Ookami38 @ Ookami38 @sh.itjust.works

Posts

3

Comments

1,209

Joined

2 yr. ago

I hate that that kidney case actually happened.

Is there a difference between 19, 20, and 21 Celsius? It's also pretty subtle. Yes, there's a bigger difference than fahrenheit, but I've never cared regardless of scale down to what degree the temperature is. As a fahrenheit user, it's always 10s. 0-10, 10-20, etc.

No, but those describe pretty well the range within people tend to do okay in. Anything lower or higher and you tend to need more specialized gear and have to seriously limit exposure.

It is really easy to map onto human feel though. 0-100 pretty accurately maps onto our minimum and maximum realistically survivable temps, long-term, and the middle temperatures of those are the most comfortable. It's far more round, when it comes to describing human preference and survivability, than Celsius is.

Which is a surprisingly good approximation for how people feel. 0-100 is pretty survivable, with the mid ranges being most comfortable, and things outside of that range starting to pose serious threats.

I can get that. Its the parts around him being a Mary Sue that work so well. His ultimate draw towards pacifism despite his clear knack for death. I feel like it captures a bullied, maladjusted youth with a clear talent pretty well, all considered.

Stephen King's Dark Tower series is my go-to epic fantasy. I'm about to start a 4th trip to the tower once I'm done with my current listen.

Enders Game by Orson Scott Card, and a select few other books in the series (Speaker for the dead and Enders Shadow most notably) - Card at the top of his game is fantastic, I just wish he didn't dive completely off the deep end.

Tangentially, Berserk, if you include manga. Hands down my favorite piece of media altogether.

That's fine. It happens. I encourage you to go back and reread the OPs post, and your reply to it. I think you'll see why I'm so exasperated.

You make good points, they're valid and based in reality. I'd encourage you to try to fully understand the opponents views before attacking them, though. Thank you for showing a bit of humility.

Again, it's irrelevant to MY ARGUMENT. In my first post I did not make any mention of my beliefs.

The chain of events from my perspective is:

OP makes an argument about how the stimuli made the economy appear, relatively, worse now than it actually is.

You replied to an argument about the stimuli CAUSING the economy to be shit.

I replied, clarifying OPs original stance. The only bit of my beliefs in the first reply is the last sentence, where I say OPs argument is a better case for UBI than it is for the current state of the economy.

You reply with an article attacking OPs views.

I reiterate my views, significantly different from OPs.

You again attack claims that I have not made.

My entire existence in this thing is one simply asking you to argue, WITH OP, on the words they've actually said. And somehow we're here, me acting as a surrogate OP because you can't seem to parse that I'm not the one making the claims, just interpreting them.

Then again you are flying squid, not reading squid.

See, this is a rebuttal. Something that lets me know you're reading words and not just dropping the first semi-relevant article.

Yes. I agree. The economy is worse now than it was. And I have never argued that it wasn't. I currently believe it's a bit of both of the above, actually. That corporations are shit and absolutely looking to extract any value they can, and that people in general rebounded a bit hard after covid lockdowns ended, but that was inevitable. I think that COVID lockdowns caused corporations to start increasing their prices, "well traffics down we have to stay afloat somehow!" Which they naturally don't want to give up now. Combined with the rebounding I mentioned earlier where people temporarily more willing to spend, and here we are.

Absolutely regulation needs to be put in place. My intent with the UBI line was simply, people spend money when they have money, put money into people's hands and (with a little regulation) the economy will start moving towards good again.

Mate you and I are on the same side in this thing. The only thing I'm trying to point out is, if you're going to argue against someone, argue against what they're actually saying, not a non-sequitor, even if that non-sequitor is the normal argument you see in this situation.

They didn't say that the stimuli from years ago caused it. They said that we received the stimuli when we were already sitting around not spending money except as absolutely necessary. These two things combined made it FEEL LIKE the economy was a lot better then than it is now. If anything, to me this says we should have a UBI already.

In my area, they either have generic brands that are cheap af but at least similar quality, regular name brands, or expensive imported stuff. Their name brands and their imported stuff are both more expensive, but particularly the imported stuff gives good quality and variety.

The fact is, in the states, aldi is not a one stop shop regardless. Their selection beyond staples is poor and sporadic. I see a ton of value going there first, getting what I can, and maybe snagging something interesting while I'm there. If I had to, I could live exclusively off aldi well enough, but it'd be a bit basic. I wish they'd expand a bit, but the niche they're in right now is nice in its own right.

I've seen a few cashiers at other places. Granted they were all older so maybe had a reasonable accommodation to sit, but maybe... Maybe..

At the end of the day, both are required. You need to study to be effective at what you're doing, but at the end of the day the only way words get on paper is writing. You'll also get more out of learning these structures and ideals trying to apply them after you have a bit of time just floundering, getting a feel for the actual task.

I choose to eschew my mouse when I can because it's easier. I don't have to move my arms around as much, and I can work quicker. It's more comfortable. All of this is a preference thing, why should anyone do something my way if it's not how they prefer?

No, it's how specialization works. True, as you do one thing more, you get better at it. This inherently disincentivizes jumping around and learning multiple skills, if we tie that to earning ability within capitalism. This does not have to be how we assign value, or earning, however. We could do any number of things differently, to incentivize different things.

One radical idea just off the top of my head would be pegging earning to age. Specialists get to specialize if they love a particular thing, and it won't hurt their earnings. Jack of all trades still finds earnings more aligned to their actual worth to society - flexibility. Right now, being an okay person at everything is pretty crappily rewarded, because you only earn more by doing something REALLY well.

Again, this is just off the top of my head. I don't think it's necessarily the way to reorganize earnings in our society. It's just an example of how labor doesn't necessarily intrinsically have to lead to specialization earning more.

Man, I'm over here crying for servicenow back. We switched to Salesforce a few years back, and it's true, the grass does always LOOK greener.

Man, HPSM was trash but christ I'd take it back for a ticketing system over Salesforce in a heartbeat. Trashfire tries to do too much and excels at none of it.

Right limited time and resources. You get more time and resources by earning more, quicker. You typically do that by becoming more skilled. You do THAT by... Specializing in one sphere of activity.

You absolutely can do whatever you want in a capitalist society, but let's not pretend there's no incentive to stick in one lane and specialize.