• u_tamtam@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    I have no idea why you try to bring a kindergarten level political twist to what was essentially a factual and informative comment. I don’t want to sound insulting but given the context you should perhaps think about your own insecurities and mental health before wondering about that of others.

    • ShimmeringKoi [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Love turning mental health discourse into a snide bitchy weapon to imply that someone pursuing a disagreement is simply mEnTaLlY iLl

      Who hurt you? Help is available.

    • ferristriangle [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      No one is attacking your “factual and informative” comment.

      No one is disputing the difficulties you’ve highlighted. What is being disputed is your assertion that those difficulties are relevant to your assertion that China won’t be able to achieve this.

      And the subject of the conversation is a technology that humans have already developed and is in use. So what is it about China/the PRC that would cause you to assert they are incapable of building/employing this technology?

      Your argument is that “Hard science doesn’t care about politics,” so I assume you don’t want to imply that you’re critiquing the capabilities of China’s political system. So what’s left? Is it racism? The removed can’t achieve what other humans have already proven is possible because the removed is subhuman?

      You are making a political statement whether you intend to or not, you don’t just get to whine about how you were only talking about the science and why is everyone being so mean when you only started a discussion about the science to reinforce (or deflect from) your original assertion.

      • u_tamtam@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        your assertion that China won’t be able to achieve this.

        Well, except I did not only NOT write that, I even wrote the exact opposite, see: https://programming.dev/comment/5899890

        Also, interpreting my messages with your ideologically colored lenses doesn’t imply that this thread invites political discourse. I’m sure you’ll find many people here willing to vent their frustrations with you in easily ignorable threads of their own.

      • u_tamtam@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        Because every single thing must revolve around America, only one thing can be bad at a time, and if I’m not with you I must be against you.

        • GarbageShoot [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          and if I’m not with you I must be against you.

          Neutrality is support of the status quo, there are no parties that neither support nor oppose it.

        • ShimmeringKoi [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          , only one thing can be bad at a time,

          Oh, were we talking about something being bad? I thought we were just having a non-politically tinted discussion about science and technology

        • duderium [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          I mean, it’s the most powerful empire ever to exist, one built on ongoing slavery and genocide. It’s difficult to find global problems that don’t lead back to the amerikkkan ruling class.