Conservatives want their women to be able to get abortions while also being able to tell everyone they oppose it. It's a phenomenon you can look up called "the only moral abortion is my abortion".

Policies should be passed at a governmental/institutional level to reduce inequality as it's identified by data. No one should be at a societal disadvantage because of how they were born or choices that are their personal right to make.

That said, I think some problems to avoid are:

• On case-by-case scenarios, assuming that broad trends apply to every individual. I don't like automatically assuming everyone of a certain demographic is a victim. Also, some people in disadvantaged groups will use very real discrimination to excuse bad decisions and behaviors. Everyone is fallible, and sometimes justice requires punishment even for these folks.

• Gatekeeping suffering. It's hazardous to society and individual mental health to tell people of "advantaged" demographics that their suffering/problems aren't valid because of who they are. I'm talking about "what do you have to complain about, you're not X or Y". We can acknowledge discrimination and work to reduce it without dismissing the concerns of other groups.

Lots of reasons. Left-leaning Canadian's take on Kamala's loss:

• Biden/Kamala have acted against the American majority for months now in Gaza. This isn't a sabotage take, it's as close to fact as can be determined of national attitude. Look at my post history before you accuse me of "both sides". A lot of Dems and especially young people are very vocal about hating support of the ethnic cleansing of Occupied Palestinian Territory. Millions of people chose to stomach it, but I think other millions felt unrepresented and betrayed by protest suppression/bipartisan condemnation.

• I don't want to insult anyone, but even moderately detailed political plans may not work in America. Trump's campaign was run on vague promises and angry rhetoric that was emotionally engaging. Clearly people don't know how much Trump's policies like tariffs are going to hurt them personally, but like "America for Americans". Kamala ran on a detailed platform that took effort to understand and clearly it failed to motivate enough voters.

• "Try to please everyone and you will please no one." Instead of solidifying support and inspiring hope among the Dem base, Kamala's campaign assumed their support due to fear of Trump and went after undecideds and Republicans. Republicans aren't going to switch and many undecideds are that way due to apathy.

• No Dem primary meant people couldn't choose the candidate they might actually want to support. They were given Biden then Harris without being asked for input.

• Related to that: Biden's campaign soured voters, and Kamala wasn't able to climb out of the hole left to her. His low approval rating didn't help given Kamala felt like a younger version of more of the same.

• Misinformation and propaganda by foreign and domestic right-wingers kept a lot of people from switching sides.

• If you're the owner of the home, know what bylaws there are regarding snow removal near your home. Where I live you can get a fine + snow removal costs if you aren't reasonably prompt getting snow off the sidewalk.

• Snowy surfaces (sidewalks, driveways, roads) are often icy surfaces = slip and fall hazard. This is especially serious for older folks but it can hurt/injure at any age. This gets worse if it snows then melts then refreezes. Don't run if you don't have to. Sand/grit on these surfaces can help, and in my area you can get sand for free at certain town facilities.

• Frostbite on exposed skin is a genuine hazard. Look up the weather forecast when it's cold and take time-to-frostbite warnings seriously.

Reddit:

• It has a much larger user base and many heavily specialized boards that nevertheless stay reasonably active.
• It's a collection of echo chambers. Dissent is usually stomped out by mass downvoting and heavy moderation/bans. It's rare to find a board that allows arguments for a long period of time. Agree with the board's users/mods or get silenced. Posted rules do not matter, and you can definitely be hateful in ways that violate posted rules so long as that type of hate is acceptable on that board.
• So many users mean that getting content to succeed is a crapshoot. Often posts become lost in the noise, especially on busy boards.
• I left about a year ago, but apparently there's a lot of bot/AI slop on boards now.

Lemmy:

• Much smaller user base. Heavily specialized boards move slowly if they exist at all. It's not unusual to see boards where it's just one/a few people posting with days in between new content.
• More ability to have disagreements. Whether it's because moderating a smaller # of users is easier, the mods are less authoritarian, or whatever you are more likely to be able to disagree. Don't be blatantly racist, celebrating violence, clearly trolling, etc. and you'll probably remain able to participate. I'm sure this isn't universal on all boards, but it's my experience on many boards.
• For all that I believe the above point, there are still "echo chamber" moments on Lemmy. Sometimes it seems people may be downvoted simply because they are already downvoted. It's still way less egregious than on Reddit, and such is human nature I suppose.
• Fewer users means you are more likely to get some engagement on your post, at least in my experience. I never sorted my feed by new posts on Reddit because it was an avalanche of posts of questionable quality, so I only saw whatever content had already succeeded. On Lemmy I can look for new posts and see most if not all content on the boards I enjoy.

Disclaimer: I'm not an expert, just an interested amateur wanting to chat and drawing comparisons from past leaps in tech and other conversations/videos.

For a time expert analysis will probably work. For instance, the "click here to prove your not a robot" boxes can definitely be clicked by robots, but for now the robot moves in detectably different ways. My guess is that, for at least a while, AI content will be different from actual video in ways like code. There will probably be an arms race of sorts between AI and methods to detect AI.

Other forms of evidence like DNA, eyewitness accounts, cell phone tracking etc. will likely help mitigate deceitful AI somewhat. My guess is that soon video/audio will no longer be considered as ironclad as it was even a few years ago. Especially if it comes from an unverified source.

There are discussions about making AI tools have a digital "watermark" than can be used to identify AI-generated content. Of course this won't help with black market-type programs, but it will keep most people out of the "deep fake for trials" game.

When it comes to misinformation on social media though, well...it's probably going to get crazy. The last decade or so has been a race at an unprecedented scale to try and keep up with BS "proof", psuedoscience, etc. Sadly those on the side of truth haven't always won. The only answer I have for that is making sure people are educated about how to deal with misinformation and deepfakes - eg. awareness they exist, identifying reputable sources and expert consensus, and so on.

I have zero proof of this so take it for the musing it is, but the Internet Archive/Wayback Machine can be used to view articles that have been taken offline (sometimes for political reasons). The IA is a very accessible way to prove that once something is on the Internet, it's out there forever. I used it in a recent post to show an Israeli newspaper article that argued Israel had a right to not just Palestine, but Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and other territories. It was taken off the newspaper's website a few days later, but IA had it.

This may explain why no one is taking credit, and there are no demands. Or it could very well be another reason, including people just being assholes.

Yeah, and what kind of psychos would want to restrict public access to books in libraries?!?! I'm not on the conspiracy train until there's proof and I agree with your post. Just saw a bit of irony there since a lot of North Americans are currently in the process of dismantling libraries.

I almost never buy multiplayer-focused games anymore. Of course not all gamers are shitty, but enough are to matter. Having left those games behind I can see how they were taking more joy from my life than they added. If friends want to do private co-op that's cool, but it's also rarer now that we're all older.

As far as sales go, I love playing a year or two behind new releases. Patched games at a discount ftw and timing doesn't matter in single-player games.

Serious answer: I remind myself it's normal to be shocked by some stuff people do/create. I check the content against my ethics, and try to decide if I'm being uptight or if it really is messed up. If it's something that isn't unethical/harmful but I just don't like, then I remind myself that not everyone needs to share my tastes.

If it's genuinely terrible I allow myself to feel the anger/sorrow for a bit, try not to let it become excessive, and congratulate myself on having limits that fit my ethics. I remind myself that good people exist and they are the ones I want to support, emulate, and engage with. As others have mentioned, distraction can also help. Video games, music, socializing - whatever will move your train of thought along.