Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)A
Posts
7
Comments
1140
Joined
3 yr. ago

Migrating here (or maybe keeping both) from @ArcaneSlime@lemmy.ml

Will put an eternal curse on your enemies for a Cinemageddon invite.

  • and every now and then they find another way to fuck half the internet.

    Like literally today lol, it has been giving me shit all morning.

  • That's what I thought, you have no statistics and your entire claim is baseless.

    I'm out, have fun with your legal rulings or whatever.

  • It's not a strawman, your reaction to "might die" was "right of way" not "well be safe about it." Again, right of way is merely a means of standardizing legal culpability, not a means of safety. Ergo, more concerned with legal culpability than safety.

    Then it's just me because you clearly haven't been reading it.

    Btw you ever find that data to back up your fantasy that right of way laws actually affect drivers safety consciousness? 'Cause I still doubt your premise and I asked about it like ten replies ago. If you have none still, I'm done with this conversation.

  • I mentioned my state having laws saying pedestrians have the right of way, are these the crushingly authoritarian laws of which you speak, or are you fantasizing?

    In any case, yes, pedestrians who indeed have the right of way in my state often (not all every single one every time you ever see a person, but often enough to have noted it being an issue, what is this "all do or all don't" black/white thinking?) do indeed act like complete morons, what's more when you ask these idiots why, they, like you, reply "I have the right of way" most of the time, and again I've never understood you people who care more for legal culpability than your own safety. This really isn't as hard to understand as you're pretending it is.

    except one friend who bounced off the hood of a Ferrari but - by his own admission - that was entirely his own fault

    But he had the right of way which is what is important! Don't let his safety be his concern, nor yours.

    Drivers always have to be careful of hazards, whether they're deer or humans who are too stupid to look both ways, it happens all too often. Most drivers don't want to hit a deer or a human regardless of legal culpability, if you're incapable of believing humans can have empathy for things hit by cars, then even still you must admit they would want to avoid damage to their car, in all but the most extreme cases like Bastille day 2016 (don't think he particularly cared who had the right of way anyway, however.)

    The "determined at fault" thing is literally "right of way." What do you think that means?

    The right of way for pedestrians refers to the legal rules that determine when pedestrians can cross the street and when vehicles must yield to them. Generally, pedestrians have the right of way at marked and unmarked crosswalks, but they must also follow traffic signals and not enter the roadway unexpectedly.

    Literally all that means is that legally you can cross where/when specified, which in practice means that if someone hits you they will be found at fault. It does not guarantee safety. The entire phrase "right of way" is legal jargon, for the legal system which determines who is at fault for what. What the fuck do you mean "fixated on determining fault" that is the entire point of the phrase you wrote in the comment I initially replied to, in which you were arguing someone who said one could "win the darwin award" (i.e die) for crossing the street irresponsibly. Am I the only one reading this thread or something?

  • I've seen people do just that in person, and my state says pedestrians have the right of way.

    I've seen people just walk out into the street without looking at all; people who look but then still step out forcing a driver (who they should have waited for) to slam on the breaks; people who (in contrast to those kind enough to speedwalk a little and get out of the car's way) will walk slowly as they can while defiantly looking at the waiting car as if to say "do it, hit me" while the car waits on patiently; people who literally just hang out in the street drinking beer; people crossing just after a blind curve on a higher speed street; and more general unsafe dumbassery I'm sure I'm forgetting.

    Sure, most of the above is allowed (minus the beer) legally, and yes as you have pointed out if the driver hits them they'll be held criminally liable, but it's still putting yourself in a dangerous position regardless of criminal or civil liability. People who "had the right of way" die every day, literally, the right of way only helps their families in the court case.

    And sure, maybe that only happens everywhere I've ever been across two different (large, not European) countries but that'd be a pretty big coincidence so I'm more inclined to believe your confirmation bias has you simply not noticing that it happens around you, too. Or maybe everyone in your country really is more civilized and better than others, yay nationalism or whatever.

    Just remember that even if you have the right of way all it takes is one distracted driver to smoke your ass and you should still be careful if your priority is staying alive, if your priority is who has the right of way or who will be determined at fault for the accident have fun I suppose.

  • Thanks for the tips! I'm no chef so they're all helpful!

    I really want to like beans since you can survive off of literally just rice/beans if you have to, so I'm excited to experiment! Flavor is one thing (I could figure out how to recreate the canned ones if need be, I'm sure it's mostly brown sugar) but texture has always been my hold out.

  • I mean not really, to be fair not leaving your loved ones out to dry is a common thing to worry about, life insurance and inheritance being some of the largest examples. And y'know that whole eternal question deal.

    But that is wholly unrelated to the fact that "the pedestrian has the right of way" directly means "so if you die, then you won't be considered at fault," but you'll still be considered "dead."

    Even if your hypothesis is correct (that "pedestrians have the right of way" means drivers are more vigilant, btw citation needed), that's all well and good, but it doesn't mean you should lollygag in the street or cross irresponsibly simply because the law will be vewy angwy with the driver if they hit you, it's still a good idea to take an active role in your safety, whether you're legally required to or not.

    I don't "fixate on what happens when I'm dead," I try to remain safe so I don't "dead" from jumping in front of a 2,000+ lbs hunk of mostly plastic, and I've never understood the seemingly suicidal people who fall back on "well he's not supposed to hit me."

  • This sounds perfect actually, I'll try it! A bit al dente is exactly what I'm looking for, thanks!

  • I'll continue to search, thanks.

    But not embracing the mush lol, tried before, didn't work. At least refried is more of a paste upfront though, it doesn't look like it's supposed to have texture while lying to me like canned beans! Deceptive little canned bastards.

  • Depends on where you're at to some degree I suppose (especially because if there are no designated crosswalks then there is no "jaywalking" as the latter action is predicated on the former condition), though "being where the cars go vroom" is still more likely to get you hit by one than "not being where the cars go vroom" no matter what the area is zoned for.

    Yet still, my point is "the right of way" isn't some magic forcefield that prevents injury or death, but simply means that if you do get injured or dead someone will be charged with involuntary manslaughter about it and likely have to pay your family money. And again I'd say "cool but I'd rather be alive," so for me the true advice isn't "don't worry the state will make sure your surviving family members get a little cash," it's "try not to get dead in the first place if you can avoid it."

  • Ok here's the thing, I fucking hate beans, BUT I'm wondering if that's because "canned beans."

    What's the texture on the fresh bois? Are they as mushy as canned or do they actually have some substance to them?

    I hate eating flavored nothing, need some texture, and yes I'm aware I'm likely autistic lmao (goes well with the confirmed adhd too, wouldn't be surprised haha.)

  • That'll help you win the case after you're dead or injured for life, so that's good!

    I mean, you'd still be more likely to get hit and personally I'd think you'd want to avoid that, but if you accept that reality and are more concerned about financially benefiting (or your family benefiting, if you're now a corpse) then this is sound logic!

    I've never understood it myself, because I am the type that wants to do everything in my power to avoid being grievously injured to begin with even if it's "the other guy's fault," but hey, different strokes.

  • There's a frog on the bump on the branch on the log in the hole in the bottom of the sea.

  • I mean, I wouldn't mind if I could use my flipper for it, but the big issue is "if flipper break get fucked." I can back up my .kdbx file in 14 luks encrypted locations, I can't backup a whole ass flipper as easily.

  • applogies

    Jump
  • Tbf, I don't read unames, and my app shows the pronouns in line with and the same color as the unames, so I don't read those either.

    Literally no clue who I'm even responding to right now. Doesn't really matter who it is either, my response would be the same regardless of your race/gender/whatever else.

    The one exception is whenever I see something profoundly stupid I will sometimes check the uname and go "ah yes cowbee again how predictable" but that's just pure entertainment and learning who here not to waste energy on, most comments are just comments and don't warrant that level of self preservation.

  • Well tarnation. I thought it had to be the one I used because when I go to mount the first part of that drive in nnn it says no, then when I try to mount that partition it says "yes but oh wait permission denied cause root."

  • unless you configure it as user mountable and not auto mounted in fstab.

    Maybe all I have to do is this actually, I need to read that fstab man page. I absolutely did not understand that I could use things like noauto and nofail instead of default until this thread.

  • Thanks I might just try that! Worst case scenario "repeat step a" now that I know how to fix my dumbassery! And if that cuts my root pass out of the equation it'll serve my purposes lol.

  • Oh man thanks! Looks like (without clicking yet) the second and third links are going to be a major help!

    I do indeed want to mount on demand (just not root) not auto-mount, and for SURE could have used this nofail today haha!

    Thanks again!