my unwillled physical direction of my neurons disagree

as with all technology though, as they become more accessible with newer models being made and other companies making foldables, the price for the same kind of quality product we have today will inevitably be less in the future.

this is already happening with cpu performance, display quality, etc… it’s finally very affordable to get a 120 hz phone with a fantastic display and snappy processor, specifically thinking of something like the Galaxy A54 or Pixel 8 (on a sale)

a general rule i use regarding technology purchasing is that newest featured top of the line products are best left to rich people who can afford it, as badly as i might want it.

this goes for cars, phones, etc… one benefit to this is that it gives the product time to become not just more affordable, but better quality as well.

the earliest foldables cracked at their fold points, but Samsungs newest fold phone survived JerryRigEverythings bend test which is impressive.

in a few more years, this quality will surely be available at sub 1000 dollar prices, containing the most modern hardware which will be even better than is available now.

besides uBlock Origin,

Consentomatic automatically declines cookie consent notices. works very well.

it’s very likely that would be the case assuming that we learn that some of our traditions were mistaken, likely based on limited information. (or assuming that the definition didn’t change somehow)

i want clarify that it’s not so much that they’re “no longer liberal”, because if they were following more or less the same defined liberal ideals back in 2000, they certainly were liberals. it’s moreso along the line of thought that “what the liberals back then thought was outdated”.

https://replicate.delivery/pbxt/M10hcdVYgWYOLhwwLx87ssPebXhCNQdGDG6p5oycNne1lU7RA/out-0.png

other areas of Lemmy have been alright for me.

here however, they just repeat the brain rot “Enlightened Centrist” meme with absolutely 0 arguments being made. very lame and simple minded “politics” being done over here!

deleted by creator

conservatism is liberal progression into an enforced tradition.

liberalism is the progression either out of old conservative traditions, or into new ones. if traditionally enforced, this becomes conservative :O

but tell me again about how you’re a “conservative” or a “liberal”?

feeling “enlightened” yet?

edit: downvotes with no replies eh? too enlightening i guess

deleted by creator

that has nothing to do with the ideology of centrism itself and would be ridiculous to even pretend so.

it has to do with the complexity of the situation, and more specifically for everyone supporting Israel, having to do with maintaining country relations moreso than the edit: humanist ideals unfortunately.

deleted by creator

so misrepresenting centrism is not bigotry? which dictionary are you using?

deleted by creator

ah yes, and i haven’t found any actually independent thinking liberals and conservatives. just people who are checking their favourite left/right wing political commentators twitter to regurgitate what they say.

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

i’ve never seen centrism so badly misunderstood.

deleted by creator

absolutely it gets abused. any time anyone wants you to tolerate what they want you to(defend their own tolerance), they might suggest that you’re not being tolerant enough. (suggesting you intolerant)

this means that both intolerance of reasonable rules, as well as intolerance to unreasonable rules can always be twisted as “intolerant of the tolerant ruling”.

essentially, whatever an authority establishes as being right/good must be tolerated, whereas what they consider wrong/bad will not be tolerated.

of course most reasonable people know that what people think is good/bad/right/wrong varies massively, and how tricky and meaningless this fact can make the whole idea of “tolerating the intolerant”. it certainly doesn’t help in convincing the intolerant to be tolerant, so i think it’s not worth talking about.

i know truth itself is not relative, so what is moral truth? to me it sounds like saying that following X persons subjective view of morality we can objectively say that Y is bad. this just then makes objectively proving a persons subjective morality a relative truth though, and not an objective truth, because we could express any side of morality, good or bad, objectively, and as you said, truth is not relative and only one truth must exist.

if you’re talking about things like Sam Harris’ definition of morality being a sort of “majority wellbeing”, i’m sure that while we can theoretically allow for the redefinition of morality and make some objective truths regaridng that subjecte moral viewpoint, but as it is not being absolute in the universe and moreso being related to subjective wellbeing of the most amount of living things, i feel that this is still just fulfilling the subjective definitions.

interestingly though, Sam Harris will go on all day about how we can’t redefine free will as being the ability to make choices which all life evidently has in common. just because these choices aren’t ultimately free, he rejects the “compatibilist” redefinition of free will.