Querk [they/them] @ Querk @discuss.tchncs.de

Posts

0

Comments

32

Joined

2 yr. ago

That's way off topic, though.

Collectively agreeing to raising prices is anti-competitive collusion and illegal.

Collectively raising prices is anti-competitive coordination and legal.

Pandemic and supply shocks is a perfect excuse to do the latter.

Good luck to whoever is trying to solve this.

Unix people today : "NICE NICE"

Unix people today from 20:28:10 to 20:28:20 GMT : "NICE NICE NICE NICE"

The patent story reveals a lot.

Government:

• creates and enforces a patent system

Also government:

• does essential research and doesn't patent their own discoveries

Donate to propublica.org - they produce a lot of great journalism.

Well, the far right faction of Republicans did already side with Dems to oust the speaker.

That's spoiling at that point

Do you think an average person in 13th century had a better quality of life than an average person living in the 21st century?

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/distribution-of-population-between-different-poverty-thresholds-historical

Is that a "random person on the Internet" take or something substantiated?

Most statements I don't have qualms with, but from my understanding, "liberals embrace ID politics" seems way off. I could see an argument that there's some kind of split across people who'd identify as or match a typical understanding of a liberal, along the ID politics line, given that it's so divisive. Id say liberal as a concept existed way before ID politics, do when that became prominent, a lot of people got split along that line. I.e. Far right probably split 90:10, Conservatives probably split 75:25, Liberals probably split closer to 50:50, while social left split 25:75, far left split 10:90 and libertarians split 1:99.

Hey, at least your average, retarded, left take seems to be (at least from my limited experience here) somewhat more palatable than your average, retarded, right take.

Data I've seen suggests otherwise. Care to engage with me so that we can figure out where the discrepancy lies?

I had a Smaturday last week.

Yes, but expecting corporations to do it on their own is silly. They operate in a competitive environment so game theory should tell us what's going to usually happen. The laws and regulations exist, and a lot more are needed, but it's also not as simple because costs of enforcement also range from inexpensive to infeasible. In the end, it's people making self-interested decisions, whether on behalf of themselves or on behalf of corporations. I don't know of any easy solutions - my feeling is that those don't exist - so the best bet is to steer society towards better and more effective politics. More distributed and less concentrated power structures, checks and balances, enforcement, novel, effective, and efficient systems through science based analysis, as well as lots of trials and errors and fast iterative improvements based on rapid feedback loops. In short, the world nowadays moves faster than the current government systems and it's a losing battle until governing adaptability can increase in speed.

This describes stealing better than capitalism. And stealing is as old as nature.

I'll get back to civ when I retire. It can get too life-ruiningly addictive for me.

If they are gonna burn religious books, why not include more of them? Burn bibles, qurans, vedas, tanakhs, etc. Make the event more inclusive :)

Engineering: It's not stupid if it works.

Sounds dope. I wonder if it will bring more clarity or more puzzles. My bet is on the latter. Which is great.

"I should speak less and listen more"