Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)F

FourPacketsOfPeanuts

@ FourPacketsOfPeanuts @lemmy.world

Posts
7
Comments
392
Joined
3 yr. ago

  • What item(s) that you currently own do you expect to be using for the rest of your life given that you don't break or lose it?

    Jump

  • Jokes on you; when technology allows, me and my partner are going to end our marriage by melding into a supermech powerrangers style and our wedding rings will fuse to become a laser cannon

  • Is the 'stuck' economy a global phenomenon? Americans share frustrations about not being able to get ahead despite education - is this a universal experience?

    Jump

  • Depends what it is you imagine they're taking. There comes a point in wealth when you're not really talking about monetary amounts or assets per se but raw power, measured in whatever abstract units you wish to use. The hyper wealthy care about political and cultural power (a battle very much underway and largely won). They don't care so much whether the average family has $10 left at the end of the month (or $200 or -$50). The numbers become meaningless. What's important to the hyperwealthy is that whatever that number is it not be able to purchase strategic land, production, or political power. (Elon wouldn't care if every worker became a millionaire so long as bread now cost 3 million and property a billion.) Their power is felt in their exclusive access to limited resource (certain beach fronts for example, or a presidents time).

    To that end there comes a point where they're not interested in taking "money" any more, since they already entirely dominate that power dynamic. You could make the number whatever you like they're still in control. Them "allowing" a very very modest improvement in some living standards doesn't cost them anything but buys a relative amount of civil order, which is how I suspect this is likely to play out.

    The pivot to far right politics over the last 20 years is part of this. When you are artificially keeping a large part of a nation on the brink, and you don't want them to accrue traditional assets like land or wealth, then a potent replacement is to "pay" them in permission to hate.

    History shows that this is a foolish course and it doesn't last long. But perhaps a few "stable enough" decades is all these materialist hyper barons care about. Wealth and power is to be enjoyed now. There's no god or heaven only power and the future is someone else's problem..

  • Is the 'stuck' economy a global phenomenon? Americans share frustrations about not being able to get ahead despite education - is this a universal experience?

    Jump

  • It's very much the same in the UK and, from what I hear first hand, also in Germany, Australia and Canada

    My rough take:

    The industrial revolution never stopped, we are still very much on the trajectory that accelerated in the 18th/19th centuries.

    The trend is to concentrate wealth in a production owning class. WWI and WWII were temporary disruptions to this. The post war consensus saw great national projects and investment happen at just the same time that mixed skill labour was in wide demand thanks to technology's progress at that point. The baby boomers were advantaged by this and ended up with disproportionate ownership of land and production means.

    The last 50 years has been a slow return to trend. With production slowly transitioning from manual labour to mental labour to fully automated labour. The freak occurrence that benefitted baby boomers has not repeated.

    The trend will continue to devalue the work of most individuals. A small proportion will be able to leverage rapidly advancing technology and take a small stake in the monopoly of the 0.001%. The rest will progressively be priced out of elevating themselves into the middle class. The result being that there becomes a vast underclass characterised by renting, inability to start a family, and insecurity but just enough comfort to prevent rioting. There'll be a vast range of skill within that class, however effort with make only a token difference to wealth.

  • Do you think a religious Marxist weird?

    Jump

  • if one reads the New Testament strictly, is quite socialist.

    This is a popular take on Christianity that I've most often encountered on Reddit but isn't quite true. Else one would have to wonder why the early church didn't evolve into a socialist state. The reason is that people are frequently urged to be charitable, but this is ultimately voluntary and led by ones conscience. But this is consistent with being a moral voice in capitalist societies.

    Jesus told specific wealthy people to give away various portions of their wealth, but he told his poorer followers to leave everything. The impracticalities of his ethic were oriented around the end of the world being imminent (Mat 24:34), not an enduring way of ordering society as they evidentally weren't self sustaining: his ministry depended on donations from wealthy women (Luke 8:3). Paul told his church when asking for aid for another church that he wanted to see "equality" (2 Cor 8:13). But, again, it was voluntary (2 Cor 8:8).

    In one of the Pauline epistles, Paul talks about all of the members of a congregation holding all things in common.

    This was Luke writing in Acts

    When the first believers met in the temple courts they voluntarily (from time to time) donated money to the apostles care and they saw to everyone's need (Acts 2:44). But then this is never heard from again. And instead what you see in the years following is people like Paul appealing to people's conscience to give from their private possessions.

    Because ultimately, right from the start, private property and private control prevailed (for example: Joseph of Arimathea was allowed to remain wealthy, Peter escaping from jail he goes to John Mark's mother who not only owns a house but also a servant girl - Acts 12:12-13 etc). And while it's certainly true church leadership urged people to be generous to those less well off, this was never compulsory (never instituted as a tax). The church in the bible did not even institute the old Jewish law of tithing (compulsory donation of 10%) despite what modern pastors would like people to believe. Instead not only was the giving voluntary but the amount was up to the giver.

    Which is probably why Christianity has melded into the various systems of government seen in the West, from dictatorships to market driven social democracies. It's quite a chameleon. Because it tells individuals how they ought to behave but says very little (if anything) about how a state or market ought to behave.

  • If money was not an issue, is there a movie, series, or a video game you would fund as a passion project with no intention on making a profit on it?

    Jump

  • Yes that is different but it's interesting, thanks. How does it work in practise? Are you not often sat around waiting for someone else to progress before you get an item you need to continue?

  • What app is so useful, you can’t believe it’s free?

    Jump

  • What app is so useful, you can’t believe it’s free?

    Jump

  • default behaviour of Windows Media Player.....

  • Anybody here whose main use of computers is NOT games?

    Jump

  • Xennial here. My non-admin use is probably split 60% learning, 30% programming, 10% gaming

  • Threads is offically getting ads

    Jump

  • That is true. Why people think enormous content servers should be run for free boggles my mind..

  • Threads is offically getting ads

    Jump

  • I should have stated it the other way round. Free and ad driven by default (like normal and like what people are used to) but an optional premium tier that removes ads and gives more control of your feed.

  • If money was not an issue, is there a movie, series, or a video game you would fund as a passion project with no intention on making a profit on it?

    Jump

  • I always wanted to see genres merged into one great big epic universe

    Plan and manage a galactic empire in the Civilization paradigm

    Enter individual space battles like Eve Online..

    Force boarding of captive ships and battle through them like Quake..

    But have all this connected and running simultaneously.. you might be rushing though a FPS battle inside a ship trying to control of it when another Frigate in the space battle blows it apart etc. Or even as the ships bridge and navigation remains under hostile control you manage to take control of its weapons and use them to aid your side. Possibilities are endless..

  • If there is no heaven or after life, what is the point of living?

    Jump

  • You are having what's called a crisis of faith and an existential crisis. Don't worry, millions of people have been through this ahead of you and come out the other side.

  • What app is so useful, you can’t believe it’s free?

    Jump

  • A variation happened to me last week that's why it came to mind. Was opening an mp4 recorded on a digital camera on a new laptop. So the stock player had a go and gave a message similar to the above. vlc was installed moments later and of course had no issue..

  • Threads is offically getting ads

    Jump

  • I think capitalist ghoulishness dominates innovation at the moment. Because massive resources will always be ahead doing new things. But at some point - I hope - a fairly agreeable social network becomes a sort of 'solved problem'. Perhaps some FOSS version becomes available that's not cutting edge but gets the job done. It would lack the sophisticated needed to coerce people and milk their attention, but that's not needed for our purposes.

  • What app is so useful, you can’t believe it’s free?

    Jump

  • some new weird video format opens windows stock media player because it's not yet associated with vlc

    "Hey.. it looks like your going to have to buy a codec..."

    manually open in vlc where it runs seemlessly

  • Threads is offically getting ads

    Jump

  • I'm wondering how long it'll be till social media is basically a 'solved problem'. As in, there becomes available a foss clone of Facebook (or whatever) that's close enough to be useable and enjoyable. If such a thing were set up with ads design need to cover costs not maximise profit (and therefore there aren't as many) or with a reasonable priced ad free tier that covers costs and only a modest profit then would people possibly be attracted to such an "ethical" offering?

  • Threads is offically getting ads

    Jump

  • How about it starts free + ad based like any other network but offers a premium tier that removes ads and gives full control of feed that current networks don't offer. They don't offer this because manipulating people is apparently far more lucrative than any reasonably priced premium tier. But this is only because they're a 'profit at any cost' company. If an alternative ethical social network advertised the fact that it only makes a modest profit so that it's free tier is ad based but not unhealthy and the premium tier is reasonably priced. I wonder if such a thing is possible.

    Obviously no current network does this because they're investor funded and committed to max profits.

  • Threads is offically getting ads

    Jump

  • Yes. I perhaps should have stated the other way round.

    What about "ethical" social network. That's free and ad based if you want that. And the ads are present but less manipulative because the goal is to cover costs not maximise profit.

    And then that's a premium option if you want to have no ads and full control of your content feed.

    The reason Facebook and co don't offer this is because they apparently make massive amounts from each user ($68). And that only because they engage in whatever ghoulish behaviour get people locked in enough to deliver that

    An ethical social network wouldn't have to drive as much per user, because it would publicly limit itself to modest profit. Covering free use with ads presumably possible. Cost of premium being running cost + modest profit seems like it wouldn't be that high surely?

  • Threads is offically getting ads

    Jump

  • People hate subscription based models because the company is maximising profit and engaging in every kind of bait and switch it can get away with

    That's why I'm wondering if there would be an appetite for an ethical social network, where the DNA of the company is based upon covering running costs and only a moderate profit.

    The fact that it wouldn't unreasonable hike prices once you're hooked in or reintroduce ads to paid tiers would be the very appeal on the platform.

    Obviously, no-one is immune to being offered millions in ad deals to try and reverse that ethical stuff. Which is why I suppose it would either have to be a very public commitment to ethical behaviour from the outset which protects backtracking and sellouts somewhat. Or else it has to get founded as an actual not-for-profit to make a future change almost impossible. Developers still get paid of course, even very well. Just no-one has the incentive to maximise share value by shitty crooked behaviour.