Considering what Disney is doing to its own old works, I feel like all of the Disney apologists could just listen to their own advice.
These guys want real feudalism to return with themselves as the landed aristocracy, make no mistake about it.
ngl, I've still got my 2060 laptop, and haven't really seen any reason to be worried about upgrading. I bet a 1060 would still be ok for most things, and RT really isn't a big deal even several years in...
(also I play a bunch of games like Terminal Velocity that require a 486 or less...)
(also I play a bunch of games like Terminal Velocity that require a 486 or less...)
One huge problem with the concept of private ownership of things that are not the "means of production" in the socialist/communist mindset is that you could theoretically use lots of things as means of production.
If you own a toothbrush that's ok, but what if that toothbrush can be used as a tool for building something else? Brushes are often used as tools, and the materials making up a toothbrush certainly could be melted down and turned into something else entirely, would that new thing made of your acceptable toothbrush now be evil contraband to be taken by the state or the people?
Same with shoes. Shoes could just be a thing for your feet, but depending on how they're used, they could themselves be a tool, or the leather and rubber used to create a tool, and then does the previously admissible shoe become an evil tool of the capitalist?
In the end, the real means of production is a skilled worker. For them, a shocking number of things can become the means of production, just watch Primitive Technology on YouTube. A bog is just a useless piece of land to most people, but to the skilled Norwegians 600 years ago, it was an important resource and source of iron. Why? Because they knew how to take the useless thing nobody wanted and turn it into the most important resource of the era. Therefore, for the state to seize the means of production means to seize the individual, and that's exactly what we see in practice. A bunch of tools and machines are useless without the minds and hands operating them, and so those minds and hands must be seized and dominated into submission.
If you own a toothbrush that's ok, but what if that toothbrush can be used as a tool for building something else? Brushes are often used as tools, and the materials making up a toothbrush certainly could be melted down and turned into something else entirely, would that new thing made of your acceptable toothbrush now be evil contraband to be taken by the state or the people?
Same with shoes. Shoes could just be a thing for your feet, but depending on how they're used, they could themselves be a tool, or the leather and rubber used to create a tool, and then does the previously admissible shoe become an evil tool of the capitalist?
In the end, the real means of production is a skilled worker. For them, a shocking number of things can become the means of production, just watch Primitive Technology on YouTube. A bog is just a useless piece of land to most people, but to the skilled Norwegians 600 years ago, it was an important resource and source of iron. Why? Because they knew how to take the useless thing nobody wanted and turn it into the most important resource of the era. Therefore, for the state to seize the means of production means to seize the individual, and that's exactly what we see in practice. A bunch of tools and machines are useless without the minds and hands operating them, and so those minds and hands must be seized and dominated into submission.
People who will preach about science but totally ignore the settled and obvious science of neurological development as it sits and unfolds in front of you in favor of a religious dogmatic viewpoint that humans are a tabula rasa that just need to be kept blank.
I watched Cars for the first time tonight. I never in a thousand years expected to find such an excellent moral tale in a movie about anthropomorphic cars.
At the beginning of the movie, the main character is already competing to be the very best of the era. He makes a 3-way tie just barely (if we're being honest, in sort of a dodgy way) and is on his way to get another chance. His hyper-competitiveness leads him and the people around him to take stupid risks, which lands him in trouble.
Over the course of his penance for his mistakes, he discovers that he's in the company of someone who achieved everything he ever wanted and more, who he thought initially was just a loser. Kids wouldn't get this, but I really liked this part because it shows that the shiny goal you're working so hard for isn't necessarily going to sustain you throughout your entire life. It's one milestone along a long road of life.
At the end of the movie, he's about to win, but goes back to do the right thing instead of seeking immediate glory, and ultimately gets third place, but in so doing earns the respect of the crowd and his peers while the actual winner looks like a knob and is largely disregarded.
I know it seems really strange to put that much thought into a movie about anthropomorphic cars, but having listened to too much podcast of the lotus eaters and Jordan Peterson, I've come to believe that the allegorical lessons in the media we present to our kids is equally important to the content itself. It's ok for some media to have weak lessons or to just be fun (Frankly, I feel like the adventures of Tom Sawyer is largely just fun stories about being a kid, and I think there's value in that too, showing that it's ok to be a kid and have adventures and interact with the world, a lesson I expect current younger generations will need to learn), but good lessons are important.
As an aside, he really likes the graphics in Elemental right now, but I hate that movie's moral lessons. The inciting incident of the story is the main character losing her temper, and at several incidences she loses her temper again and again and never really pays penance for it or learns from it. The moral lesson of the movie seems to be "the reason you're so mad is you're not getting what you want, so just get what you want" which is sociopathic and it's no surprise such a movie was made by Hollywood in 2022. the only thing that saves it a bit is the filial piety from the fire people really having a lot of asian characteristics, but that's a peripheral theme and not a core lesson.
At the beginning of the movie, the main character is already competing to be the very best of the era. He makes a 3-way tie just barely (if we're being honest, in sort of a dodgy way) and is on his way to get another chance. His hyper-competitiveness leads him and the people around him to take stupid risks, which lands him in trouble.
Over the course of his penance for his mistakes, he discovers that he's in the company of someone who achieved everything he ever wanted and more, who he thought initially was just a loser. Kids wouldn't get this, but I really liked this part because it shows that the shiny goal you're working so hard for isn't necessarily going to sustain you throughout your entire life. It's one milestone along a long road of life.
At the end of the movie, he's about to win, but goes back to do the right thing instead of seeking immediate glory, and ultimately gets third place, but in so doing earns the respect of the crowd and his peers while the actual winner looks like a knob and is largely disregarded.
I know it seems really strange to put that much thought into a movie about anthropomorphic cars, but having listened to too much podcast of the lotus eaters and Jordan Peterson, I've come to believe that the allegorical lessons in the media we present to our kids is equally important to the content itself. It's ok for some media to have weak lessons or to just be fun (Frankly, I feel like the adventures of Tom Sawyer is largely just fun stories about being a kid, and I think there's value in that too, showing that it's ok to be a kid and have adventures and interact with the world, a lesson I expect current younger generations will need to learn), but good lessons are important.
As an aside, he really likes the graphics in Elemental right now, but I hate that movie's moral lessons. The inciting incident of the story is the main character losing her temper, and at several incidences she loses her temper again and again and never really pays penance for it or learns from it. The moral lesson of the movie seems to be "the reason you're so mad is you're not getting what you want, so just get what you want" which is sociopathic and it's no surprise such a movie was made by Hollywood in 2022. the only thing that saves it a bit is the filial piety from the fire people really having a lot of asian characteristics, but that's a peripheral theme and not a core lesson.
Open just long enough for them to get in the door so they can install a really good lock.
Dang it, lost my post....
You don't necessarily need to be severely mentally handicapped to be deceived.
My dad started without running water or electricity and today has wireless fiber optic Internet and a 3d printer. The world has changed a lot since he was a kid, and sometimes stuff just changes and it doesn't seem to make much sense.
My first computer struggled to draw a circle, but later my PC could fully emulate that computer while doing 20 other things, which is kinda insane when you think about it.
Plus governments and politicians make advertisements and announcements through Twitter all the time, and that loss of gravitas has consequences...
As a basic test of competence, maybe voting should be restricted to property owners. If you can't manage a piece of land you shouldn't have a way in the management of the nation...
You don't necessarily need to be severely mentally handicapped to be deceived.
My dad started without running water or electricity and today has wireless fiber optic Internet and a 3d printer. The world has changed a lot since he was a kid, and sometimes stuff just changes and it doesn't seem to make much sense.
My first computer struggled to draw a circle, but later my PC could fully emulate that computer while doing 20 other things, which is kinda insane when you think about it.
Plus governments and politicians make advertisements and announcements through Twitter all the time, and that loss of gravitas has consequences...
As a basic test of competence, maybe voting should be restricted to property owners. If you can't manage a piece of land you shouldn't have a way in the management of the nation...
I see what you mean, but on the other hand I can buy a whole bunch of stuff if I have my bank card by just tapping it. No code, not even a signature, just tap and go.
I can and did get a birth certificate, a critical piece of ID by just visiting a website. Using that I could get a bunch of other critical things but the process was really easy. I also update my health card, my driver's license, my license plates online with very little verification. I can send money from my bank through text messages or email.
And then for voting, in my country you actually have to display some ID to say you are who you say you are, but apparently showing ID is racist in the US so you just say you're someone and you can vote as if you are that person. Didn't 2020 have mail in voting without any real verification? None of that was a joke, it's true somehow.
So it's tough. You get up against these questions and often freedom of speech gets bent because there is a line where even under ideal constitutional law speech isn't protected because it appears to be intended to deceive and violate someone else's rights instead of being an expression of actual opinions or facts. I think reasonable people could come down on either side based on their personal experiences.
I can and did get a birth certificate, a critical piece of ID by just visiting a website. Using that I could get a bunch of other critical things but the process was really easy. I also update my health card, my driver's license, my license plates online with very little verification. I can send money from my bank through text messages or email.
And then for voting, in my country you actually have to display some ID to say you are who you say you are, but apparently showing ID is racist in the US so you just say you're someone and you can vote as if you are that person. Didn't 2020 have mail in voting without any real verification? None of that was a joke, it's true somehow.
So it's tough. You get up against these questions and often freedom of speech gets bent because there is a line where even under ideal constitutional law speech isn't protected because it appears to be intended to deceive and violate someone else's rights instead of being an expression of actual opinions or facts. I think reasonable people could come down on either side based on their personal experiences.
Trump ran with the meme, but when Obama was talking about Fake News, he was talking about news sites or chain emails containing things that were not true (and not "well maybe from a certain point of view" not true, but straight-up untrue things) and unsophisticated people accepting them as fact.
The other thing being, I'm not sure what the joke or meme would be -- it just looks like something played straight. It looks like a reasonably polished ad for something that would be useful but isn't real.
And I know comedy! I watched an Amy Shumer movie once!
The other thing being, I'm not sure what the joke or meme would be -- it just looks like something played straight. It looks like a reasonably polished ad for something that would be useful but isn't real.
And I know comedy! I watched an Amy Shumer movie once!
https://www.aier.org/article/how-government-prolonged-the-lobotomy/
In the process of doing research for a post I found this article, which is really chilling.
People talk about the prevalence of lobotomies, but with 94% of lobotomies being performed in public institutions after just a few months of an individual being committed, with the remaining 6% in private practices or asylums, and in those cases as a last case scenario after years of failed treatments. I don't think anything in the media ever properly portrays that.
In the process of doing research for a post I found this article, which is really chilling.
People talk about the prevalence of lobotomies, but with 94% of lobotomies being performed in public institutions after just a few months of an individual being committed, with the remaining 6% in private practices or asylums, and in those cases as a last case scenario after years of failed treatments. I don't think anything in the media ever properly portrays that.
I think this is one of them.
Honestly, I can't help but think it's sorta reasonable to call this not ok...
Imagine if a candidate you like didn't win and it was solely because someone convinced some part of the voter base to do something that wasn't voting. Imagine if a chunk of electioneering became trying to convince less sophisticated voters to do something that wasn't voting. I don't think that's a positive future.
Now, there could be an equal protection question here -- Were there similar posts on the other side of the political spectrum that were not prosecuted? If that's the case I think there's a constitutional argument to be made due to the differential enforcement, but as for whether the act itself is sanctionable conduct, I can't help but think it probably should be.
Honestly, I can't help but think it's sorta reasonable to call this not ok...
Imagine if a candidate you like didn't win and it was solely because someone convinced some part of the voter base to do something that wasn't voting. Imagine if a chunk of electioneering became trying to convince less sophisticated voters to do something that wasn't voting. I don't think that's a positive future.
Now, there could be an equal protection question here -- Were there similar posts on the other side of the political spectrum that were not prosecuted? If that's the case I think there's a constitutional argument to be made due to the differential enforcement, but as for whether the act itself is sanctionable conduct, I can't help but think it probably should be.
Rage Against the Machine cucked hard (maybe they always were), but they had some good lines in their music.
Mic Check asks: "Who has the power, that be my question; the priest, the book, or the congregation?"
People seeking power think if only they can get the book and become the priest they'll have power over the congregation. They don't realize that the congregation choose to follow the book, listen to the priest, and that can go away at any time -- then they're angry that the book and their collar means nothing as people turn away.
Mic Check asks: "Who has the power, that be my question; the priest, the book, or the congregation?"
People seeking power think if only they can get the book and become the priest they'll have power over the congregation. They don't realize that the congregation choose to follow the book, listen to the priest, and that can go away at any time -- then they're angry that the book and their collar means nothing as people turn away.
Fools don't realize the precedent they're setting right now.
A study in contrasts. "They're not gonna stop and they should not stop" vs. "Go home" -- In my view, the moment this pandora's box is successfully opened, it's coming for the idiots who opened it first.
A study in contrasts. "They're not gonna stop and they should not stop" vs. "Go home" -- In my view, the moment this pandora's box is successfully opened, it's coming for the idiots who opened it first.
Youtube showed me that video on autorotation, which I found really odd because I think the establishment media should be cast into a volcano to appease the almighty god of.... whatever needs to be appeased that week...
It isn't where they make their money, but letting something that important slip through their fingers really illustrates that they don't realize how much of their value lies in just holding intellectual property.
>While Yascorp may have allegedly waterboarded civilians in Latin Americ
Come on, who hasn't done *that*?
Come on, who hasn't done *that*?