• 0 Posts
  • 35 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: August 6th, 2023

help-circle
  • It will never happen.

    No one’s gonna buy a $30 cable rated for 100w and 120fps video to charge their phone. They’re gonna buy the $5 one at the gas station that’s only rated for low power charging.

    No manufacturer is gonna put the hardware to safely deliver 100w in their phone charger. They’re gonna do the cheaper lower power option, and people already say the ones that do include this functionality are greedy price gougers for charging more than the $5 low power charger at the gas station.

    How soon before manufacturers start stripping those high power delivering ports out of laptops because they raise the risk of permanent damage under a failure too high for the market/brand to bear?

    It’s no fun to be laughing at the people who all wanted a usbc-only world and are now having to live in it but here we are.




  • Can you point me at the right wing propaganda on hexbear? Someone elsewhere in this thread said blahaj has downvotes disabled so that might be two.

    It’s interesting to me that hexbear disabled downvotes because of downvoting campaigns against lgbt users, cultivated a culture of replying instead, federated with blahaj, broke with blahaj and now blahaj ostensibly removed downvotes.

    Queer instance main sequence?




  • gayhitler420@lemm.eetoMemes@lemmy.mlDank Brandon Rising
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    “Just wait till my evil demon gets to amorally act with impunity!

    What? He already is?”

    There is no way the sc will rule that chief executives can be prosecuted for crimes committed while in office. Every former president would be drowned in lawsuits immediately. Discovery alone would subject so much information to FoIA that it would require additional staff.



  • According to the goofy dictionary definition were working with, wealth is a requirement.

    That definition doesn’t talk about the relationship between wealth and extracted profits because getting to the bottom of that relationship ultimately ties the two together. There’s no space to explain that if you own productive capital, you’re by definition wealthy.

    If we wanted to examine your retail investment portfolio under a broader definition, you could possibly be considered the most petit-ist of bourgeoise under some circumstances, but generally if you have to work for a wage or are expecting to have to work for a wage once your education is over then you’re not a capitalist. Participating in the securities market doesn’t change your relationship to the means of production.

    If you made your living as a securities trader, that might be a different story.

    I’m not sure what you’re saying about the labor and selling it themselves, but the organization, strategy and marketing are all labor that went into the production of the goods. The capital in the form of facilities and equipment are fixed costs like the raw materials used in production, so any profit from the sale is necessarily coming out of the value of the labor.

    Good to know that market manipulation is illegal, surely there’s no examples of markets being manipulated in our recent memory!


  • I think if we just go by that dictionary definition, you being a wealthy person who invests in trade and industry to make a profit in accordance with the principles of capitalism would by definition make you “rich af” and would align your interests against those of the people whose labor allows trade and industrial production.

    The people whose labor allows trade and industrial production want to get the highest pay and best living conditions possible, you, as a wealthy investor in the concerns that employ and pay them want the most profit possible. The raw materials of trade and production are fixed quantities so any profit must come from paying the worker less than their labor produces.

    Does that make you evil? I don’t know.

    You used the example of an etf and I wanna talk about stock and securities trading briefly. A person with enough money can invest it in the market in such a way that it causes huge changes and can basically write their own ticket. Small time (retail, if you’re familiar with the lingo) investors take on quite a bit more risk and while they might hope their bag goes up or down they don’t generally have any control or say over what happens to laborers or industries and certainly not any power to control markets.

    There’s an argument to be made that the move to replace pensions with invested retirement funds was explicitly intended to align retail investors and working people with the interests of the very capitalists who needed them to accept lower wages and reduced benefits, but this tea…

    I do take issue with using dictionary definitions though, because they tend to be truncated and devoid of the background and context that allow for understanding and use of words in conversation or correspondence. This one, for example doesn’t explain what the principles of capitalism are, only that they must exist because capitalists are people who invest according to them. This definition doesn’t even describe capitalists as a class, which is fundamental to understanding the overwhelming majority of ink spilled in the last few centuries about them and the system they are in control of!



  • I don’t think you’re being disingenuous here and English is a crazy language, so here’s the definition google came up with:

    noun: capitalist; plural noun: capitalists a wealthy person who uses money to invest in trade and industry for profit in accordance with the principles of capitalism.

    In the sentence

    I’m a capitalist who doesn’t defend billionaires and also doesn’t feel left out…

    The word capitalist is a noun.

    But even if you were to pull up a dictionary definition of the word that says otherwise, in the context of the economic and political system of capitalism there’s three hundred years of writing that define capitalists under capitalism as various groups of bourgeoisie.

    I think we can dispense with petty arguments over the dictionary definitions of words given what we’re discussing. If it will make you feel better I can refer to capitalists as flying purple people eaters.



  • i don’t know how it is in most cities on the planet because i don’t live in them and haven’t looked into their public transit.

    part of having a common good is defending and upholding it. usually when there’s a problem with the routes people show up and yell loud enough that something gets done. I don’t think they’ve cut a route and not replaced it with one that has more stops or split it into two that provide more coverage in like 20 years.

    during covid here there were fewer busses running, but it was because of reduced ridership and they ran more on demand shuttles to make up the difference. they started installing big crazy air filters on the top of the busses too, so now you can’t even smell a fart on one.

    when there’s more people than the route can handle you gotta wait, same as when there’s more traffic than the road can handle. here when that unexpectedly happens they redirect people to other routes when possible.

    a lot of what youre talking about is disabled people getting equal access to what car drivers have, which is good when the disabled person lives in a place that expects everyone to have a car. if a place were to ban cars, expect people to use public transport and operate public transport with enough volume and coverage to replace them, it would be better for the disabled than expecting each individual disabled person to own a car with expensive modifications to accommodate them and become licensed to operate it or hire a driver or service in the case they cannot become licensed.

    serving the disabled and elderly is what’s driven the expansion of bus routes and accessibility here. we don’t even have car bans and it’s a benefit for so many people!




  • there’s a lot youre leaving out. I don’t think it’s on purpose, but one of the only ways that the korean war can be made to look like a soviet invasion is by conveniently leaving out everything that happened before the norths army crossed the 38th parallel.

    korea was one nation and people before it was divided roughly along a line of latitude by two american officers with no input from those knowledgeable about korea or its history. one of those officers, dean rusk, has said that he would have done things differently if he knew that forty years before, the tsarist russians and japanese had discussed dividing korea along a very similar line.

    They divided the peninsula because the idea among the allies was to reunify it five years or so after china’s civil war ended and it was clear weather koreas only land border would be with the communists or the koumintang.

    as the japanese retreated south, the korean people formed their own governing committees. the soviet forces integrated those committees into the provisional government, the american side integrated the collaborators from the japanese occupation into theirs. the north had a democratic election, the south became a military dictatorship.

    both sides claim to have held elections, but while a majority of the north wanted to vote for kim il sung, the fighter who was an ally of the liberators that empowered koreans to kick out collaborators and do land reform, the souths election that would put syngman rhee in power were boycotted by the souths political parties and accompanied by what was reported on in even western papers as brutal repression. it’s worth noting that one of the leaders of a prominent political party would be assassinated a little later.

    there’s plenty i’m glossing over, but the north didn’t cross the 38th parallel out of the blue for no reason but to impose their evil communist brainwashing on the kindly people of the south. in the south, the repression of jeju island, the military uprising against the government in response to that repression and the bodo league massacre are the backdrop for the norths invasion.

    now think about those circumstances and history for a second.

    the americans divide your country along the same line the russians and occupiers wanted to use before. lets say youre in the north: maybe you don’t trust these soviets, but they respect the peoples committees and theyre doing that land reform youve been wanting for decades. they’re supportive of you expelling the japanese collaborators and things feel like they’re getting better. how about if youre in the south? the americans put the collaborators back in charge, broke up the peoples committees and are putting the ever growing number of collaborators to work beating everyone into shape for the election.

    when 30,000 koreans die on jeju island, there’s a failed military uprising and a massacre of south korean communists, what would any right minded person do? of course the north crossed the made up line keeping them away from their countrymen in peril!

    since i’ve written enough already i’ll just address what you said about the state of the north being so bad: when and why was it so bad? why did it take a carpet bombing campaign and international blockade to make it so bad?


  • I’m sorry, but you’re deeply misinformed. I’m saying this not to start a fight, but in the hope that seeing it from someone outside hexbear (I’m banned from that instance!) will be received better.

    What you’re saying is the us propaganda during and about the war after it ended. The consensus among even american historians stands in stark contrast to what youve posted.

    I’m on mobile at the moment, so I can’t make the biggest post, but if you wanna know something in particular lmk and I’ll get to it as soon as I can.


  • Who decides if a criticism is unnecessary? We’re ten responses deep. No one’s gonna see even if I did somehow turn this into a “dunk”.

    I’m really trying to help you understand what’s going on in the Nazi table saying.

    “If there’s ten people at a table and six are wearing ss uniforms, how many Nazis are there at the table? The answer is ten.”

    The specific counts change but people say this because there’s something so abhorrent about naziism that just accepting them into your company requires that you assent to their awful actions and ideology.

    What awful actions and ideology? Why white supremacy and genocide of course!

    So when someone says the same thing but points it at communists the implication is that communists are just as bigoted and genocidal as Nazis, which is what the antisemitic double genocide theory states.

    You’re saying you didn’t mean it like that and I believe you. It’s just important to understand.

    You should be making fun of that person for being too scared to own their proud communism, but you can’t use the Nazis at the table analogy.


  • You can always not post a response if you’re bored.

    Even without English as your first language, surely you can see how bringing up the behavior and perception of Nazis and Nazi spaces in response to a person in a communist space would be seen as a comparison because of how those two groups stood in opposition to each other?

    If something feels cringey to you why not just not do it? You brought up good faith, not me.

    I am genuinely interested in helping you understand how bringing up people who accept Nazis being lumped in with Nazis invites a comparison no matter who you use it in relation to.