain that.

Yes, and racism is also a social hierarchy and systemic structure that utilizes tools of oppression to allow the in-group to have power and control over the out-group. Calling it prejudice alone is not acknowledging the full picture.

Sure is. But "White" is prejudice at worst, not racism. Racism includes the inherent power dynamics and systemic racism against minorities.