rockstarmode @ rockstarmode @lemmy.world

Posts

0

Comments

107

Joined

2 yr. ago

This hasn't been my (anecdotal) experience, or that of anyone in my network.

The industry is unstable no doubt about that, but we've never had trouble finding better places to land.

IMO if you've been in tech building your skills for a few years, you really shouldn't have trouble finding work. '01 was weird but there was still plenty of work, especially in defense. '08 was scary but turned out to be a great time to join a startup. Sometimes it's a lateral move instead of up, sometimes it requires relocating , but if you've been doing good work and building your professional network you should never have to go back to driving forklifts (unless you choose to).

Is that a problem?

I obviously can't speak for everyone, but in the US my parents were elated when I reached the age where they could start teaching me to drive, which in my state is 15 and a half years.

They helped me buy my first beater car for $500, then told me to get a job to pay for gas and insurance. After 16 I was never home, I was working, at school, or out with friends.

Public transportation instead of a car could have taken me to some of the densely populated areas, like the cities or the beach. But with a car I could go to the desert, to the mountains, camping in the middle of nowhere with my friends. When your state/country is HUGE then public transit might be nice, but a car means freedom to get out of the urban areas.

I was basically self sufficient, and my folks were happy to have some time back for themselves.

I'm not really a fan of the 1984 Dune, but David Lynch is a cinematic genius, and a madman.

What's to stop you from voting multiple times? Or voting as someone else? Or someone else voting as you? That last one actually happened to me during a presidential election in my home state.

I don't think it was part of some deep state plot to steal my vote, I'm betting some distracted volunteer at the polling place accidentally crossed off the wrong name and handed someone else my ballot. But still, it seems to me that if we can give out free IDs (which is a thing in my state) then there's no downside in checking them during voting in person.

Defense with justifiable deadly force (as a last resort) is not evil or bad. I appreciate that you agree that there's a good reason for millions of law abiding people to be armed.

Sure, but it doesn't do that without someone pulling the trigger.

What you've done is assume either the tool has agency of its own, or that humans can only use this tool for negative purposes.

What I said was that those things are patently untrue, and provided examples of how >6 million pistols are legally carried by civilians in the US every day, and how those civilians are far less likely than regular public to commit gun crimes.

This is kind of a tautology because the legal carry folks are both:

• legally allowed to acquire a firearm (ruling out prohibited persons like people with prior criminal histories) and in many cases they've
• gone through even more extensive background checks and rigorous training

But I also acknowledge that some folks don't think those facts are significant, I'm just sorry this resorted to name calling.

I gave other examples of "tools" like a watch or a wallet. Tools are just a means of getting things done, and aren't in of themselves good or evil. Some tools are more dangerous than others, just like some jobs are more dangerous than others.

Trained and responsible adults do dangerous jobs, often with dangerous tools, in public, all the time. Similarly millions of law abiding Americans legally carry pistols every day, and you'd be surprised how little crime they commit with their tools compared to the overall public.

But that's probably not what this crowd wants to hear, and that's ok. I'm just chiming in to lend a perspective that might not be the status quo in places like this.

The firearm is just a tool, it becomes part of your daily routine. You pick it up and holster it like you put your wallet in your pocket and your watch on your wrist.

I check to make sure it's loaded, but other than that there's nothing special or exciting about tucking the holster in my belt. No "OMG A GUN" feeling, no excitement, my heart rate doesn't jump. It's just normal to be armed and you sort of forget about the heavy lump of metal and plastic secured to your belt.

That being said, I've never forgotten about it enough to pack into a prohibited place like a police station or a bar, and CERTAINLY NOT A FUCKING AIRPORT.

Also, we shouldn't be giving TSA a pass here, assuming the congress critter actually went through security like us normal folks.

What about posting on a privately owned platform is free speech?

I agree twitter is shit, and these prices are stupid, but I'm not seeing the 1st amendment argument.

as they [Israel] shoot missiles directly into apartment buildings

I didn't see this part in the linked article. I do not condone Isreal's treatment of Palestinian civilians, but I haven't seen any reports like what you wrote. Do you have an additional source so I can read up?

Looks great!

My perhaps overly critical feedback: it looks like your pasta is very short, did you break it before cooking? Also, photos (the quality of which is a major contributor in a foodporn context) look better when the pasta is sitting neatly on the plate, learning to nest it could help make the pics look even better.

Well done, I'm sure it tasted amazing.

I agree with most of your points. Just wanted to add that I use Git + GNU Stow to manage this exact situation and it works flawlessly.

Oh wow, thanks for putting so much thought into your replies! Aside from the couple times you've resorted to insults I've really enjoyed our back and forth conversation. It's been a mostly good faith exchange.

I know some Internet person isn't going to change your closely held beliefs in a random thread, so I'm not going to try to do that. I also admit that many of my beliefs are inconsistent with most of what is to be found in places like this, so I don't take it personally when I'm met with vehement disagreement.

Nationalised industries do not need to profit

What may have gone unnoticed is that I used the word "quality". In my experience no quality good or service has ever been provided by a large entity (government, corporation, etc..) without profit motive. National parks in the US are close, but mostly because governmental benign neglect is as close to the natural state as we get, so doing very little is doing very little harm to a system that without human participation would be in equilibrium.

Industries that do not have profit motive operate on altruism or largesse (sometimes both). Altruism cannot run high quality national scale entities, there just aren't enough folks who reject profit while still doing their best work. Largesse can run small and large operations, but at national government scale they become so wasteful that delivering quality becomes impossible. This is where my comment about nationalized housing stock being equivalent to the projects came from.

The mythical large government who cares about their people and delivers high quality services at scale has not, nor ever will, exist.

Are you... really gonna pretend you've never heard of landlords

No. But I also refuse to pretend that all landlords are evil by definition. I think PE funds and foreign nationals probably have motives which do not align with those of their renters, or the overall improvement of the quality of life in the US, so large scale ownership of domestic housing stock by entities like those poses issues, which I've already said we should address. But I have no problem with a small shop owning a handful of units, and seeking to make a profit.

You're a fucking landlord, aren't you?

Not unless you count me owning the home I live in as being my own landlord.

it could only happen under a government that genuinely wants to and can work for the people.

I think this situation is possible, but not at national scale.

When did I say there's "no way up"?

When you implied individuals cannot succeed and instead must appeal to a higher power (national scale government) which has zero evidence that it has ever existed.

You are the one saying it's impossible, not me. You are the one saying there's no hope for change.

I'm saying that Internet echo chamber groupthink pushing for larger government is what will not work. There's hope for change, but people have to be accountable to themselves first.

I agree that we should prioritize quality of life for everyone, and we must take care of those who cannot take care of themselves. Doing those things requires large scale solutions, no doubt about it. It's just doubtful that nationalizing the entire housing stock will achieve those ends.

Quality housing can't be free. If there's a cost, then someone is profiting. Whether that's a corrupt government or whoever the landlord boogyman is you're targeting, it doesn't matter.

I'm not parroting any "talking points" for corporate giants, you need to get out more. Popular culture and echo chambers like this one might have you beaten down and convinced there's no way up, but that's what they want you to believe. Hopeless drones are easier to control than thinking humans. If you take control of your life at least you can be responsible for the outcome.

Personally even if I don't succeed, I find the prospect of self determinism preferable to waiting for a benevolent government to miracle my way to a better life. Large government does not exist to serve the regular person, it will grind you beneath its feet as assuredly as any corporate entity.

You posted:

Actual nationalisation would be handled by a government that gives a shit about it. So far we have seen this happen in the early Soviet union and in China.

Those are examples of strong central governments. "Nationalise" means taking control on a national scale, necessarily requiring a central government.

Why are they choosing where people live?

If the government has a monopoly on the housing stock, then individuals cannot choose what to build or how to permanently modify it since they cannot own their domicile. I was talking less about the geography of where people would live under a nationalized scheme, and more about what the effect on individual choice non-ownership would have.

only a paranoid mind assumes nationalisation would lead to either.

This might be true, but my experience with government run housing bears it out.

you are defending landlords. Why? They don't benefit you.

I will not attempt to defend large corporations and hedge funds owning housing stock. I'm an individual homeowner, so I'm looking out for those who, through some mix of hard work and/or luck, have chosen to own their homes.

I benefit from choosing how I live, where I live, what my home is like, and from accumulating equity. I want to preserve that opportunity for other hard working free people.

As I stated in my first comment, we can certainly improve how we manage housing stock and make it available. Foreign corporations and shadowy hedge funds driving up pricing, and governments manipulating values through tampering with interest rates are places I think we should start looking.

Nationalizing the whole of our housing stock? Nah, I'll pass.

This entire thread is in response to you posting

Nationalise housing

Maybe I misunderstood what you meant, but I'm pretty sure that means you want a strong central government to take control of the entire housing stock, thus controlling where everyone calls home?

I'm not sure what argument you're trying to make, but I'm pretty happy with my fully "private" housing situation. There's no way in hell I'd want anyone, government or otherwise, controlling where I sleep.

So I guess we agree?

No fucker wants that, and you're disingenuous for suggesting they do, or that nationalisation of housing means that

I'm not saying anyone wants to turn all housing into the projects. I'm saying it's inevitable given how national and local governments have managed housing in my experience.

You think nationalisation of housing happens without a government competent enough to do it?

Maybe? IMO all lifelong government bureaucrats are corrupt and/or incompetent, and the result of putting them in charge of housing everyone would be horrific.

You might as well complain about buses because they don't work without wheels.

I'm not sure I understand what you're attempting to get at with this statement. I will say as a lifelong user of public transportation in my metropolitan area the buses and trains post-COVID have been nightmarish.

I'm not sure how true this is.

My Jabra 75 is paired and connected via BT with my Android phone and a MacBook Pro. I can hear notifications or podcasts from my phone as long as I'm not actively listening to something on the Mac. I use this dual device always on config upwards of 9 hours a day with no issues.