this post was submitted on 06 Sep 2025
523 points (97.8% liked)

Technology

74966 readers
2995 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ideonek@piefed.social 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Hmm? Now I'm honestly confused. What is the thing I said that I claim I didn't say?

[–] Ulrich@feddit.org -1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

What I tried yo explain you there was that there was no "into the traffic" there. People didn't "wonder" on the streets.

You think: people who wonder on the street are to blame if they are hit.

One of these things is not like the other.

[–] ideonek@piefed.social 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Yes, those are not the same and that's exactly the point.

2nd one is me trying to understand your perspective and assumimg that you asses the irresponsibility of wondering into trafic must comr from the modern perspective in accordance with modern standards (existing traffic laws and road culture) - reality after PR campaign.

1st one is pointing out that that traffic laws and road culture were different back then, and.we.can't even talk about "wondering into" traffic anymore than we could talk about "wondering into sidewalk" - reality before PR campaign.

Those two not being the same is the result of PR campaign changing one state of round culture to another by stigmatizing being a pedestrian on the street. That's the problem we are discussing.

Come on.

(Man, I'm regretting biting after it was obvious this conversation is going nowhere. This time I'm truly out. Feel free to have your last word, but - hopefully - I'll not address it)

[–] Ulrich@feddit.org -1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

and assumimg that you asses the irresponsibility of wondering into trafic must comr from the modern perspective in accordance with modern standards

So you're confused because you made baseless assumptions about me personally? Yeah, that'll do it.

[–] ideonek@piefed.social 4 points 2 days ago

Personally? It was based on things you said. We allready discused it, right? And it was the only thing to.me that made sense. At least than you'd be understandably wrong, instead of stubbornly wrong. If you understand that before the campaign walking on the streets was normal and perfectly leagal and the capaign stigmatized it as a simpletons behavior of irresponsible people, than I honestly don't understand what is the hill you chose to die on.