In FOSS you’re paying with your time and plausible feedback / contributions.

Social media sites live as advertising vehicles. Being able to show numbers related to users showing links helps them sell advertisements.

It’s reportedly why Bluesky redirects links in the app to a referrer – so websites can see how much traffic they get from there and have a reason to post on the network.

Whether or not this is a good thing, and how much tracking is acceptable, is an entirely separate discussion. (Which should really include words like “I regularly donate to my Lemmy instance” or their equivalent…)

It’s not so much a philosophical challenge as a grammatical question.

Was the egg that the very first chicken hatched from a chicken egg, even though it was laid by a non-chicken?

If I waved a scientifically-advanced biotech wand and impregnated a chicken with a small dinosaur, would the resultant egg be a chicken egg even though a dinosaur came out?

I think you underestimate how long a telegram can be.

Not everyone who sent telegrams was as poor as Victor Hugo inquiring about the English sales of Les Miserables by sending a single '?"

This is really dependent on how many people are taking the same trip you are.

There’s a rail line that goes very regularly between my state capital and my state’s eponymous megacity. (And more along the entire corridor on south to the national capital). If it’s just one or two adults doing that trip it’s cheaper to ride the rail, since the two round-trip tickets cover gas, fuel, tolls, parking, and depreciation. Not so if it’s enough people to fill the car.

I misremembered. The last one I looked into isnt FOSS, but is thick with AI.

https://alistaircrowe.com/

LibreOffice is sick with LLM plugins, and at least one FOSS word processor that I looked into as a word alternative advertised a thick AI integration.

Any rational adult Christian needs to have an answer to “why does God let bad things happen” to be all three of those things.

Some assert that bad things are entirely due to mortal choices. Others assert that God lets bad things happen to setup later good things. Both are reasonable answers, though I don’t happen to believe either applies to all instances.

I personally think God lets bad things happen for the same reason that authors let bad things happen to their characters. God can see our whole mortal existence unconstrained by time, and from His point of view in Heaven our temporary suffering or painful end are just part of a four dimensional whole most comparable to a role we played on a stage.

Thankfully, the moment of suffering is something Christians assert God Himself incarnated and endured, even going so far as to doubt and fear as he was being killed. Most of us say God lived as one of us and felt all the same wretched emotions humans feel, including exactly the anger and frustration that you describe.

Bathrooms are segregated by gender because victorians thought women deserved better than unsanitary holes in the ground, so they made actual bathrooms for them when women started to work in factories.

By the time enough men realized they wanted indoor plumbing at work too, the tradition had been established that women had separate facilities and so the separation stuck.

(And now it’s just the slow process of redoing every public bathroom on the planet to be gender neutral. Which is harder than it should be since transphobes love telling horror stories about trans women so they can police all women.)

Gender segregated sports aren’t segregated so women get to play. Sure, a lot of girls benefit from this segregation, but it’s not the reason.

High-skill men, unskilled men, high-skill women, mid-skill women, and unskilled women have historically been kinda fine in letting men and women compete in an equal footing. For man-centric things this means most winners and competitors will be men, but the inverse happens for woman-centric things and nobody really complains.

But mid-skill men doing a man-centric thing absolutely lose it when they lose to high-skill women. Which doesn’t happen a lot, but they lose it loudly enough when it does happen that for anything as trivial as sport it’s easier to just segregate so we can protect the fragile egos of mid-skill men who just can’t handle losing to a woman.

Failure to do something can be as much your fault as if you did something wrong.

In the face of societal oppression good parenting requires positive and engaging action. “I’ll love you no matter what” is warm but scary, while “I’ll assume your non-binary until you come out one way or the other” is a clear message of acceptance.

(My daughter came out as cis, largely because she was annoyed at her parents proactive inclusion.)

You literally said you have a mental health issue (seperation anxiety) and asked if an unusual household habit might be a contributing cause.

Going to a therapist is definitely worth considering.

The standard rebuttal is thus:

If your kid doesn’t tell you that they are trans, there’s probably a reason and it’s definitely your fault

The bible doesn’t say being gay is a sin. At worst, there’s an old testament law against bisexuality (that may just be about not cheating on your wife with a man), and a new testament story about God making some homophobic Romans gay to punish them.

More importantly than the ambiguity of either the old testament laws or the post-gospel epistles however are the actual techings attributed to Jesus. Each of the four gospels tells the story slightly differently, but two stories are applicable here.

The first is the story of the Mary who was neither Jesus’s mother nor bestie, but just a random Jewish girl who was caught cheating with a married man and was about to be gang-murdered by an angry mob chucking stones at her until she died. Obvious sexual sin, and apparently the customary punishment. But God essentially says “I tell you what, SURE she’s a sinner, how about y’all get someone who isn’t to start this execution right.”

( Which, when coupled with a few later passages about leaving judgement for God, honestly let’s any Christian ignore anyone else’s sin entirely.)

The second story is a bit more on point, and is contained in all four gospels as essentially the thesis of the new religion. Jesus was asked what the most important part of the law was, and he essentially said “love” twice. To love God with all that you are, and love everyone else as you love yourself. And then went on to imply that one could derive all of celestial law from just those two. Which means any Christian can and should ignore any hateful old testament law if they honestly feel it is wrong.

(Which can sound like a cop out until you get back to the “we are all sinners” point. It doesn’t matter if homosexuality or premarital sex are sins, because being a hateful jerk or judgemental ass are also sins and the only way anyone gets to avoid hell is if God decides to not give us the horrible fate we deserve.)

The Christianity I practice is a religion based around the idea that God created everything, loves us all, and really just wants us to not be dicks to each other.

There isn’t enough room in a life concerned with the “new” commandment to love everyone as we love ourselves to be a dick about anyone else’s sex life. As long as you’re honest with your lovers and do your best to not spread STDs, whether or not your seventy-five member atheistic informal polycule is sinful or not is between you and God.

Accusing a Christian of cherry picking their political positions from the bible is like accusing a cook of cherry picking the recipe from an online story about a great date and adopting a dog.

Why is a woman whose child is murdered through corporate malfeasance less deserving of wealth than the CEO whose ability to vacillate gets them a bonus whether the company does good or bad?

Why is she less deserving than some rando who won the birth lottery?

Or, hell, a rando who just won a lottety lottery?

Wage theft as only “not paid what was owed according to current law” is already the biggest form of theft and the least prosecuted.

Please don’t help perpetuate capitalist exploitation by blurring it with the “value theft” inherent to capitalism

“Actual coverage is less than what’s theoretically possible” is a hell of a way of saying "these things aren’t good enough (yet) to actually replace real people ".

Maybe @OP didn’t realize this is “unpopular opinion”, and not “virtually universal opinion”?

What matters is consistency.

“Why do you have a label that excludes me?” scales up and to a virtually universal group and down to a specialized category with only three members.

It doesn’t really matter if you say that men are right to critique the label “feminism” or if you allow specialization all the way down to “Midwestern small city non-theater trans-male part-African part-Irish demisexual furry feminism”. Just so long as you’re fighting bigotry and applying your principles consistently.

(I much rather spend effort arguing that a man arguing against anti-masculine sexism is a cause worth supporting than bickering over whether or not his cause counts as “feminism”, even though I would casually include him in the label.)