I like this observation a lot. Because I was going to say that if we couldn't conceive of a simulation, we'd probably just speculate about the closest thing we could imagine.
I tried following Lemmy users on Mastadon. It was a cool to see that it's technologically possible, but it was not a pleasant way to consume Lemmy content.
Yeah. Everyone who got mad at him is basically like, 'Hey! Fuck you, asshole, for selling before I got a chance to sell! I wanted to do that, but you did it before I could do it! No fair!'
Also: the coins are now with far more than when he sold. So strangely, the folks who got rug pulled ended up with an actually valuable coin and an opportunity to sell at a high price. Which makes zero sense to me. But they apparently have no reason to complain. It worked out great for everyone, somehow.
I want to respond to this by saying that it is 100% correct.
Get to know your neighbors. Figure out who can do what. Is anyone undocumented? Is anyone good at fixing things? Who has kids and who is good at watching kids?
The plus side is that if we do this right, we should be able to toss out the Christian Nationalists in a few years. But we'll have a much better shot at that if we learn how to take care of one another the way we should've a long time ago.
That looks much more like a data artifact than an accurate representation of behavior.
I think that the trajectory of the three low dots matches the overall slope very closely in a way that looks far more like a flat subtraction of all three. If it was behavioral, I think you'd see the behavior come and go over the course of several days.
I think what you and @mossyfeathers@MossyFeathers@pawb.social are picking up on is that youth-coded descriptors are often terms of endearment. They're often used flirtatiously and towards people of whom you feel protective.
Conversely, adult names imply responsibility. Is it a problem to describe men in a way that implies responsibility and women in a way that implies protectiveness? Not necessarily.
I just think this stuff is linguistically interesting. I think it's more grammatically typical to use equivalent terms to create parallel construction when comparing the sexes. Again, no judgment is intended.
That's an interesting idea. I'll add that to stuff to try. Thanks!