I tend to disagree on the basis that something new is often derived from something old, and if everything old is owned and locked up by someone then that means you can't derive anything new from anything old and thus have to come up with everything from scratch.
The Divine comedy draws heavily upon the works of the greeks and the romans, as well as contemporary for the time christian ideas, and it's widely considered one of the most greatest works of all time.
More recently, a lot of writers got their start writing fan fiction, and the massively popular 50 shades of gray started off as a twilight fan fiction (which itself draws upon lore about werewolves and vampires)
There's a line somewhere that you stop getting more works by the limited time monopoly and start inhibiting works that are stifled by those monopolies owning generations of our stories.
The Divine comedy draws heavily upon the works of the greeks and the romans, as well as contemporary for the time christian ideas, and it's widely considered one of the most greatest works of all time.
More recently, a lot of writers got their start writing fan fiction, and the massively popular 50 shades of gray started off as a twilight fan fiction (which itself draws upon lore about werewolves and vampires)
There's a line somewhere that you stop getting more works by the limited time monopoly and start inhibiting works that are stifled by those monopolies owning generations of our stories.
I don't think it necessarily needs people to get it right for Liberty to win. Are we really need is for one group to lack a monopoly on power, and that balance of power will help prevent anyone from pushing too hard because it'll just push everyone else in the arms of someone else.
I don't want theocracy anymore than you do, but thankfully the right has a lot more than one faction included within it. You've got the red pillers, the petersonians, the theocrats, the libertarians, and I tend to think as long as there's a coalition there and an opposition there will be compromises that give more people a little of what they want and that'll look like more freedom overall. That is in contrast to ideological homogeneity where you're free to be exactly what everyone else is like.
I don't want theocracy anymore than you do, but thankfully the right has a lot more than one faction included within it. You've got the red pillers, the petersonians, the theocrats, the libertarians, and I tend to think as long as there's a coalition there and an opposition there will be compromises that give more people a little of what they want and that'll look like more freedom overall. That is in contrast to ideological homogeneity where you're free to be exactly what everyone else is like.
It's a pretty good suggestion that people should take up arms against commies, since that ideology has murdered more people than every other ideology in human history combined...
But I suspect what is intended was "oh you need to fight the people I call nazis because I don't like them!"
But I suspect what is intended was "oh you need to fight the people I call nazis because I don't like them!"
I've been asked a few times about whether 2024 is going to be a better year than 2023.
My prediction for 2024 is the massive undeniable recession hits hard. Economically it's going to be hard for everyone... It already is and has been.
On the other hand, I think that it could be a massive win on a bunch of other fronts. Culturally, I think that freedom has passed its nadir and is on the upswing, even if we dont feel it much yet. The forces keeping authoritarianism alive are now feeling the pull of gravity because authoritarians tend to be incompetent, and they believe their own hype.
Spending the time developing family relationships, and personal relationships, communities, nurturing my son, making plans for all kinds of activities this year that don't rely on economic throughput to be fulfilling. I've made a lot of progress on my next book, I would like to see if I can get that done before the end of 2024.
Materialism is an incorrect ideology. You can get every bit of stuff in the world that you ever wanted, and it won't make you happy. Stuff doesn't really matter. What matters is relationships, setting personal goals and either achieving them or doing your best to try to achieve them, and fighting to live a life that you can be proud of regardless of your material circumstances.
So even though our material situation will be I expect worse in 2024 than 2023, I expect 2024 to be a much better year because we are achieving, and we are learning, and we are building.
My prediction for 2024 is the massive undeniable recession hits hard. Economically it's going to be hard for everyone... It already is and has been.
On the other hand, I think that it could be a massive win on a bunch of other fronts. Culturally, I think that freedom has passed its nadir and is on the upswing, even if we dont feel it much yet. The forces keeping authoritarianism alive are now feeling the pull of gravity because authoritarians tend to be incompetent, and they believe their own hype.
Spending the time developing family relationships, and personal relationships, communities, nurturing my son, making plans for all kinds of activities this year that don't rely on economic throughput to be fulfilling. I've made a lot of progress on my next book, I would like to see if I can get that done before the end of 2024.
Materialism is an incorrect ideology. You can get every bit of stuff in the world that you ever wanted, and it won't make you happy. Stuff doesn't really matter. What matters is relationships, setting personal goals and either achieving them or doing your best to try to achieve them, and fighting to live a life that you can be proud of regardless of your material circumstances.
So even though our material situation will be I expect worse in 2024 than 2023, I expect 2024 to be a much better year because we are achieving, and we are learning, and we are building.
There is a concept in maintenance where people think if you maintain a thing more it'll always get more reliable, but in reality even skilled practicioners can take something that worked and walk away with something that doesn't work, so you have to balance the risk of failure with the residual risk of maintenance. More often than not, you just let the failure happen because you can't mitigate some risks and by trying you introduce more risks. By understanding this you can do less maintenance and get more reliability.
I've always applied this logic to medicine as well ...
I've always applied this logic to medicine as well ...
All things considered, that's kind of exceptional.
It obviously hope that nobody gets hurt or is trapped, but at the beginning of the post I expected things to be way worse
It obviously hope that nobody gets hurt or is trapped, but at the beginning of the post I expected things to be way worse
I'm deeply saddened by the fact that so many previously funny interesting people gave it all up to become the fact that they don't like one guy.
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.