booty [he/him]

Ocarina of Time. There’s, like, a whole world out there. I can walk around and see stuff. There are people to talk to. Hey, big owl. Scary monsters wtf. This shit’s awesome.

Been chasing that feeling ever since :(

Frankly it’s why I’m so into TTRPGs now. Video games can rarely give me a true sense of wonder, of exploring the unknown and unexpected anymore.

So I’ll ask again, what criteria would you like to use?

Well, let’s start with the first step, which is citing a source at all. They have asked you to follow through on your offer to cite sources to back up on your claims multiple times, and you just keep getting bogged down in these wacky circular semantic arguments. Currently you are failing to produce any source of any strength or bias.

Point to where I said “we know they don’t let people in because they’re isolationist”.

Sure! It was right here.

The restrictions for leaving and entering have not been imposed on them externally, this attitude of Korea predates even the Roman empire

Anyway, we’re at an impasse here. You’ve decided that the DPRK is not a distinct country and that all you need to know about their laws can be extrapolated from the ancient history of the Korean peninsula, and that anything modern which contradicts your juvenile interpretation of ancient history must simply be made up. I have no idea what species of brainworm is responsible for this ridiculous conspiracy theory, and I am not qualified to exterminate it.

dudes rock

You linked two things. One of these is an article about literal ancient history, and the other is an article about three Christians who all lived and died long before the country we’re discussing existed. Please, please explain to me how your “sources” are in any way relevant to the topic at hand.

Your circular logic is as follows: The DPRK is isolationist. We know it’s isolationist because they don’t let people in. We know they don’t let people in because they’re isolationist. No, I won’t pay any attention to the hard fact that they do, in fact, let people in, and that it is in fact their enemies who do not let people into their country.

you have some very strange, very incorrect ideas about the DPRK built on a foundation of circular logic. please start de-propagandizing yourself with that video i linked earlier, it’s a very good one.

we are having a conversation about a country which has existed for less than 100 years why the fuck are you talking about the roman empire and the joseon dynasty

Apologies if my semantics/grammar are too loose

your grammar is fine, it is the content of your posts which is utterly useless.

sources
Wikipedia

The restrictions for leaving and entering have not been imposed on them externally, this attitude of Korea predates even the Roman empire so external factors wouldn’t have been possible as a cause

come back when you can form a coherent thought

I say that, I’m going by every regular source that ever existed

“regular source”

its near-impossible standards for leaving or entering

did you know these are imposed on them externally? their policy is that they love tourists. here’s a video of a couple of australian tourists enjoying themselves there. the reason americans can’t go there is because the US forbids it.

its lack of internet access (who here has seen anyone who is actually from North Korea),

it’s a country under brutal siege for its entire history. yes, they’re poor. whose fault is that?

North Korea has the world’s worst human rights

You understand propaganda like a fish understands water

only 66k a year until you’re 80

motherfucker i make like 12k a year

What definition of safe are you using which makes a private messaging system without privacy safe? What would have to occur for it to become unsafe, if not being private does not make it unsafe in your eyes?

They absolutely do. A private messaging system which is not private is the definition of unsafe. Especially in the context of a post on !privacy@lemmy.ml

If something claims to be unsafe and delivers, that doesn’t make it any more safe.

Safe and private are synonyms in this context.

It is not unsafe.
It is not 100% private. Admins can read your messages if they choose to investigate your messages.

These points contradict one another.

I don’t know any of the technical details, but my understanding is they’re very unsafe. Our instance has a warning recommending that you take conversations involving sensitive information to Matrix

my elbow had a small itch a moment ago, so i scratched it.

I think they should be [REDACTED]