It becomes less stupid the moment you realize Elon is angry some people are allowed not to have his bullshit forced down their throats. Then everything starts to make sense.

The pandemic got exacerbated in the US because of Trump’s dumbfuck negationist policies, but even countries with far tougher positions suffered pretty bad cases of COVID.

That’s because you’re weak and uncommitted. Jack up those vaccines up your forearm and minmax your autism until the build starts paying off.

If you want to share what you’re making, dip your toes into the water. Some communities will appreciate the self-promotion as long as you do it in a sensible way, and other won’t. Right now, some degree of self promotion is great because it’s new content, which the Fediverse needs.

Yeah, given the Fediverse’s much smaller amount of active users and its shorter history, it barely has niche communities nor a wealth of specific knowledge. Anyone who wants the Fediverse to be able to support that role that Reddit currently fulfills of non-corporate information has to know that there’s a very large road ahead and it needs active building.

Holy shit your title was a punchline and it was a good one

…That’s disgusting.

I’m not sure I got the message Tyrone is trying to tell. Could you have him say it 77 or 87 more times?

Removed by mod

…There is no purple though?

And the modern political class is far more aligned with employers than current and future workers, because politicians need the large financial and media networks that investors and owners control.

So you’re not going to see any kind of top-down policy change to this effect.

I disagree, actually. There are a few parties in Spain that have been supporting expansion of social security and reinforcements of worker rights during the last few years, and even though they’re either the minority part of the government, or are supporting the government from outside, they have made consistent progress. The mass media are indeed almost always pushing these parties and their positions down, but that doesn’t mean you should renounce to seek reforms within a liberal democracy - just be aware that it shouldn’t be your only field of action, and that building base level organizations are the most important stepping step to ultimately achieve country-wide changes.

Hiring practices are broken from its very basics. The vast majority of businesses consistently discriminate against people who deviate from the norm in presentation, even if the candidate meets the technical requirements or would otherwise be productive, which results in millions of people who are capable of contributing to society being pushed aside.

Anon is one step away from discovering why dirty talk was invented, and two steps away from discovering why BDSM is a thing.

I’m starting to miss Reddit’s feature to collapse heavily downvoted comments.

You have two distributions of populations:

Distribution A has 50% of the population scoring 10 happiness, and the remaining 50% scoring 0.

Distribution B has 100% of the population scoring 5 happiness.

Your research has shown that these two distributions are the two options that allow for maximization of happiness, and you can achieve any of them at the same cost with exactly the same externalities. This data is confirmed with perfect mathematical precision to a point currently unavailable to our scientific institutions for the sake of this thought experiment.

There is no objective reason to choose one over the other; if none is chosen, a suboptimal distribution will be chosen for you.

Fuck Elon and I can’t wait till the Saudis come to collect on that $44B they loaned him.

Well, this is news to me. The Saudis owning Tesla is definitely going to be a bitter joke.

Are you saying this as a retort to me indirectly calling tankies authoritarians? If so, that’s pretty rich.

The Soviet Union suppressed people who used Marxist analysis to argue that the higher echelons of the party aparatus had constituted itself as a separate, dominant class that held the ultimate political power, which resulted in a tendency to exert that power undisputed and continued accumulation of privileges. Once enough time had passed, some of the people leading that aparatus decided they wanted an even larger share of the cake, so they decided to drop the pretense, drop the nominal communism and embrace privatisation. When working people tried to oppose that process, the authoritarian state used its repressive forces to protect the ruling class. What is most interesting about this is that you can see similar processes in almost every single country that followed the leninist vanguardist model, ultimately losing any political equality that was initially sought in its revolution, and any self-respecting Marxist should have taken the hint that this makes Leninism and its godchildren a failed avenue for socialism.

To connect this with your not too hidden assertion that “since every state is authoritarian, me supporting authoritarian states is ok”: any state and society is going to decide the margins outside of which behavior and politics are not acceptable, but that is absolutely no excuse to give free reign to any government to become as authoritarian as they aim to no matter the cost. When we do that, we come across disgusting situations such as the difficulties for working class Chinese people being unable to self-organize and protect their rights if the local party strongman arbitrarily decides they’re too much trouble. Any kind of emancipatory project soon turns crippled under those circumstances, which you could have easily noticed if you weren’t drown in liturgy.

Get off the wrong internet spaces and you’ll start meeting the right kinds of nerds.

There’s nothing wrong with what you’re saying on a vacuum. The problem is deciding what is actually a problem, and once it’s been decided, which one solution out of many possible ones we’re actually going to pick.

Is unequality a problem? If it is, up to which degree? Is it a problem that the richest person has four times as much wealth as the poorest person? Is it a problem that the richest person has x100000 times as much wealth as the poorest person? Are we going to solve that through redistribution? Through better public, accessible education? By empowering worker unions? By socializing the means of production in order to prevent capital accumulation?

Once you’re perfectly aware of what values you’re defending, you can find the most efficient way to let society advance forward according to them. But since not everyone shares the same values, even if everyone was perfectly rational and had access to all information, different people would still defend different solutions. Of course, people’s values evolve all the time and everyone is irrational up to some degree, even if we put effort into perfecting our epistemology and use the scientific method to approach as many issues as possibles (which we should nonetheless do), so even that ideal state of things is very, very far away.

Because they’re very vocal online, are annoying, and also give actual leftists bad rep. If you’re promoting egalitarianism and distributing social power among everyone, you wouldn’t like people who support authoritarism to share a label with you.