Musk: Ukrainian front will collapse if I switch off Starlink
Excrubulent @ Excrubulent @slrpnk.net Posts 8Comments 2,232Joined 2 yr. ago
Excrubulent @ Excrubulent @slrpnk.net
Posts
8
Comments
2,232
Joined
2 yr. ago
I've watched it too. The image it paints is of someone who has no concept of how children actually behave, presumably because he's never had a reason to spend time with them before.
It's not about needing to helicopter over the kid. If I was with a friend and we were walking somewhere together I'd pay more attention to them than that. That kind of full back turned walk away when you clearly expect to be kept up with is disrespectful unless you are actually intending to walk away and leave the person. The fact he felt the need to turn back and hurry the kid along shows he just gave no consideration to the kid.
He does it multiple times too. Walk away; hurry up; walk away; hurry up. This guy is herding this kid he just doesn't know how to do it, like he expects a retinue or something.
Like you can read it differently if you want but I don't agree with your assessment. The body language is pretty clear to me.
Just wait till he walks off negligently ignoring the child. Boom, no more human shield.
This is a valid rebuttal, as I was talking completely literally. I apologise, I thought they were a civil engineering and construction firm.
Yes, they are unreliable. The fact that this is typical of software companies doesn't excuse the behaviour or make it a sound business strategy.
You're not actually arguing with what's being said, you're just normalising it.
"This river doesn't need a bridge because almost nobody ever crosses it."
Also is there a reason they can't just distribute proton? It's open under BSD, so they'd be free to do it.
Reddit doesn't have the internet infrastructure FB has where they were able to monopolise the internet of whole countries in certain parts of the world.
And the wider they cast this dragnet the more users will be caught up in it, the more will slowly leave, the less content will be created, the worse the platform will get.
I think for the future of reddit you only need to look at digg.
I'm not sure what the venn diagram of people into mutual aid and people who buy scratch tickets looks like, but I'd suspect it's a small overlap.
But hey who knows, if this stuff is getting more popular traction then I might be wrong about that.
There's a guide out there about what to do if you win.
Basically, tell nobody before you talk to a senior partner in a big law firm, get trusts set up for yourself and the people in your life so everybody is looked after and you can't fall below a decent living wage even if you fuck the rest up. This also stops people hounding you for a slice and destroying your relationships.
Then there was stuff about setting up investments, and setting aside some spending cash.
Personally I'd want to put most of the "investments" into various mutual aid projects to build lasting social stability rather than using it to further the stock market, but other than that it's pretty good advice.
"It's the market" is another way of saying "because I can".
They don't have to raise the rent to match the market, the market is simply a signal to them that if they lost you by raising the rent, they could potentially replace you for the same or higher rent.
They could ignore that and leave your rent alone. They don't. It's a choice.
I'm not going to get a meaningful exchange with you, I can already tell. I think I made that pretty clear, as well as my reasons. Your reply is empty of anything but a very unsubtle attempt at emotional manipulation, so I'd say I've made the right call.
It's not about force or having authority to define something, this is about being able to have a real conversation, and you left the main term undefined except in your own mind, and then when I asked you for it you gave an absolutely wild definition that makes no sense and which I can't find anybody else using, and yet you still called it "the" definition and not "your" definition.
If nothing else that means you're not someone it's worth trying to talk to, because you're not even trying to communicate effectively. I don't care if you have your reasons, they're not good reasons but I feel like in the spirit of this conversation I just shouldn't fucking bother to explain why, because based on precedent you'll just insist I'm wrong for your own inscrutable reasons and carry on as you were, and if I try to wrest those reasons out of you they'll be nonsensical. Also you're not worth trying to convince because you're not somebody anyone else will listen to for long before they realise you're completely full of shit.
Goodbye.
That definition of authority is so immediately, obviously wrong that I don't even know where to start dealing with it.
It's so uselessly broad. I literally said at the start that authority isn't just any inqeuality, and you didn't address it. You should have if you thought that was wrong, because that's literally the definition of the thing that we're talking about.
I would like to see you justify this incrsdibly broad definition. If you want to see my justification for my definition, I would invite you to look it up in any dictionary.
I need you to define the word "authority" in that case. I've given my definition, so what is yours and how does it differ, please? Because I already addressed the fact that an imbalance doesn't create a hierarchy, and your description of imbalance does not fit my definition of authority.
Power imbalance doesn't automatically create the conditions for domination. For that you would need both expertise and monopoly.
And the solution to a misunderstanding isn't to concede the definition of the word "state" but to educate. The state is any entity that has a monopoly of the legitimate use of violence in a region. That applies regardless of the system of government that rules it.
Your definition isn't a definition, it's just a collection of categories that gives no useful information.
We don't need to be dominated in order to clean up our garbage. And the state is often really bad at collecting garbage, so just teach people that.
I honestly hate the concept of "bootmaker authority", because it's exactly the same wrong conflation that Engels makes. Not every inequality is a form of authority. Expertise is not authority, it is expertise.
Authority is the socially-recognised power to dominate. Getting a bootmaker to advise on or perform bootmaking tasks is not domination. The bootmaker can't hold you at gunpoint and command you to wear a certain kind of boot, nobody would allow that. There aren't bootmaking cops.
Like what exactly does the bootmaker's "authority" entail in this theory? Giving consent does not confer authority. Authority operates regardless of consent, that's what makes it bad.
In English it definitely carries a connotation of recklessness I think, but it can also mean like a dynamic and forceful push, as opposed to actually letting go of something and making it fly through the air.
No worries, I love this stuff, I'd never really thought that much about the expression before so I learned something too. :)
This seems to come from the assumption that right wing views have equal validity and exist on an equal footing, but they just don't.
Right wing autoritarian attitudes are just whatever is propped up by the propaganda of the prevailing hierarchy. They're blasted out of mainstream news outlets everyday. They don't survive on merit, but on funding.
Like honestly, if you want to hear what conservatives have to say, go watch their news, listen to their pundits, join their social media apps, but if you've got half a brain then you shouldn't be surprised that it's just a pile of callow, self-serving bullshit. You will be disappointed. You won't see a reasonable debate of the ideas.
Like this is an open system. Anyone can make an instance. You know why right wing instances just... aren't? Because they can't stop themselves from being bigots, which most people hate, actually, and gets them yeeted, so they don't thrive here. It's not some conspiracy or bias, it's just what happens when assholes aren't shielded by some big daddy corporation. They can't hack it.
I think "but it's different" is actually just special pleading:
To "throw support behind" is a common expression. It implies vigour in a way that "mount support" does not, so I think it's a good word choice.
Removed
New fediverse chick just dropped
Jump
I mean in the vast scope of objects that exist you basically are.
If you have DNA at all you are in a very small and closely related club in the context of the universe.
Because it was on video, it's easy to digest, and it reveals something about his character. It especially makes clearer his reasons for dragging the kid everywhere he goes; it's clearly not because he gives a shit about the kid. It makes the abuse a lot more obvious, and detracts from the humanising effect of the kid.
Like if you thought the issue was that people thought the moment had some serious material impact on the kid's wellbeing, or that he actually lost his kid in a crowd or something, then I think you just missed the point of it entirely.
Also if you thought context makes it better, the people who were physically there and were presumably supporters of him said "you're leaving your kid", so it's like... obviously an issue, by admission of people who wouldn't want to admit it.
Like you could ask the same thing about his Nazi salute. We focused on it because it tells us something about who he is. The exact posture of his hand in that moment didn't physically hurt anyone, it's about the message it sends, and that message is going to hurt people.
And yes bad parents are everywhere, and Elon is unsurprisingly among them.
This is super basic stuff.