Eximius @ Eximius @lemmy.world

Posts

0

Comments

204

Joined

2 yr. ago

I disagree that cars are incredibly complex machines. They are certainly more complex than Ford Model T, but it is generally just iteratively sometimes useful bloat. When you say they are "incredibly complex" it usually means population's understanding of it is lacking. To the point where people are afraid to jump start a dead battery, because "it has this complex computer and stuff"

I would be fine with cars being made more dumb. The chips cars need (to work, without half-assed shit infotainment systems) don't need to be manufactured by tsmc.

Computer chips are so expensive per volume, I feel they will not get impacted too much, but it would be nice to have fabs for it in Europe.

But then, for Europe, the sources would be Kazachstan, USA, and Africa. I would much rather have Kazachstan or Africa get money for it than China. And shipping raw rare earth metals should surely be less impacted than shipping full finished products that include cadmium (that take much more shipping volume).

Hell, maybe this will also push for more recycling of Cadmium (and other special metals) as the source becomes less reliable / more expensive.

I only see a problem for companies that try to milk every cent and are terrified of raising the price which will impact their profit margins and CEO bonuses.

Good? Manufacturing should overtime move locally, and local business should boon.

It worked well with Stalin (though admitedly he died from a heart attack, so nobody to blame, but still his death made USSR a bit better almost immediately)

Again, you’re not bringing any remotely new pseudocriticism to the table. <...> I agree that I am not read up on this topic. My knowledge of Lenin is definitely less than limited. If I read his works I could talk about more in depth about his persona.

From my coarse perspective, given your input, what Engels wrote (which would be even more dated) maybe takes in more perspectives. But then, we weren't entirely talking about Engels before. Scope broadens.

My very first comment was about your (not entirely hidden) socialistic propaganda style of writing. The points you tried to make in your very first post would likely be valid, but instead they were railing the discussion in a direction of socialistic revolution, because of ACs.

Again, showing us how you haven’t read a single essay or book on Marxism <...> Even if I haven't read a book, discussing the topic should be viable, otherwise how would those books have been written by esteemed law-practicing philosophers? And in general, the ideas of socialism and capitalism are tremendously interspersed in all literature we read, one can't live without being subjected to them.

In no way was my response anti-communism propaganda. I just disliked the phrasing which clearly shows your desire to drop the old-school battlecries without a directed objective. (Unless you desire to just include all objectives without second guess, from books, but then be sure to include all).

The general problem I have (which is empirical and not substantiated here) is that Lenin himself, while likely incredibly intelligent, was not, by trade and thus biggest chunk of his time, a mathematician, or an economist, so while he can read the papers, having a fully informed opinion on the matter is a dubious idea.

Reasons why I am so jaded and critical is that many fields these days (especially lacking rigorous peer review) fall victim to innability to discern fact from fiction. Specifically for philosophy, feels like the field has diverged from mathematics and physics in an ununderstandable way, where philosophy tries to be a voice of reason in humanity's subjective reality of society while ignoring mathematics and pure formal logic. To me this is insane. Especially for a field that was once exactly that: mathematics, physics and trying to understand the natural world. In general, the field has been critiqued for empirically arguing that its education is actually formative for logical thinking 1 2.

The reasons I am jaded at dated books, is because the way of thinking can be so different, even in physics, many papers from early 20th century have god in the picture or see the human as some kind of special consciousness in the picture of the universe.

The Russian Empire in 1917 was a backwards, feudal <...>

The first paragraph I completely agree.

Nazi Germany was indeed defeated by allied forces. And Russia definitely played a large part in it. However, the way it did, was not due to industrialization. It was due to an insane amount of conscription that is well-known as a meat-grinder. 9 million military dead (versus 4.3 million military from Nazis. Note: Nazis weren't only fighting USSR.) was not a mark of an industrialized nation cranking out well-prepared, well-rationed, well-equipped soldiers, it was a feudal state throwing meat at the problem (or rather opportunity). Among other atrocities such as forced famine Holodomor.

The time of the cold war, Russia was barely scraping by to keep the narrative of "Great superpower" alive, it was only until Chernobyl, Gorbachev that USSR finally imploded and all was slowly unraveled. If 1970s USSR was this great superpower, then somehow 10 years later it fell to stagnation and then collapse? What? With people coming out from the iron curtain amazed at how simple people in foreign countries had lived, the variety of food, the quality of engineering, of clothes they had.

All the while illegal speculators were a huge problem, and simple food items were "always out of stock" throughout the whole USSR's life. You just had to know the right people and pay the right money to live normally. That is, after you waited for 3 hours to get bread.

Personally, USSR achieved limited industrialization, while funneling unfathomable amounts of money into shiny things such as space exploration, while people had a hard time getting bread. To me, this is still close to feudalism.

I disagree. Capitalism inevitably leads to the concentration of capital and the establishing of monopolies

Europe has achieved the highest quality of life in the world not by a planned economy, but by mediating the inherent problems of capitalism (monopolism, elitism, class warfare) and complete socialism (government overreach, lack of freedom, lack of democracy). This is what I said is most prudent to continue, but it requires maintenance from strong-willed people.

“Regulating” companies into stopping their polluting and monopolistic behaviour usually amounts to allowing the companies of other countries to outcompete them

That is indeed a central problem, slightly reduced by import taxes. Obviously a full solution should include some international cooperation, and if it isn't possible (and seems it isn't) sanctions and heavier import taxes should follow. Or some taxes on import that take into account pollution at the importing source.

I don't see how your example of corruption is novel. Corruption is indeed something that must be fought, and it wouldn't disappear in a socialist society, as it didn't USSR (where you could get anything for favors if you knew the right people).

The 20th century period across Europe was indeed a rough one, many countries went fascist (Spain, Portugal, Russia, briefly: Austria, Greece, Germany, Italy). Still, I don't think it's a novel example. And it's also not an example against the current state of Europe, it's an example of the inequality and volatility of European countries at the time.

The anti-scientific and ahistorical thing <...> One thing is to talk about history and how we got here, and to talk about what we have now and what do we do. These are separate.

The idea behind representative democracy is that I cannot do the work of a law-maker, deal with tax policy details while also living a life, so I elect someone whom I think I can trust.

If I have no trust in the system, I will go to the streets, as it was always the case. And yes, in this sense, we hold a lot of thankfulness for those that went to the streets before us to bring us to where we are now.

Lenin does sound awfully like socialism propaganda. Or more in essence, the desire for egalitarian utopia written by pseudo-philosophers (neither economists, nor engineers, nor mathematicians, nor any based-in-logic scientific field) without having any such social system in place and only dreaming. USSR did not go well, in any way, as an aside.

I can understand the desire for a push for more socialistic government reforms, but what needs to just happen is European semi-capitalism semi-socialism to just be more controlled, especially with regards to tax avoidance, and anti-monopolisation, and then to government mandated climate-change-fighting policies such as heavy (and unavoidable) taxing on pollution.

Looking back into old books and spouting the same-old propagandist battlecries does not do much to the conversation, and actually tries to derail it, instead of simply pointing "yeah that's bad, maybe they should have done this, I did the math [or maybe this other person

<link>

I would prefer if you used just "owners" or "owners of the majority of wealth". Owners of production just sounds like old-school socialism propaganda and doesn't really translate to the current world.

Aaaah, I would love it if people had to carry a visible law-mandated label saying "May contain bigotted and un-read-up (i.e. dumb), toxic opinions about all things" unless they pass some psychological exam.

Brave new world.

It's much less abstract; more directed, logically laid out and verbose.

So it is actually a useful, constructive discussion piece, instead of your quoted line.

Thanks for official figures. However his comment is valid still.

No. Israel has 13bil in millitary means just from this year from USA, while Gaza is starving. Fuck off.

Just open other books as well. Plenty of books talk about lands controlled by long forgotten kingdoms. And many of these are actually history books, instead of religious gospel from influential figures.

"Fighting back" by heavily bombarding a Palestine area that has no offensive means due to decades of slowly administered austerity measures. From a land their diaspora didnt own for the last 2000 years...

So you think Adobe is too big and should be split up?

If they can get away with it, by maybe burrying it in page 137 of the EULA, then yes.

I vaguely remember win 8 coming with lots of invasive features, that were able to be disabled by a application which had such lists of registry edits needed.

Also: Microsoft backports privacy-invasive features to windows 7 and 8 Many of these have effectively hidden Customer Experience Improvement config values in "help" menu of the program.

Just keep breathing in that copium, while Microsoft already specifically starts banning programs that are a curated-ish list of privacy-sensitive things to disable on windows at one click.

Freedom requires effort, and always did.

Maybe more lately, but such is life

Did nobody read the manual?

IEEE 754 double precision: The 53-bit significand precision gives from 15 to 17 significant decimal digits precision.

The government runs out of money... so it drops the gold standard to "to invigorate the economy"... by taking away value from those that hold cash... which is always the lower class. Higher classes hold assets that dont inflate away.

whooosh