The person on the left is carrying bags, the one in orange is a delivery driver and a couple of people are wearing backpacks. Aside from car brained, Damaris is also blind.
The person on the left is carrying bags, the one in orange is a delivery driver and a couple of people are wearing backpacks. Aside from car brained, Damaris is also blind.
I think that’s slightly critical of Damaris.
They are asking a question regarding something they do not understand.
It is a true statement that roads are used to transport goods and services.
They then simply ask who in the video is carrying goods and products into stores/homes, and how workers move goods from ports to the stores.
They don’t know how a system like this works when it comes to, for example, stocking a grocery store, because they have not worked or lived in a place with infrastructure like this.
It’s just ad hominem and poor practice to call someone blind when they aren’t familiar with something, particularly when they seem interested in how it works, and works contrary to convincing people of the cause.
If someone has worked with punch cards to program a computer all their life, and someone showed them software written the python programming language and they said:
“But the punch card is so that the computer can read in bytes to know what to do, in this text I don’t see any bytes, there’s nothing telling the computer if this is little endian or big endian, it all looks like a book. How does the text tell the computer what to do?”
Then my response would NOT be “Well the list comprehension here is yielding a range of numbers which are sent to the print function, and this class is acting as a signal handler. Aside from punch card brained, you’re also blind”.
My response would be a very happy opportunity to explain to them the benefits of a modern programming language versus punch cards, and how it works in comparison.
Unless this is a person known to be explicitly anti-bike and pro-car, it is bad to be this critical of them and works in no one’s favor.
I’m skeptical of all that - surely they understand that roads carry more than just goods and services. It’s such a basic part of society that you’d have to be from another planet to be confused about that and build a whole argument based on it.
It’s a very simplistic and reductive view of roads, though, in response to a post that specifically mentions another function of roads, namely, facilitating people’s travels as individuals for their own purposes. It’s like you telling someone you like using lemmy because you’ve found communities you enjoy participating in and individuals you like talking to, and they go, “But the internet is for commerce, the buying and selling of goods! Who is selling and who is buying in these instances?”
Your example is overly charitable, in my opinion. Not everyone is being malicious with these sorts of questions, but the person is ignoring some pretty clear context explaining other uses of roads to go attach a strawman. At the very least, it seems like a bad faith argument.