dx1 @ dx1 @lemmy.world

Posts

2

Comments

761

Joined

2 yr. ago

I used to land at basically this analysis myself, but there are definitely some assumptions that need to be addressed. We can probably agree that to a significant degree "money is power", or at least, money can elicit power, especially in terms of directing the actions of the desperate. We witness in our society - which is not pure "free market capitalism" - that inequality is rampant. There are theoretical explanations for this blaming both government intervention and just simply the behavior of individuals within the market that centralize wealth. And, conversely, there are theoretical explanations for how government can decentralize wealth, or how market participants can decentralize wealth (including boycotts, unions, etc.). The biggest challenge with this age-old "communism vs. capitalism" debate is that establishing overall tendencies for state vs. private actors requires exhaustive historical analysis, and is not even inherent to the nature of either actor, i.e., someone as a private actor, or state actor, can act in a way that either centralizes or decentralizes wealth. The only overarching principle you can even safely state is that the actions of a state are distinct from those as a private actor because of the "monopoly on violence" factor, i.e., the ability to enforce unfair demands that people can't escape in practice (a behavior that leftie types usually accuse capitalism of, inversely, by pointing to corporate monopoly power - which of course, depends on the dictates of a state or equivalent body to enforce).

The only way I was able to resolve the problems with this whole analytical framework - communism, capitalism, state, private - was to reject this terminology entirely and perform the analysis in terms of individual behavior, actions, inanimate vs. animate, and the ethical properties deriving from those. A "state" is a useful abstraction at times and a confusing complication at other times. "Capitalism" and "communism" as terms have no universally agreed upon definition, resulting in unproductive, endless, circular debates. What we're really trying to do is design a social system that maximizes outcomes for every criteria we like - equality, prosperity, individual wellbeing, health, lack of environmental externalities, etc.

That gets to the root of the problem. We have "checks and balances" designed around the idea that separate institutions would check the excesses of each other. Even if you don't accept the "Republicans and Democrats work for the same people" theory, well, now all three branches of government are majority Republican, and not even in a way where there's significant internal division or strife, so it's just a bulldozer. The stupidity of not including popular recall votes in the Constitution - or really, just not having a mechanism for popular referendums, vetoes, etc. - is I think its biggest fault. The "representative democracy" model is inherently flawed because you can corrupt representatives, while corrupting an entire population, while not impossible, is a hell of a lot harder.

The ADL exists to normalize fascism and "Israeli" colonialism. That's it. It's a subversive fascist lobbying group masquerading as some kind of pro-equality, anti-racist civil society nonprofit group. Absolutely disgusting organization.

Sure, if you say so.

Oh, now it's owned by the Chinese military?

Which part of "freedom of speech" involves precluding us from ingesting content from a country our government decided it doesn't like? Or electing to send our own device data or interactions to that country?

That unanimous decision made it perfectly clear that the government knows something we don’t,

Yeah, they know who pays their checks.

My bet is on the genocide being much worse than even TikTok was showing,

TikTok showed them incinerating an entire civilization. Not sure what you saw on there.

If that were true then they wouldn’t have given ByteDance the option to sell 80% to citizens and continue operating.

Except the entire point of that is the U.S. ownership would succumb to that pressure.

Sidestep providing the evidence and go straight for the personal attack. Nice.

Bytedance's long-term hope is naturally to be able to continuing operating everywhere without violating any laws. Right? Therefore, their strategy is to stay as compliant as possible with various national laws (within reason), right? Therefore they have to take a conservative reading of the bill (PAFACA). So let's look at the text of the bill:

https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/7521/text

(1) PROHIBITION OF FOREIGN ADVERSARY CONTROLLED APPLICATIONS.—It shall be unlawful for an entity to distribute, maintain, or update (or enable the distribution, maintenance, or updating of) a foreign adversary controlled application by carrying out, within the land or maritime borders of the United States, any of the following: [...]

Now, the actual distribution of TikTok is done by a U.S. corp, incorporated in California and Delaware. That corp has to stay compliant with these laws. Therefore, to maintain or update or enable the distribution of an app as defined in this bill, is legally punishable. Make sense? Particularly because the law mentions them by name, there is basically zero legal defense against it besides contesting its constitutionality. Which the horrifically corrupt Supreme Court upheld.

So, probably the only way they felt comfortable resuming operations in the U.S. was with some kind of written agreement with the Trump admin - as of yet undisclosed.

Yeah, but the ban passed with overwhelming bipartisan support, randomly jammed inside of the global military spending package including funding the Ukrainian war effort and the genocide in Gaza (which is a must-support bill for Democrats and Republicans alike I guess).

I looked that car up a few days ago - know why? It was Jesse's car in Breaking Bad.

If you're into cars for curiosity's sake, it's a fun deep dive to look into the cars used in Russia, including the USSR-era ones. Harsh winter conditions, huge backcountry. Some of the government issue ones, uh, GAZ-69, UAZ-469, GAZ-66. I bet people have done modern engine swaps with the chassis on those. One of the crazier things is in the colder regions (e.g. Yakutia) engine cooling isn't an issue, rather they have to insulate the engine so that it'll be warm enough to start.

That is also a big help, the best thing you can do is increase what's basically the coefficient of friction.

It won't help you skidding out on the highway, but there are a few situations where you start slipping where they'll actually catch it.

It's not either.

Remember when Musk took over Twitter and "open sourced" the algorithm, although it was impossible to reconstruct anything from what was given, and contained clear signs of being edited and incriminating details suggesting content categorization and prioritization?

What I really want to see is Facebook's algorithm, because it seems to just produce a neverending stream of alt-right bullshit.

I swear on the graves of my ancestors, they script this shit to keep everyone guessing at what the real explanation is. Everyone finds a way to fit it into their own understanding of how the world works. Same thing with the ceasefire agreement. Democrats understand it one way, Republicans understand it another way, outsiders understand it a third (or fourth or fifth), more skeptical way.

Nobody would want to take a shitty deal, and since your comment was posted it's back online in the US. You sound like you don't understand how business works and are twisting facts to fit your understanding of the situation.

What is the one on the left anyway?

Technically it's not the power of the engine but the AWD/4WD. You can floor your engine and just skid on ice. Subarus are pretty cheap 4 cyl boxer engines known for great handling in snow with some clever differential systems they have (viscuous coupling diffs, active torque split, etc.) But yeah a Ford Focus or Honda Civic or whatever with FWD only will leave you stranded. Not your main point I know.