I mean, if “take back control” means treat people with dignity and respect. Offering them safe routes and a welcoming speedy asylum process then, great.

Unfortunately, I’m not sure that’s what they mean by “take back control” and that just makes me wonder who on Earth is going to offer me an actual progressive alternative to vote for at the next election.

Can we form a Lemmy Party or something?

I like that is was originally “The Spy who loved you” and the fixed it.

Accusing people of witchcraft was also a great way of avoiding blame. Bread didn’t rise properly? Not my fault. Neighbour is a witch.

Poor 1989eddy, he just wanted to help her with learning how to use tiktok.

I asked a friend this the other day and they didn’t know. In the last election Harris seemed to be set up to take over from Biden at the next election, but since then I’ve not heard anything about her or what she’s been up to as VP. What happened?

Um…no no, this is just our … hyperbaric chamber, yes. For eternal youth. Have you seen the hallway? It’s exquisite!

What are the other 81 photos like though?!

Woah this looks amazing. Now I have a new project to add to the list! Got any videos of it in use? How does it feel? Did you document the build process?

Damn you for opening up these possibilities!

I said something similar in another reply, but I can’t think of any games where winning/losing is possible but doesn’t change my enjoyment. Even elden ring invasions feel better if you win the encounter.

The only thing that could come close is an encounter like that or in something like DMZ where you can talk it out and join forces, but maybe that’s just another form of winning.

Trying to think of an example of any games I play where winning or losing is possible, but doesn’t affect my enjoyment.

I’m coming up short, I don’t think I can honestly say that I have one. Anyone else?

What counts as a “competitive game” - is it anything where there are winners and losers or something more specific?

The safe space idea is interesting. Maybe there would be a correlation between the type of drug and risks associated with it and the use of those spaces. I’m not sure people would make the effort to go to a space to smoke when they can do it pretty safely at home.

I was thinking about this some more yesterday and ultimately land in the area of it’s a good sounding change and if it leads to some instances of antisocial behaviour, then let’s look at how we solve that afterwards. Were never going to find a single perfect solution to everything and meanwhile people are dying.

I can put my “what about me?!” problems to one side.

Seems like a sensible step and possibly free up public services a little for other things? Legalising and taxing feels like a good thing too, but maybe I’m being naieve. Overall though, good for society.

My biggest worry, and it’s such a selfish worry, is how it affects me. I’ve had neighbours (terrace and semi-detached) who smoke weed and it causes everyone’s house to stink. It’s a shitty experience and something you can’t do a lot about. Would that happen more and more with decriminalisation/legalisation? You can use whatever substances you like, but should I be affected by that choice?

I’m not sure I trust people to consider others, drugs or not.

Don’t suppose he said why he believed taxpayers need that?

I’ve experienced working a 4 day week and I found it such a positive experience both from how much I got done in the 4 days and how much happier I was. I’d love for everyone to have that opportunity, especially public sector workers.