I've been looking into the Sumerian city of UR, and no one knows for sure what happened to it, but there was one hypothesis that it was invaded leading to the common saying "I'm in UR base killing UR dudes"
Communism are associated with totalitarianism and authoritarianism for the same reason fire is associated with hot: pretty much every time that it's tried the same thing happens.
When the blueprint for achieving a stateless society includes creating an all-powerful dictatorship, and the next step is that that all powerful dictatorship is supposed to just magically disappear, that's just to be expected.
The problem isn't the social or the commune, it's the ism. There are lots of people who are perfectly happy with the current system which while flawed has led to the greatest improvement in material quality of life in human history for more people than ever before in history, despite the many and obvious flaws of that system. Therefore, to switch to a different system that insists it'll change everything you're going to need to use force to get universal adoption.
In my view, an ideal system is one under which people are free to choose how they want to live. If you want a commune you can do so without oppressing those who don't. If you want to create a workers cooperative you're free to do so without oppressing those who don't, and I'd you want to engage in free trade you're free to do so without oppressing those who don't. There have been eras when US had a similar system to this, but it's sort of unstable and eventually someone wants to make everyone else do their ism.
When the blueprint for achieving a stateless society includes creating an all-powerful dictatorship, and the next step is that that all powerful dictatorship is supposed to just magically disappear, that's just to be expected.
The problem isn't the social or the commune, it's the ism. There are lots of people who are perfectly happy with the current system which while flawed has led to the greatest improvement in material quality of life in human history for more people than ever before in history, despite the many and obvious flaws of that system. Therefore, to switch to a different system that insists it'll change everything you're going to need to use force to get universal adoption.
In my view, an ideal system is one under which people are free to choose how they want to live. If you want a commune you can do so without oppressing those who don't. If you want to create a workers cooperative you're free to do so without oppressing those who don't, and I'd you want to engage in free trade you're free to do so without oppressing those who don't. There have been eras when US had a similar system to this, but it's sort of unstable and eventually someone wants to make everyone else do their ism.
Considering how much the state is orchestrating the media now, of course she's a villain in a hollywood movie.
OBEY.
OBEY.
Could you imagine being someone who breaks the law because they think those laws are morally wrong?
They have to make Rosa Parks a white man -- They always make the villains white men in these new movies.
They have to make Rosa Parks a white man -- They always make the villains white men in these new movies.
If a Mexican makes it to Canada, they're probably a member of the professional class.
We gotta build a wall to keep gangs from New York out. It we won't because our leaders are weak.
We gotta build a wall to keep gangs from New York out. It we won't because our leaders are weak.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/new-studies-warn-of-cataclysmic-solar-superstorms/
Here's an article about the study. I watched an extended video from the author on youtube, and the methodology makes sense.
I mean, the Carrington event caused operators to get shocked, the 1921 event caused telegraph stations to burn to the ground. Is that a lower level of effects?
Here's an article about the study. I watched an extended video from the author on youtube, and the methodology makes sense.
I mean, the Carrington event caused operators to get shocked, the 1921 event caused telegraph stations to burn to the ground. Is that a lower level of effects?
According to contemporary measurements it was as large as or potentially larger than the carrington event. Telegraph lines did in fact get damaged in the later event, which is why it was called the railroad storm. Despite that, it didn't have any effect on the electric lighting systems installed in the same regions.
It'll be highly dependent on the region. How they get their power, the geology of the region, and how much mitigating technology is in place.
It'll be highly dependent on the region. How they get their power, the geology of the region, and how much mitigating technology is in place.
Huh, go figure. Watched the whole documentary, guess we'll just have to deal with it if a sort of 12000 year cataclysm happens.
I'm sure a Carrington sized flare would cause a lot of damage, but it wouldn't get rid of all electricity for the rest of our lives. A lot of stuff could break really badly, but in particular systems that don't rely on long distance transmission could be back up and running as soon as the event ended, as well as systems that were brought offline in expectation of the arrival of an event.
It's likely that the 1921 solar storm was similar in strength to the 1859 Carrington event according to recent research, and at that time we already had radio systems and electricity was used for lighting in some regions. The one saving grace for the world's technology in 1921 was we didn't rely on long distance electrical transmission lines. The risk of ground current would be different from place to place. If you're in the east or the upper midwest, then there's a very high risk, but down in Florida it's a much lower risk, mostly due to the geology of the different places.
The 1989 event that knocked out the power in Quebec seemed to be largely affecting power regulation that relied on ground for voltage references, and that damaged static var systems that regulate voltages by injecting inductive vars onto the electrical system. After that event they took mitigating measures, but I've heard that before and then the same exact problem occurs again so the proof would be in the pudding...
I'm sure a Carrington sized flare would cause a lot of damage, but it wouldn't get rid of all electricity for the rest of our lives. A lot of stuff could break really badly, but in particular systems that don't rely on long distance transmission could be back up and running as soon as the event ended, as well as systems that were brought offline in expectation of the arrival of an event.
It's likely that the 1921 solar storm was similar in strength to the 1859 Carrington event according to recent research, and at that time we already had radio systems and electricity was used for lighting in some regions. The one saving grace for the world's technology in 1921 was we didn't rely on long distance electrical transmission lines. The risk of ground current would be different from place to place. If you're in the east or the upper midwest, then there's a very high risk, but down in Florida it's a much lower risk, mostly due to the geology of the different places.
The 1989 event that knocked out the power in Quebec seemed to be largely affecting power regulation that relied on ground for voltage references, and that damaged static var systems that regulate voltages by injecting inductive vars onto the electrical system. After that event they took mitigating measures, but I've heard that before and then the same exact problem occurs again so the proof would be in the pudding...
Soapbox and rebased has behavior I've never seen on big tech. Sometimes people are posting on lots of accounts I follow all at once and the new posts just blast past!
What do you mean by nova? The sun isn't the sort to nova, it looks more like it'll become a red giant, so I'm assuming it's a cultural event?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uM6JSS3l-IQ
A 1 hour documentary on the bronze age collapse where the majority of civilizations of the era collapsed. It's just one example of civilizational collapse, but it's a really big one.
A 1 hour documentary on the bronze age collapse where the majority of civilizations of the era collapsed. It's just one example of civilizational collapse, but it's a really big one.
In some ways, that's authentic for those instances -- it's a lot of people who are intolerant and insular, and they get together and create their thing that's locked down and intolerant and insular. The nice thing is that the libre people can also find each other and their instances can have fun and be creative without having the intolerant and insular as middle-men.
What's your view of what civilization collapse would look like in the postmodern age?
It's probably healthy for the ecosystem to have people leaving to an extent. Not every user is going to find what they're looking for here, and considering that many, many people are addicted to the algorithm they shouldn't find what they are looking for here. The fact that it appears many people are staying however is also a positive thing, that there's maybe a thirst for the sort of authenticity the fediverse provides and big tech can't anymore.
https://invidious.fbxl.net/watch?v=-pZG7snE7tU
Looking at history through razzorfist's lens, it becomes immediately apparent why John Wilkes Booth screamed "sic semper tyrannis".
But in some ways it's a white pill. America survived Lincoln. It may have been changed forever, but it didn't remain as authoritarian as it was. There is a path to walking back from the ledge. With luck, maybe the America and the rest of the world still has a chance to walk back from the ledge.
Looking at history through razzorfist's lens, it becomes immediately apparent why John Wilkes Booth screamed "sic semper tyrannis".
But in some ways it's a white pill. America survived Lincoln. It may have been changed forever, but it didn't remain as authoritarian as it was. There is a path to walking back from the ledge. With luck, maybe the America and the rest of the world still has a chance to walk back from the ledge.
tbf, there's no right answer to "how high should interest rates be?"
If the interest rates are low it causes false demand driving up prices of assets for people who aren't using loans so it forces people into perpetual debt so fuck banks
If the interest rates are high then they're stealing more money from the productive economy so people are in perpetual debt so fuck banks.
There's a really good argument against debts in general. Not an economic one, but a moral one that no matter how inexpensive or expensive the loan is, it's going to have a parasitic effect on society.
If the interest rates are low it causes false demand driving up prices of assets for people who aren't using loans so it forces people into perpetual debt so fuck banks
If the interest rates are high then they're stealing more money from the productive economy so people are in perpetual debt so fuck banks.
There's a really good argument against debts in general. Not an economic one, but a moral one that no matter how inexpensive or expensive the loan is, it's going to have a parasitic effect on society.
It's deeply upsetting. How are we supposed to kill innocent defenseless children because they're inconvenient for us and we wanted to have meaningless unprotected sex if the state starts defending them? The only purpose of the state is giving free stuff, not enforcing laws!