You must log in or register to comment.
I’m frustrated more people are complacent with the state of the world, including myself.
Abortion should be mandatory.
People keep arguing over whether abortion should be legal or not, but my opinion is that it should be forced on everyone whether they want it or not. Late term abortions up to 100 years after birth should also be considered for inclusion in this rule.
One of my favourite activities is finding controversial opinions, then taking an opinion so extreme that it makes everyone else look like a centrist.
DUI laws are too strict. It shouldn’t be all or nothing at .08 BAC but more severe punishments for more severe inebriation. .08 is pretty low and people who drink regularly can function fine at that level.
People hate this one but… hey, it’s my most unpopular opinion.
That is an actual unpopular opinion. Fuck people who drink and drive, driving is dangerous enough as it is, and no one needs to drink alcohol ever
It’s a personal decision. Some of us enjoy the flavor and the social enhancements after having a few. I agree fuck people who drive really drunk but I don’t consider a few beers to be that. In fact, I know that a few beers doesn’t make me drunk or mess up my motor skills any. I’m significantly more dangerous when I am sleep deprived but that isn’t illegal. Heh.
There are people with addictions who live in car centric places and need to drive. Should we stop those people from living a normal life because of a medical condition? Probably leading to it worsening = more drinking
I think it’s a more complicated issue than it seems at surface level and a real solution needs to be nuanced.
They chose to drink and then drive. Even if I buy that alcoholics should be allowed to be alcoholics, just purchasing the alcohol, then driving home and then drinking it is of course an option.
They used to be more lax, the current rules are more strict because it IS a problem and there are studies showing it to be. Hence the lower BAC limits.
Cognitive ability is a far better test. I used to be a raging alco, like real alco, not just daily drinker. The levels I functioned at would kill most people.
Of course I still have alcoholism, but I haven’t drank in 12+ years. While I don’t condone drinking and driving at all - in fact it makes no sense at all in this age of ride sharing - but if I were on a jury I could be swayed by a heavy drinker excuse. 🤷♂️
That’s one I used to hold until I went looking for studies on how smaller doses of alcohol impact a person’s driving ability. What I found was a linear, dose-dependent response with no real hard cutoffs. Driving is dangerous enough; there’s little benefit to making that worse by drinking beforehand.
I might be OK with a reduced penalty at .08, but I’d like to add a slap on the wrist at an even lower level.
Here in Sweden the limit is at 0,2 ‰ which I believe is equivalent to 0,02 BAC. So 0,08 BAC is really high IMO.
The limit for a serious violation is 1 ‰
The punishment for a normal violation is a fine or up to 6 months in prison. The punishment for a serious violation is up to 2 years in prison. Apparently if you go above 1,5 ‰ you are quite unlikely to get any other punishment than prison, so community service or similar is out.
If you are found guilty they generally take your driving licence a As well and you are not allowed to get a new one for a minimum of 1 month or a maximum of 3 years (minimum 1 year for serious violation)
Does that mean the limit is like half a drink?
I have no idea, I don’t drink.
But if that’s the case it makes sense since you shouldn’t drink and drive at all IMO the limit should be treated more like a margin of error (because you shouldn’t drink at all) and less like a limit of how much you can drink.
Wow. .08 is ridiculously lax IMO. I agree punishments should scale by inebriation level but I never expected people to think .08 was too strict.
Mine are unpopular, but in the other direction.
I think your first DUI offense should be the last time you drive. Period. I feel like the fact it’s so lax is due to people knowing they won’t be severely punished.
Punishments are pretty severe… Night in jail, thousands in fines, possibility of losing your license… Justified when the person is actually inebriated but I don’t believe that is the case at .08… that’s a little buzz.
Not trying to change minds here though. I know it’s an unpopular opinion.
I don’t think a little buzz is ok either. Driving is dangerous at the best of times. Another reply somewhere in this thread already said it, but there’s no need to make it worse than it has to be.
People go to bars and friends’ houses and such and drink. It’s a part of life in western society. There is a massive difference in being slightly buzzed and being sloshed and I think the punishments should scale. Just as I’m not trying to change minds, mine won’t change either. This is my unpopular opinion as the thread requested.
Fair. This whole thread is unpopular opinions, so it’s kinda natural for most people to disagree with each other.
Thread participation achieved. I’m not even mad. (งツ)ว
It would be for the best if public transport were good enough everywhere that you wouldn’t have to drive a vehicle with alcohol in your system.
Yeah, agreed. Everybody likes to say “there’s no excuse when you can Uber!” but in a real world situation that requires an expensive ride home and then an expensive ride back to your car the next day while worrying if it’s okay in the parking lot. Not actually very practical when you’re just having a reasonable amount of drinks and not getting shit-faced. So I hang around where I’m at after my last beer until I know I’m safe and just hope I’m not slightly over that silly .08.
don’t believe that is the case at .08… that’s a little buzz.
And a little buzz is too much to drive with? Respectfully, that is just rearranging titanic deck chairs. Buzzed driving should be illegal too.
As a society, we have to draw the line somewhere. Personally I am happy the line for driving 2 tons of steel is BEFORE someone feels the affect of alcohol. Driving is dangerous enough as is, buzzed still slows reaction times.
Lines are fine. The punishments are too severe at this line though.
Everyone should have to retake the driving test (both written and practical) every five years. And if you don’t pass on the first try or are in a crash where you are found at fault, it should be bumped up to every year for the following five years.
People drive dangerously because they’ve forgotten rules, or rules have changed, or they’ve had a physical or cognitive decline. And yet we’re like “yep, you took a test once decades ago, good to go.”
Dangerous driving kills so many people.
I agree, and it could work like that here. (your driver’s license is only valid for a certain time) But as far as I know, you only need to retake the tests when applying for renewal if your license expired multiple years ago. Otherwise, you only have to fill out some forms.
At least old people & those who’ve had their license taken away need to redo their tests, which is better than nothing, but not enough in my opinion.
Yeah at the very least, they could easily make it a requirement to pass a written test at every renewal. Hell, they could do it as an online test you can do it home before you come in, I don’t even care if people “cheat.” Make it open book. Then at least people would have to flip through the book every few years which is better than nothing.
I agree with that i also think they should offer a more complex test that will extend that time to 10 years. After a certain age though you’re only eligible for a 5 year extention.
So i drive a lot for work every day, and people not knowing traffic rules at all is a big problem. But people not even caring is so much worse. Everyone is the most important person on the road. The amount of time people cutting me off, backing up onto the road or merging on a highway without even looking or caring is crazy. These people probably pass a test, but you can’t force them to care, other people look out for them so it doesn’t matter to them.
Also turn signals. Where i live, there are a lot of roundabouts, and it keeps the traffic going. But for them to work properly, you have to use turn signals, so you can go as soon as you see a blinking light. But most people don’t care because it doesn’t matter to them if the other person has to wait, because they are out.
I agree about people not caring about anyone else, and I think it’s gotten worse since covid.
Totally agree! Also ppl like to bash on elderly persons. Statistically speaking you are most likely to be hit by a young or middle aged man.
I meeeeeean, there is a elderly guy in my neighberhood that only drives with his wife as a passenger, becuase he said he can barely see past his hood.
If someone couldn’t pass a driving test, they shouldn’t be driving. This should apply to everyone, elderly or not. It’s just that elderly people are less likely to be in as good of a condition as when they got their license for the first time.
I’m guessing they would do this if they could justify the cost to voters. I recall having to wait months for my driving test. Sadly, I have a feeling it’s easier to kick that problem (i.e. accidents) down to someone else’s department. But I’m totally with you. Yesterday I almost got ran over by someone that treated a stop sign like a yield sign.
Onedrive is not that bad of a service*.
*
Using linux of course.
It’s not that it’s a bad service. It’s that MS tries to force you into it at every turn and makes it inconvenient to not use it. I have to click several times just to get to the file browser that lets me save files locally on my work PC. It’s insanely frustrating.
I kind of agree… I hated it at first but it grew on me.
You son-of-a-bitch.
ADHD is massively over diagnosed in the US. No shit stimulants make you concentrate better, that doesn’t mean you had ADHD. Concentration is like a muscle, you have to actively invest effort into making it better. It’s hard to concentrate and scrolling through posts and flicking through shorts is atrophying this ability. It’s like someone who doesn’t work out or eat well thinking they have a muscle development disorder, taking anabolic steroids, and since they gained muscle it confirms their suspicions that they had a disorder. Concentrating is difficult, it takes active effort, and you will hit walls when your brain is tired. It can be trained, however. This should be the focus and stimulants should be the absolute last option and only for people who truly meet the definition of disorder, i.e. it greatly impairs their relationships, work, or daily life.
I’m not saying it doesn’t exist at all, but I do think it’s way over diagnosed. Doctors want those high patient satisfaction scores, which is another issue in medicine in general.
You’re right, but I think it’s also massively underdiagnosed in certain groups like women, immigrants from countries with shit views on mental health.
A lot of my opinion also hinges on that last D, disorder. For example, many people have autistic characteristics, but few have autistic spectrum disorder that severely impairs their normal functioning in life. Likewise with ADHD; just because you can’t concentrate well doesn’t mean you have a disorder. Pills shouldn’t be the first line response.
In general I see this as an issue with healthcare in general; few want to put in the hard work, everyone wants pills or injections. This is also seen in fat loss (GLP-1 drugs rather than a healthy diet and being active) or how the VA treats disabled servicemembers (pills first, skimp on the mental health treatment or physical therapy). I’m not sure where to place the crazy rise of testosterone replacement therapy but I also believe it fits in this general “drugs first” approach. We love our drugs.
The fact doctors rely heavily on patient satisfaction scores exacerbates the issue. Sometimes the best medicine is not at all what the patient wants to hear.
This is an overreaction. Drugs do fix problems and sometimes hard work just isn’t actually enough and if anything my experience has been mostly just humouring doctors until I get to the drugs and that actually fixing the issue I had.
No matter what I could try I simply cannot fix my ADHD, and concentration is really the least of my worries, but amphetamines fix it like magic, and the way I even found out I have ADHD is by getting amphetamines from DNMs long before getting them prescribed legitimately.
There are no “healthy habits” I could form when I’m literally unable to form habits without the background dopamine needed for executive function, which is something vyvanse provides for me. Similarly there was no amount of gender non-conformity or societal change that would have fixed my crippling gender dysphoria and I’m glad I just on blockers and HRT as a teen and later got surgery because that was just very literally the fix and I’m just fine now.
Similarly, We’re just now finding out that not only does exercise nor a “healthy” diet have a causal relationship with weight, but that some people are just genetically wired to be more hungry and we have meds that fix that and from then on the “hard work” becomes actually doable, and whaddaya know - being less hungry makes you eat less.
Just as you are saying doctors are incorrect for jumping to the conclusion of using drugs first, you are incorrect by jumping to the conclusion that the individual is to blame for their condition and that they should have to do some kind of work to get better, which is a touchstone of ‘Christian work ethic’ framework where bad/lazy people do bad/lazy things because they are lazy/bad.
I know it’s annoying to accept sometimes that miracle cures exist because it feels unsatisfying, but I think when it comes to skepticism of medicine it is best to be specific rather than draw broad conclusions from a preference for “holistic” vibes and a healthy distrust of capitalism and privatised medicine.
I would not lay it on the patients. My wife is on GLP-1 but she begs my doctor to raise her thyroid supplement instead. Her tests come back as the bottom of normal and she has thinning hair, dry skin, constipation, and feels cold all the time. She does have other medical issues but I mean common lets use a little common sense and factor in symptoms along with the blood test. I firmly believe there is some sort of kickback scheme going like with the opiods because thyroid is super cheap.
What I’m hearing here though is a greater critique of capitalism than anything. Medicine attempts to resolve situations with drugs first because it’s cheapest and keeps the lights on, and people can’t afford non-drug therapies because they’re poor and overworked. The VA skimps because it’s underfunded and America wants people to fight its imperial wars and then fucks them for doing so. Peoples’ hormones are disordered because of unprecedented levels of environmental pollutants.
Your opinion is unpopular because it’s clear you don’t know what ADHD is. It’s not just “trouble concentrating”. It’s not even primarily that. It’s a slew of issues, physical, mental, and emotional.
I know the DSM isn’t perfect but inattention, hyperactivity, and impulsivity are the main criteria, and those are all issues that I believe stem from poor concentration or focus.
My opinion still remains the same; I think many have these traits but few have it to a level which is appropriately classified as a disorder. Stimulants are performance enhancing drugs for your brain and they have side effects. People hear from a friend or post online that it helped someone and go get evaluated - by a for profit industry that stands to make money by getting more patients. Pretty easy to cut someone a script and bill that CPT code.
I’m not saying this disorder doesn’t exist, or that some people have no option but medication. I do think it’s over diagnosed by an industry relying on patient satisfaction scores.
This is my unpopular opinion. I don’t believe taking a medication for life as the first line treatment is appropriate, especially when they’re directly affecting reward pathways. ADHD is just one of many areas in medicine I see this happening.
My maybe unpopular opinion is that it sucks that my meds, which are like my “glasses” correcting focus, motivation and emotional self-regulation, which are much safer than any antidepressants and at high dosage have about the same side effects as too much coffee, are being framed as dangerous stimulants and abused by idiots who snort them in their noses, and have to be so heavily regulated.
I got late diagnosed and since I got my meds I overcame my overthinking and anxiety issues, have no more of what I thought to be depressive episodes (caused by severe under stimulation and the burn-out of chronically forcing myself to do stuff against the strong child tantrum-like inner resistance with raw will power as you ADHD “expert” and all of my family suggested all of my life), and finally can feel and function like an adult and at the same time am much more zen and balanced.
Yes, having some symptoms does not qualify. Just as being sad sometimes does not qualify for depression. But every mental disorder is a matter of severity. You cannot feel how things feel to others. If a diagnosis and meds help a person, why would you not want them to get that help? It’s like saying that people who are short-sighted should just try harder and train their eyes and do not need glasses.
Yeah, a really surprising effect of finally getting diagnosed with ADHD and starting meds is that I’m actually able to emotionally regulate and self-soothe. A lifetime of depression and anxiety could have been managed so much more easily.
Also I find it odd that people say “ADHD is over diagnosed” but everyone I know that has an ADHD diagnosis had to FIGHT to even be screened for it. I think there’s definitely more self-diagnosis than there used to be and a decent amount of that is bullshit, but I don’t think it’s particularly easy to get an official ADHD diagnosis.
My psych got me on Buproprin and it’s amazing how much impact it’s had on my impulse control and depressive phases. Like, the feelings are still there, but I only have to say “no” to them once instead of every two minutes for days at a time.
Absolutely 100%
I think the more likely reason it’s “over diagnosed” is because it’s a far more common type of brain than we previously recognized. The whole hunter vs gatherer theory. It’s really just that many people, and modern day stressors plus a better ADHD understanding are resulting in more positive diagnosis.
Votes should be inversely weighted by age. The vote of someone who’s going to clock out before the next election even rolls around shouldn’t be worth the same as the vote of someone who’s going to have to live with the consequences for half a century or more.
Ooooh dark. I like.
Vote 1! @Sordid
But what about the reverse argument?
The elders know much more than the young generation, shouldn’t they have a larger say?
Or have the voting age be 18 years old to the average national life expectancy, although i really haven’t thought this through too much. I assume if such a situation were to exist, it would be much easier to cut Social Security and Medicare without losing the elderly vote, so that probably would backfire.
Voting age should be raised to at least 24, so that the frontal lobe is fully developed.
Not really my belief, but you’re opinion marginalized me, so I’m counter-proposing.
Then cap the voting age at 50 when cognitive decline of the frontal lobe really kicks in, if we are talking about fully developed brain function.
Neural plasticity has even declined once you are past your 20s. One of the reasons people find it much much harder to learn a new language past then, for example.
reasoning, memory, and speed of reasoning eaches a decline threshold when you are around 40.
My unpopular opinion is I guess that humans were never evolved to live as long as we do (and certainly not meant to labor as long) so everything in our brain gets very wonky. Empathy is also one of the things stunted with age. There is a reason the “grump old man” trope exists.
Perhaps there’s an IQ cutoff you’d favor as well? Perhaps a psychological exam? Surely the mentality handicapped shouldn’t vote, right?
You speak to me of empathy?
Why would I post it here? I’d get mass downvoted, only mild unpopular opinions are popular.
We don’t have karma
Still, it would be buried at the bottom of the thread.
Not if you sort by controversial
Oh no!
I don’t know if that take is stupid or truly unpopular
Come on, spit it out. Who cares about Internet points?
Linux will never come close to replacing Windows.
It doesn’t even matter how good Linux is or how bad Windows gets, Linux is lacking the one thing that made Windows mainstream: Billions of dollars in marketing and brand recognition.
Did Firefox have billions in marketing when it overtook Internet Explorer?
The big difference being that most people don’t know or care to learn how to download their own OS. Installing a browser is quick and easy in comparison.
I’ve been out of the tech world a minute now so maybe its changed but last I knew no PCs came with Linux preinstalled and you can’t just get a Linux OS disk to use to install.
Fair, it’s not as easy as installing a new browser.
But it’s not difficult.
- Download Linux
- Flash it on a USB
- Change boot settings
- restart and follow install wizard
It’s real easy and there are many clear guides out there.
Linux is missing more than that. It, by nature, has no direction.
It has many directions, not none.
Same problem, different cause.
Right and Windows’ direction is so clear and not hype-driven at all
I’m sure people didn’t think Internet Explorer would be replaced either.
But if your product is dog shit log enough, people will move
Windows will never come close to replacing Linux! There’s way more Linux out there than there is Windows.
Presumably you mean on the personal desktop. In which case I still disagree in the very long term. I think at some point Windows will be replaced by *nix based systems in the vein of OSX and Chrome OS.
Been hearing this for decades and it has not happened.
Boo! Hiss!
The St. Anger snare is fine.
This is the hottest take I’ve heard in a while. Bravo.
Context?
On the Metallica album St Anger, the drummer Lars decided to use the most obnoxious sounding snare probably ever recorded. Said something to the effect of making it sound like it was recorded in a garage. The rest of the band didn’t sound lofi, so it REALLY stuck out.
RIP your inbox
Nickelback is an alright band. Far from my favorite, I just don’t get what all the hate was about.
In fact, I’d go as far as saying that their first album is pretty good, and I like it. Except from that song which is severely overplayed and mediocre.
I was in Middle School when they hit it big, and am Canadian to boot. They got overplayed to the point of frustration on the radio and TV.
Couple that with them being one of the last successful “butt-rock” bands, and my friend group had everything we needed to hate on them.
Do yourself a favor and hear that cover bit they did for Metallica’s “Sad but true”. They’re pretty good musicians actually but they just choose to do more corny/commercial stuff – which imho is not valid reason for the hate. Sad but true.
Choosing to produce generic and soulless music for profit isn’t a good reason to dislike a band?
It was le funny reddit thing to hate Nickelback and love queen.
The hate came from them being absolute dicks to their own fans.
Wait, actually?
Jip it’s their own fans that started hating them and spreading the hate.
I always assumed because it was played on the radio 24/7
On toilets with two flush buttons for different flow rates, if there is a larger button and a smaller button (with no other singe), the larger button should correspond to the lower flow rate. Odds are more people are flushing for pee, and don’t need the extra flow, and the more common action should be represented by a larger button. For people who are unsure, lazy, or not looking, they’re probably pressing the larger button just for pee, and wasting water if that were to correspond to more water usage, which is wasteful.
Isn’t this how they actually are? I’ve only seen 2 of these in my life, but both had the big button for a piss rinse, and the smaller one for the shit shoot.
Every time I’ve encountered the ambiguous buttons, I have asked other people and have been told “smaller is for less water/bigger is for more water” and I feel like an asshole wasting water for a little pee. One time I did experiment and did try both buttons and didn’t notice a difference really, but i couldn’t measure it fully.
piss rinse … shit shoot
I actually LOL’d. Thank you.
I made myself chuckle, too.
You’re welcome.
The Beatles are highly overrated. I respect the impact they had, and I acknowledge that the music I like (metal) would not exist without them, but I’ll go out of my way to avoid listening to them.
It was easier to be a big fish in the pre-internet music pond. I would never said the Beatles are bad, they aren’t. But aside from understanding the historical significance, I would never ever put the Beatles on regularly.
Just as I don’t watch B&W films every night. Charlie Chaplin was great, for the time, just simpler than what I actually actually enjoy.
I’m also on this camp. I get the significance, but I think I just didn’t resonate with what they wrote, and the “old” production.
Here and there I found a great version someone else performed and was surprised to find it’s a Beatles song, then I heard the OG and went “yup, still not for me”.
The wage gap is mostly down to the what careers people choose and how hard they push in those careers.
Women for the most part, earn less then men for the same reason gay men earn more than straight men.
(side note: I’m not denying that there is sexism and discrimination in the workplace, it’s sadly common and should be stopped, I’m saying that’s not the cause of the wage gap)
What is the reason for the gay wage gap tho? The wikipedia gave the stats but not the reason.
The gap exists between identical positions – that’s like the whole thing
https://www.payscale.com/research-and-insights/gender-pay-gap/
Idk if this is a good source, but if it is then how can you really point to generally .99 to every 1.00 as a really significant issue? If you want to say that women aren’t getting the same opportunities for better job positions then sure that’s probably generally true. However I don’t think you can legitimately say that the adjusted/controlled wage gap is that bad. At least there are many valid arguments for why the unadjusted/uncontrolled wage gap is bad.
I’m mistaken on that point then, though there is still a measurable gap. There is a large disparity in the “unadjusted” numbers which the article you sent notes is just as important as the adjusted one. It represents a power disparity. Ty for the correction
Here’s another reliable source:
https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2023/03/01/the-enduring-grip-of-the-gender-pay-gap/
Sure, but I feel that’s for the same reason gay men earn more than straight men.
That’s mostly because men, on average, negotiate for higher wages; if the women in such positions asked for higher wages, the disparity would be much lower.
This isn’t true as I was mistaken. The gap apparently is 1 cent when adjusting for positions. I think this is an overly simplistic view which unduly shifts the blame to women, when in fact society and our economic systems push women towards particular jobs (or motherhood) and compensates far less.
Hers a source I linked elsewhere:
https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2023/03/01/the-enduring-grip-of-the-gender-pay-gap/
ya got my upvote! It’s something I’ve witnessed for most of my working life.
Do you think that’s universal or only applied to the USA? And how does the article support your opinion?
Wow, you really hit the spot right here!
Lol yes, I was literally asked for an unpopular opinion, gave one and now I’m being down voted…
No idea. I can’t sort by up down votes.
If that’s the standard, then mine is probably
I consider tankies to be people that are incapable or unwilling to admit that China or whoever else massacred their people.
from the .ml/c/memes community. It also got me a temporary ban for not being “civil and nice.”
