Yeah, obviously. But that doesn’t do my child a damn bit of good now does it?

Is that what you think people are worried about? Planetary death has never really been on the table, that’s just the ignorant parroting things that were misunderstood.

Honestly, why isn’t this just standard procedure for dealing with the dead? Especially if they’re already being cremated. It’s very weird to me that people are so pearl-clutchy about what happens to a dead body. I would much prefer mine goes to something helpful to someone over sitting on a mantle or frozen in a sterile box.

Obviously the consent part is a valid issue, I (somewhat begrudgingly) wouldn’t want to force this on people with deep religious reasons to keep a body whole, but I’d have it be something you have to opt out of.

Honestly yeah that’s even better. How great would it be to watch Chrome slowly die out while funneling money to fight climate change?

Seems like it allows a non profit to assume control of a company without having to pay out funds to actually purchase it. They apparently have to reinvest all profits back into the company rather than directly benefiting from it. Though the article does mention under the proposal, some unspecified portion of Chrome profits would go toward ‘climate action’, so there’s some vague positive out of it.

Seems like it would be pretty great honestly, so I can’t imagine it’ll be accepted.

Sometimes much higher than that. Nature is really fucking weird.

https://www.iflscience.com/world-first-study-finds-sex-reversal-surprisingly-common-in-wild-australian-birds-80408

Didn’t play TLoU, but if you didn’t catch it from the start, the point of The Mandalorian was clearly always about Grogu becoming ‘the Mandalorian’. Just cause it didn’t go the way you expected doesn’t mean nothing happened.

Connecting to characters in media is a great way to connect to your own feelings. It sounds like you’re treating it like it takes away from reality somehow, but all media is a reflection of reality. People have a reaction to it because it connects to something in their life. If you haven’t found things that resonate with you that’s cool, but looking down on others for being emotionally open is unnecessary.

Making Elizabeth invincible is the only way that game is playable for me. There’s no chance in hell I’d play an entire game that’s one long escort quest where I’m constantly worried about the useless sidekick that I’d rather be without. She may not have added much, but a superficial narrative device is a thousand times better than a crippling gameplay decision.

And nobody is going to get in trouble for scrolling past a woman with a bikini on at work. If your workplace is that strict, you’re going to be in more trouble for scrolling social media on the clock.

More graphic content is visible in ads on any major website. The idea that a clothed woman should be censored as if it’s vulgar is excessive in my opinion. Where do we draw the line? Shoulders? Knees? Ankles? I had assumed as a society we had decided it was the actual genitals, but apparently not.

And they would be fine with you publicly browsing Lemmy on the clock?

NFSW is meant to help people view content at work/in public by making it avoidable.

I agree with this. This is the fundamental point of the tag. I don’t want anyone to lose their job, or suffer undue consequences for happening across something particularly graphic, upsetting, or unlawful.

If it’s debatable and isn’t tagged, that’s inconsiderate and a request to tag it should be treated with consideration and kindness.

This is what I don’t agree with. Everything is debatable. I live in the US south, if my coworkers had their way, any image of a drag queen or a pride parade would have to be marked NSFW. And while thankfully this isn’t a problem on Lemmy (yet), that means a sizable portion of the population would be unable to see that content at all without uploading their ID and giving up any semblance of anonymity.

There’s nothing dangerous, illegal, or upsetting about a woman in a bikini. It’s something any person might see in public at literally any time if you live somewhere warm. And yes, I’m sure there are people who would feel harassed if you waved an image like that in their faces, but I cannot imagine a scenario where someone suffers any professional setback because someone saw them scroll past some clothed tits.

NSFW is cultural shorthand for porn or graphic content. It’s not a literal guideline for what’s acceptable in every single workplace. Should ACAB posts be labeled NSFW because saying that at my workplace in the US south would make a hell of a lot of people uncomfortable?

And why are you browsing Lemmy at work in full view of passing coworkers? Is it that lax that you can just openly fuck around and your only concern is someone might see a girl in a bikini?

Vent just refers to the general end of the butt. It’s the cloacal aperture that’s the all purpose asshole/penis/vagina. It’s really an all-in-one orifice, quite a time saver.

And I think everyone here can agree that any of these subs that are focused on explicit material should absolutely be pressured into setting the sub NSFW.

The part that has people against the OP is that he’s claiming a girl in a relatively modest bikini should be flagged NSFW, and that a sub for non-explicit anime pics should have to adopt the NSFW label, which seems excessive to me.

It’s legally sold to minors, available in grocery stores, hell I’ve seen them sitting on a rack in doctor’s offices.

NSFW is the terminology we use for actual explicit material, that’s the point. It’s a shorthand. Getting overly literal about how ‘work’ should be applied to the context is like arguing that all FPS games are actually RPGs because you’re ‘playing the role’ of some character.

How is it ‘clearly’ anything? It’s the only example OP provided, what else are we supposed to judge his claims by?

Well since you obviously didn’t open the link, it’s a girl in a fully covered bikini. Literally not softcore anything, it’s as racy as sports illustrated.

Background checks typically only flag legal history. Your employer absolutely does not submit a list of ineligible employees for government record keeping, that’s purely internal use. If you aren’t planning on coming back, there’s absolutely nothing to worry about.

If a new job asks for references they might find out, but the risk of getting slapped with a lawsuit for keeping a former employee from getting a new job means it’s very rare for a (competently run) business to say something negative about a former employee unless it’s very severe and well documented.

The steam deck is pretty much just a PC with a built in gamepad. You can put windows or any OS you want on it.

Every action has an equal opposite reaction…