I'm sorry for your loss

I'm beginning to think Emperors New Groove wasn't 100% accurate

Counter offer, you make a pizza at my home

Cost per person before toppings: $2.77

Will tbf, split a costo pizza between 4 people and you're already ahead 🤷

Next strategy will be hyperinflation to make sure that line keeps going up and to the right. Invest your Trump check® today!

Who won this election...

A. The people knocking on doors, organizers, grassroots volunteers and donors, the multiple household-name politicians who campaigned with El-Sayed, the actual 2.5 million people physically in Michigan who showed up to vote for him, El-Sayed himself keeping steadfast to his wildly popular platform...

B. Some random influencer that showed up for a photo-op and his 2 million parasocial parasites who might [generously, if we assume they're all Americans] make up 0.05% of the voting population of Michigan

This guy has never left his echo chamber and it shows.

Also: "we [who...?] put forth these popular candidates"... My dude El-Sayed wasn't endorsed by the DSA or any notable radical progressive bloc. The dude ran his campaign with charisma and easy to digest policy against ghoulish opposition. His main building blocks were traditional Michigan cohorts (unions) and the underrepresented Arab/immigrant population of SE Michigan.

The exit polls show basically no change in people shifting their label from conservative to progressive. He just ran a good campaign with wide support. This guy needs to get over himself and touch some grass.

I don't know much about architecture, but a building is generally bespoke. It's made to a specific physical location and has to work in its surroundings and be built to local regulations. From that viewpoint I can't really judge how much value the blueprint actually has and therefore if it matters who "owns" the IP. The architect has done real legwork to bring that specific building to life and anyone else would need to redo much of it to copy the result.

Any human effort can be a creative artistic expression. You could mass produce a jacket or a hand-stitch an equivalent jacket and both will be warm. You could code a subtle and elegant CMS for a website or use some pre-built solution, both will deliver the same content. The difference is, people will laugh you out of the room for trying to patent your home stitching technique but nod and clap when you put a license on your code.

Unironically a AI's biggest win. Absolutely fair criticism on art and weak imitations of human creativity, but code is just math with syntactic sugar. "Owning" algorithms and hiding implementations is such an absurd concept.

I often wonder how much better and more accessible software would be if everyone wasn't reinventing nearly every wheel all the time. What if every phone could copy-paste an Airdrop implementation? What if printers just worked? What if you could put adblockers on any device? What if every online game could be self hosted and modded? AI is (for the moment) giving an approximation of that timeline and I'm here for it.

How do I invest in sea temperatures? $SST?

The encapsulation of Mao:

“If the worst came to the worst and half of mankind died [in nuclear war], the other half would remain while imperialism would be razed to the ground and the whole world would become socialist.”

Zapp Brannigan revolutionary with no plans beyond bravado. There was/is no universe where a nuclear holocaust ends in sunshine and roses instead of the (functionally) permanent crippling of the human race. That lack of critical thought is still infecting leftist conversation today: vastly underestimating the cost and implications of actions and relying on blind appeals to moral determinism.

And yet the USA's production and consumption based emissions decreased over his tenure. Seems like replacing foreign fuel shipped from across the world with domestic fuel is a climate win, but that doesn't let you own the libz...

War kills people and nobody pollutes less than a dead man 🤷

But do you actually have a source for that? Because agriculture is the largest driver of ecological collapse and I'd be shocked if a handful of aircraft carrier emissions outweighs tons and tons of foods and goods being shipped.

If anyone considers climate to be their highest priority, the choices weren't even close to comparable. One was milquetoast green half measures that would kick the can a little further and one was nosedive everything off the cliff and irreversibly accelerate the climate catastrophe. If you stayed at home and were fine with the second choice you were flat out lying about your priorities.

Certain white guys will grow up listening to this and somehow end up cheering for fascists and complaining about their favorite bands "going woke"

If you don't need to scrape anything out of the bowl on your last couple bites then you're eating broth, not soup (consommé is a broth, fight me)

Or perhaps because it's easier to scrape down the sides of a rounded container with a spoon?...

Everything is different (read: unknowable) to our experience as humans. Plants are well known to react to stimulus and damage, some are very sensitive to it and have sofisticated methods to communicate the stimulus. From a philosophical perspective, there's no way to know that they would "feel" in those situations.

Does a lack of physical agency evolve into a tranquil fatalist acceptance or do they suffer in an agonizing silence? Similarly, does the limited insect cognition of crickets let them feel the dread of lurking predators or dull the intrinsic terror their ecological niche?

This is the problem I have with discussions on animal cruelty. There's an assumption that we can project our human experience onto almost anything. We have the hubris to implicitly or explicitly anthropomorphize creatures to the point of personhood. Why does a tree limb have to be a human limb in order for us to ethically consider it?

In my opinion, the only useful discussion is about our human reaction to cruelty/perceived cruelty. The shades of acceptance or repulsion will vary by our personal lived experiences (a bird might be a crop stealing pest or a beloved companion), but that doesn't mean we can't reach a stochastic answer on which behaviors towards others beings we find ethical.

An average person in a certain country in the 21st century finds human torture morally abhorrent, mammal abuse to be disturbing and the chemical genocide of many insect species to be mundane. Another person in a different place and time might disagree. Maybe our resulting ethical framework is objectively correct or entirely inverted, but the exercise shows us more about ourselves and builds our empathetic awareness.

What happened to your main account chief? Get banned from everywhere with sane moderation? 👋

Never said you were? I guess it's probably easy for you to hallucinate persecution narratives since you spend so much time flooding your brain with garbage. Thanks for proving me right I guess

bullshit apologism for red army rape and war crimes, claims it wasn't tolerated

Show Stalin himself, on record, expressing approval for war crimes

wHaT aBoUt UsssAa?????

Living proof you have to have some cognitive deficiency to subscribe to the tankie narrative. Go touch some grass or eat dirt or something, the internet is rotting your brain.

• one month old account
• every comment is repeating tankie talking points

Bro you're not beating the allegations

there was never any evidence of this being a policy or something tolerated by the officers

...meanwhile...

Have fun with a wench and take some trifle — Joe "War Crime" Stalin

Begone tankie