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/)B
Posts
9
Comments
743
Joined
3 yr. ago

  • Which is why NFTs work. They're refreshingly honest: They represent nothing of any kind of value, yet are valued. Something something fetishism.

  • The US and Canada apparently wanted to be special, again.

  • I'd expect them to stay sane and use prestressed concrete ones like the rest of the industry. Steel might make sense in some situations.

  • As far as I understand it comes down to recycling rates: In countries like Germany where there's mandatory deposit on one-use plastic bottles it's a definitive win, in other places the situation isn't as clear-cut. PET bottles can be recycled very well provided you have a clean recycling stream, which the deposit ensures.

    Still, beer in plastic bottles is a travesty, it's generally deposit glass bottles over here (some brewery-specific, many many many generic though the crates tend to be specific). Cans at least won't spoil the beer, but are also more annoying deposit-wise as you have to take care to not crush them in the wrong way or the machine won't be able to read the code.

    Side note: Apparently our whole traditional glass recycling is cooked, too much stuff that shouldn't be in there in there that spoils whole batches. And very difficult to educate people about it or filter things out automatically, sure, ceramics can be filtered out, but drinking glasses of the wrong type of glass messing up the whole chemistry? Forget it. The good news is that crushed glass makes excellent aggregate, I've even heard of some places using it to top up beaches.

  • Obvious troll is obvious.

  • Certainly!

  • It depends on the density of the ingredient, as well as the packing density, e.g. coarse vs. fine salt makes quite a difference.

    Which is why it's silly to use volume in cooking which is why Americans are doing it.

  • Especially because programming is quite fucking literally giving computers instructions, despite what you believe keyboard monkeys do. You wanker!

    What? You think “developers” are some kind on mythical beings that possess the mystical ability of speaking to the machines in cryptic tongues?

    First off, you're contradicting yourself: Is programming about "giving instructions in cryptic languages", or not?

    Then, no: Developers are mythical beings who possess the magical ability of turning vague gesturing full of internal contradictions, wishful thinking, up to right-out psychotic nonsense dreamt up by some random coke-head in a suit, into hard specifications suitable to then go into algorithm selection and finally into code. Typing shit in a cryptic language is the easy part, also, it's not cryptic, it's precise.

  • Oh great you're one of them. Look I can't magically infuse tech literacy into you, you'll have to learn to program and, crucially, understand how much programming is not about giving computers instructions.

  • Lots of techies loved the internet, built it, and were all early adopters. Lots of normies didn't see the point.

    With AI it's pretty much the other way around: CEOs saying "we don't need programmers, any more", while people who understand the tech roll their eyes.

  • Shovel vendors scrambling for solid ground as prospectors start to understand geology.

    ...that is, this isn't yet the end of the AI bubble. It's just the end of overvaluing hardware because efficiency increased on the software side, there's still a whole software-side bubble to contend with.

  • To be hyper clear for you:

    Left WING is not leftIST

    LeftIST is left WING

    Whether -ist or -wing doesn't matter both still contain the word "left", don't they? Therefore, they are either anti-capitalist, or they're confused. And, yes, much of US politics is terribly confused. The moderate left, in the US, begins with AOC and Bernie, both solid socdems, radical is far a ways off. The Democrat establishment, by and large, supports the oligarchy, they don't even begin to be on the left.

    Don't expect lefties from elsewhere to play into that confusion.

  • For example fiscal centrists who are socially progressive. You may call that a false leftist, but I’d just say they’re a mild left wing voter.

    So you would call Peter Thiel a leftist? A literal billionaire? A literal neo-feudalist? Because he happens to be gay and proud of it?

    You are taking a word that has been, since its literal inception (seating arrangements in the French national assembly, as seen from the lectern), been connected to the struggle of the masses vs. nobility/oligarchy, and you're attaching orthogonal meanings to it. You cannot be leftist if you're on the side of the oligarchy, if you're a capitalist.

    "Socially progressive". You already have a term for it. Good. Use it. Don't dilute other terms, or even allow them to be turned into their opposite.

    centrists

    There's no centre point between "believe in god" and "deny god": Either you do or you don't, and anything agnostic is not in the centre, it's not a compromise, but off the axis altogether.

  • IDGAF about what the US is cooking up when it comes to political definitions, much less so when they disagree with the rest of the world. Anti-capitalism is necessary to be on the left, it's not negotiable.

    Just like you wouldn't call someone who denies god a Christian. There's no "but they deny god a bit less than Richard Dawkins, so they're more Christian": No, they're still denying god, they can't be Christian. If they consider themselves Christian despite denying god, then it stands to reason that they're quite confused about what being a Christian entails, don't you think?

  • They very much expect the SPD to defend things like co-determination laws to the death, though. They also expect the SPD to implement referenda that say that landlords with over 1000 apartments should be expropriated, that they're dragging their feet on that kind of stuff ("but the markets might get uneasy and that would have consequences") is one of the reasons why they don't poll well.

    Can you imagine a US city the size of Berlin pushing through a referendum to expropriate landowners? That's how far apart the overton windows are. There's hardly even overlap.

  • Adam Smith, in modern terms, would be a social liberal. Probably some kind of ordoliberal. It's Marx where the modern definition of capitalism comes from and it's pretty much "what capitalists do, systemically, to stay in power": Accumulate their capital, evade regulation, generate monopolies, seek rents, etc.

  • Socdems are leftist, even if you might disagree with their whole non-revolutionary approach. Definitely more leftist than the billionaire-creating CCP which yes is in the G20. China is part of that club. The whole EU, constitutionally, is not capitalist but a social market economy.

  • I can’t be Left wing unless I want to destroy capitalism?

    Yes. Yes indeed you can't. How to go about that is up for grabs but if you think that leftism is all about preserving the system that allows oligarchs to accumulate more capital and power, to allow a minority to exploit the majority, I don't know what to tell you.

    ...besides that you're probably American because only y'all are so damn confused about the whole topic.

  • Escape next to 1 is also underappreciated. It's how vi was meant to be used.