I share this view. Someone elsewhere on the thread said that the best covers are ones that recontextualise the original, and this song/cover feels like the perfect example of it. I just can’t directly compare the original to the cover because they’re going for such different things

Oh, I love this version of Bad Guy.

Your playlist sounds fun, would you be willing to share a link?

I love Avantasia’s “Lay All Your Love on Me” (Originally by ABBA). Metal covers can sometimes feel lazy, but this is an excellent rendition. It feels like the perfect coming together of two distinct parts of me: the me that daubs myself in rainbows to dance to ABBA at the gay club; and the metal/punk energy of the majority of my style and music taste. It always goes down well at parties.

Edit: I am having more songs coming to mind, but a weird one I can’t help mentioning is Edmund Welles cover of “Hallowed Be Thy Name”.. It’s a clarinet quartet (+vocals) cover that I didn’t know I needed until I heard it. So delightfully weird, and it has no right to go as hard as it does

Echoing Jubilant Jaguar’s sentiment about defaults mattering, I think that sometimes an excess amount of choice can be overwhelming such that a user is less empowered to make choices about things they do care about (Leading to a less steep learning curve). Sensible defaults need not remove anyone’s choice

Damn, I hadn’t heard about her husband being abusive. It’s striking to me that Giuffre was 41 when she died, and had been married to her husband for 22 years, meaning she was around 19 when they married. That’s very young, and so soon after being sex trafficked by Maxwell and Epstein.

It’s unclear how far back the abuse by her husband stretched back, but I wouldn’t be surprised if it was present to some degree for their entire relationship. And surviving abuse at the hands of Epstein and co may well have made her more vulnerable. Fucking hell.

I agree, but “slight” is the operative word here. I’m autistic and there are some cutlery that feel so unpleasant in my hand that I can barely force myself to use them. In the past, it has even resulted in me hardly eating (when the lack of good cutlery was due to the nice ones being missing rather than just dirty). I felt very silly that I was letting myself go hungry over an irrational preference, but I find that some battles aren’t worth fighting.

I have also found that other neurodivergent people often have strong opinions on cutlery, which has been a wee source of solidarity. I think that, in addition to the concrete reality of people’s preferences, there’s a reinforcing cycle where once a cultural thing becomes associated with a particular group, there will be in-group jokes made about that association, which reinforces the link. That is to say that the relevance of this meme somewhat transcends the reality of the relative frequency of neurodivergent people having strong opinions on cutlery

I like to think that data doesn’t hate theory, it just has highly particular tastes. Like this lil octopus guy in a plastic cup, who spends a while rejecting shells before finding one it’s happy to abandon its cup for. https://youtu.be/DTJbdy097m0

Imagining the data as a cute octopus helps with the rage when nothing goes right 🙃

Not sure where this obsession with air fryers has come from.

It is March…

I have a bunch of origami tesselations stuck on my window. They’re made with translucent paper (similar texture to tracing paper, but lighter), so they catch the light beautifully

Bitterns are so silly

oh no

This is one of my favourite Lemmy communities. I always smile at posts like these (and I often have at least one friend who would enjoy such posts)

You’re comparing between different sample pools, which matters when we’re talking about probability adjacent stuff. We’re not asking “from this large pool of people at an airport, who is likely to receive additional scrutiny?” Because of this, your comment about how you’ve seen people of all backgrounds get scanned isn’t relevant to OP’s point.

The scope we’re looking at is the pool of experiences across one person’s trips. Imagine if it was every time that you got stopped for additional checks at an airport, even when you couldn’t see any mistakes that you had made. If you get checked because your keys triggered the sensors, then that’s a mistake that you can learn from, but consider how it would feel if you meticulously complied with everything you were meant to do, but were still consistently pulled aside for additional checks.

I know that on the internet, you never know whether someone is being hyperbolic, or straight up spinning a yarn, but try to take OP on faith here and consider how dismissive your comment comes across. I don’t know OP’s particular circumstances, but I have previously made a comment similar to yours to a friend, who called me out on being an asshole. Back then, I was oblivious to the reality of these things.

My friend explained that the first time they were pulled aside for additional checks, they opted to believe that it was just a random thing. The second time, they felt more uneasy, but actively resisted the “victim mentality” (their words). By the 20th time, they had come to expect it as inevitable, and that no change to how they packed, or what they wore would change things. They desperately wanted to believe that they weren’t being targeted for additional searches, but after a certain point, it becomes impossible to believe that these things are random.

I was telling a friend about him the other day. She said she found it odd how it seems like he became a martyr for his ideals, in that the way that he is remembered is almost like he’s a mythological figure, more ideal than man. I agreed with her that the loss of humanity due to such a high profile death is tragic, but that it wasn’t the internet who turned him into a martyr, but the FBI (and whoever else was pushing for his prosecution).

They threw the book at Aaron Schwartz because they wanted to set a precedent. They wanted to turn him into a symbol, and that led to his death. I’m proud of how the internet rallied around him and made him into a different kind of symbol, but like you, I feel sad to think about what could have been if he hadn’t been killed (I know that he died by suicide, but saying that he “died” felt too passive). It sucks that he’s just a part of history now.

I find Scientism concerning because I am a scientist who is quite concerned by the gap between actual science, and how people use science-shaped rhetoric. An example of this is how in the UK, during COVID, the government repeatedly claimed they were “following the science”, despite many of their policies being completely contrary to what the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE) had recommended.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m a big fan of the scientific method — I wouldn’t be a scientist otherwise. But writing news headlines about the achievements of scientists exists beyond science. Being opposed to Scientism isn’t being opposed to the scientific method. Rather, it’s more like acknowledging that science isn’t a universal tool for solving all ills. Personally, being against Scientism also means being against the weird way we put science, and scientists on a pedestal. I understand the sentiment (and hell, I’m probably a scientist in part because a younger me was chasing that pedestal), but I think it’s probably harmful long term — both to society and to science

Edit: fixed grammar

“I’ve now had multiple bosses try to court me to return after I’ve left roles”

Describing them as courting you is an excellent use of the word

I find it weird to think about this sometimes, especially the fact that in a different time, I’d have probably been institutionalised, despite modern standards considering me “high functioning” that I got to go to university (where I met many other autistic nerds).

I was confused as well at first, but then I realised I need to think real literally: The one on the left is lit up and colourful, because he knows how to turn on a light; the one on the right looks as if he is in the dark (due to not knowing how to turn on the light)

Though you saying you’re “in the dark on this one” does make me wonder whether you did get the joke, and in fact I am missing a joke that you are making.

I’m really glad that I discovered the phrase Corporate Memphis, because it works really well as an out of context pejorative. E.g.

“Ugh, that’s so Corporate Memphis”

That could refer to something that isn’t at all like the corporate Memphis art style in a literal sense, but has all of the vibes.