this post was submitted on 23 Jan 2025
8 points (78.6% liked)

Casual Conversation

1993 readers
376 users here now

Share a story, ask a question, or start a conversation about (almost) anything you desire. Maybe you'll make some friends in the process.


RULES (updated 01/22/25)

  1. Be respectful: no harassment, hate speech, bigotry, and/or trolling. To be concise, disrespect is defined by escalation.
  2. Encourage conversation in your OP. This means including heavily implicative subject matter when you can and also engaging in your thread when possible. You won't be punished for trying.
  3. Avoid controversial topics (politics or societal debates come to mind, though we are not saying not to talk about anything that resembles these). There's a guide in the protocol book offered as a mod model that can be used for that; it's vague until you realize it was made for things like the rule in question. At least four purple answers must apply to a "controversial" message for it to be allowed.
  4. Keep it clean and SFW: No illegal content or anything gross and inappropriate. A rule of thumb is if a recording of a conversation put on another platform would get someone a COPPA violation response, that exact exchange should be avoided when possible.
  5. No solicitation such as ads, promotional content, spam, surveys etc. The chart redirected to above applies to spam material as well, which is one of the reasons its wording is vague, as it applies to a few things. Again, a "spammy" message must be applicable to four purple answers before it's allowed.
  6. Respect privacy as well as truth: Don’t ask for or share any personal information or slander anyone. A rule of thumb is if something is enough info to go by that it "would be a copyright violation if the info was art" as another group put it, or that it alone can be used to narrow someone down to 150 physical humans (Dunbar's Number) or less, it's considered an excess breach of privacy. Slander is defined by intentional utilitarian misguidance at the expense (positive or negative) of a sentient entity. This often links back to or mixes with rule one, which implies, for example, that even something that is true can still amount to what slander is trying to achieve, and that will be looked down upon.

Casual conversation communities:

Related discussion-focused communities

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Hello, I didn't know where to post this to, which community. I came to Lemmy with the initial reddit migration. I just play video games and smok weed mostly. Lately, the state of the world has me down. And I'm into philosophy.

Basically, in a bunch of recent posts, some deleted by me, others by Mods, and plenty still up.. I thought the term I was trying to explain was called being a Misanthrope.. Someine replied it's called Eco-Fasicm.. I didn't do enough research and started commenting about that.. I'm truly sorry! I felt it sounded wrong eventually and asked an AI called Llama 3.1 what I was really searching for.. It is called "Misanthropic Anti-Natalism". The position that human existence is inherently problematic and that the best solution is for humans to go extinct. This ideology is often based on the idea that humans are a destructive force on the planet, causing harm to other species and the environment, and that our existence is a net negative.

There is a lot more to read on this if you choose to look. Personally, I hope that a bio-phage will be created somewhere with 3d-printers in a science lab using amino acid blocks, synthetic viruses, nano-tech, powered by AI that singularly targets the Human Genome only... Release/Hack it across the planet, Unbelievably contagious.. Most Human pop dead within a week. The straggling Bunker people and billionaires will expire soon after as the air is still death for humans and powered by a defensive AI... Lol sci-fi I know.. but at least more plausible than a Genie's wish for magical extinction...

Misanthropic Anti-Natalists often argue that human beings are driven by Self-Interest, greed, and a desire for power, which leads to exploitation and destruction of other species and the environment. They may also argue that human existence is inherently contradictory to the well-being of other species and the planet as a whole...

Thanks for listening! I'd like other people's ideas on this? I don't believe in God either. Just Thermo-dynamics and Universal Entropy.. the great mixing.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Onyxonblack@lemm.ee 2 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

Very interesting, and I can certainly see the sense in your words. Thank you for your insight!

[–] Cris_Color@lemmy.world 2 points 8 hours ago

Thank you for sharing ideas and talking about your way of relating with the world with me, I think this is one of the beautiful things that comes of our deeply flawed messy existences :)