Higher than the 2008 financial crisis?
But we were told it's the best economy in the history of the world?
But we were told it's the best economy in the history of the world?
I have a pet peeve when you order off the menu at a fast food place and they're like "oh, we don't have that."
Your menus are friggin TV screens, and sometimes the items that you don't have are the promotional item that you play a little video trying to get me to order! Just have it so that if you don't have the thing, the menu item doesn't show up! Usually I wouldn't have ordered the thing if it wasn't on your menu and you didn't have a promo for it!
Your menus are friggin TV screens, and sometimes the items that you don't have are the promotional item that you play a little video trying to get me to order! Just have it so that if you don't have the thing, the menu item doesn't show up! Usually I wouldn't have ordered the thing if it wasn't on your menu and you didn't have a promo for it!
I like hoe_math. He quietly introduces whole realms of PhD level pay hology in his work like it isn't even a thing.
I've felt the same -- the only people who should have no speech protection are those who want to silence others speech.
I heard he bought an entire truck or used shoes and forced Shelley Duvall to shine every last pair until he could see his face in the shoes.
I got in some big conversations with one crypto guy about this, and he's like "Oh, there's a power company in Colorado you can pay your power bill with bitcoin and a water company in singapore you can buy groceries from a company in the netherlands, you can use bitcoin as money!" and it's like... bud, you have to live in one place. You have to pay all your bills where you are, you can't buy your power from colorado and your water from singapore and your groceries from the netherlands.
Enlightenment rationality tells us to train our most intelligent people that the world is consistent and so if you find things that contradict each other and all things that matter can be flattened into believing one universal synthesis. This was an incredibly powerful worldview, because it helped us come up with Newtonian physics, which seemed to show a clockwork universe in line with enlightenment values.
In spite of being useful and intelligent, it is anti-wisdom, because to be rational and consistent is unwise in a world made at the quantum level of paradox.
Besides quantum mechanics at the very small level, we also come up with relativistic mechanics at the very large level which breaks Newtonian physics, which is quite unintuitive but I'm not going to talk about relativity right now.
What came next isn't necessarily any better, because instead of navigating all of the different things that are true at once, they just take one step into the fact that things can be contradictory and assume that nothing is true.
I mentioned the quantum level, and this is a good example where both of these views are wrong. At that level, things are true in ways that are sometimes contradictory, and we can't always know exactly what is true so we have to take our best guess at it, and in a lot of ways it's really difficult to pin anything down, but the important thing is in spite of that there are still rules that are followed, and so even though we might not be able to understand the objective truth it might not be knowable,it might not be measurable, it might not be intuitive, it might not be rational, might not be coherent, but it is absolutely true and by guiding ourselves towards what is true we can perform miracles.
In this case I'm talking about the stuff more like microchips than parting the Red Sea.
In spite of being useful and intelligent, it is anti-wisdom, because to be rational and consistent is unwise in a world made at the quantum level of paradox.
Besides quantum mechanics at the very small level, we also come up with relativistic mechanics at the very large level which breaks Newtonian physics, which is quite unintuitive but I'm not going to talk about relativity right now.
What came next isn't necessarily any better, because instead of navigating all of the different things that are true at once, they just take one step into the fact that things can be contradictory and assume that nothing is true.
I mentioned the quantum level, and this is a good example where both of these views are wrong. At that level, things are true in ways that are sometimes contradictory, and we can't always know exactly what is true so we have to take our best guess at it, and in a lot of ways it's really difficult to pin anything down, but the important thing is in spite of that there are still rules that are followed, and so even though we might not be able to understand the objective truth it might not be knowable,it might not be measurable, it might not be intuitive, it might not be rational, might not be coherent, but it is absolutely true and by guiding ourselves towards what is true we can perform miracles.
In this case I'm talking about the stuff more like microchips than parting the Red Sea.
"take that, Elon!"
Uh... Elon just sold a whole boatload of cyber truck body panels. He doesn't own those vehicles.
Uh... Elon just sold a whole boatload of cyber truck body panels. He doesn't own those vehicles.
It's kinda funny when you think about it that the boomers as a bloc flipped from 2007 to 2025 and are still directly opposed to the young as a bloc.
I think fascism is a self fulfilling prophecy under modernism.
Fascism is made a carry-all for anything people don't like, so we have to assume something is fascist when it has attributes of fascism. This includes state worship, censorship of opposing views, expansionism, militarism, and reliance on violence. It might at first glance look like fascism is dead, but these attributes still live under the surface. I'm using a definition here closer to Umberto Eco’s “Ur-Fascism” essay than the definition I previously laid out as "state socialism" because if we use the latter definition, it becomes almost axiomatic, it's not even worth discussing at that point -- of course everything ends up being totalized under the state, it just does. This is also a distinct definition from Italian fascism, because if one narrowly defines fascism in this way then neither German national socialism nor Franco's Spain are fascist and neither is anything that is not explicitly Italian fascism. I think it's important to note that's the both incredibly narrow and incredibly expansive definitions of fascism are in part a dialectical tool that lets people assign anything and everything the label. This also means it's true fascism isn't a very useful label unless the definition is given up-front since it's intentional that different audiences use definitions in the same conversation.
Modernism is about finding a single coherent objective truth and building a single grand narrative.
It leads to a false certainly of black and white views of the world in a real world that has shades of grey and also many other colors as well.
When you know you're right and everyone else is wrong, totalitarianism is justified because you're saving the people who don't know any better. Militaristic expansion is justified because you're ultimately saving the people you expand into. Genocide is justified because the good people need to save the world from the bad people. Worshipping the state is justified because it is a tool to enforce the totalizing good ideology vs. the evil ideology.
Postmodernism is a reaction to this and rejects grand narratives and objective truth, but in practice it becomes modernized, an objective truth and trans narrative in and of itself.
Of course, fascism can hide under a veneer of civility. It can be expansionist and nationalistic as long as it's expansionism is Machiavellian instead of overtly aggressive. It can be nationalistic by redefining the nation as a meta-nation which exerts overwhelming control over member states. It can be violent and censorious as long as it follows certain rules in its violence or censorship.
For what postmodern fascism looks like, look at the "rules based international order" and it's reaction to Donald Trump, brexit, AfD, and the war in Ukraine.
It uses violence and censorship to silence opposing views.
It seeks to expand itself (I've even seen the idea of the EU consuming Canada in response to the "threat" of Donald Trump!)
It doubles down on more government control.
It presents anyone who doesn't agree as totally "ontologically evil"
And in Ukraine, the intention was to pretend the new global order is not militaristic, but the moment the United States says they might not want to play war anymore it's a global outcry.
If you're a modernist you'd take the above and declare the current world order evil and probably start railing against it, but all you do is replace one absolute for another. In reality we need to balance multiple, often contradictory, truths among reach other. That's why a more advanced worldview is both more accurate in estimating the world and weaker in terms of rallying people under a single banner -- complex and nuanced solutions that actually take multiple things into account are more correct, but resist being reduced into a slogan or a tweet.
Fascism is made a carry-all for anything people don't like, so we have to assume something is fascist when it has attributes of fascism. This includes state worship, censorship of opposing views, expansionism, militarism, and reliance on violence. It might at first glance look like fascism is dead, but these attributes still live under the surface. I'm using a definition here closer to Umberto Eco’s “Ur-Fascism” essay than the definition I previously laid out as "state socialism" because if we use the latter definition, it becomes almost axiomatic, it's not even worth discussing at that point -- of course everything ends up being totalized under the state, it just does. This is also a distinct definition from Italian fascism, because if one narrowly defines fascism in this way then neither German national socialism nor Franco's Spain are fascist and neither is anything that is not explicitly Italian fascism. I think it's important to note that's the both incredibly narrow and incredibly expansive definitions of fascism are in part a dialectical tool that lets people assign anything and everything the label. This also means it's true fascism isn't a very useful label unless the definition is given up-front since it's intentional that different audiences use definitions in the same conversation.
Modernism is about finding a single coherent objective truth and building a single grand narrative.
It leads to a false certainly of black and white views of the world in a real world that has shades of grey and also many other colors as well.
When you know you're right and everyone else is wrong, totalitarianism is justified because you're saving the people who don't know any better. Militaristic expansion is justified because you're ultimately saving the people you expand into. Genocide is justified because the good people need to save the world from the bad people. Worshipping the state is justified because it is a tool to enforce the totalizing good ideology vs. the evil ideology.
Postmodernism is a reaction to this and rejects grand narratives and objective truth, but in practice it becomes modernized, an objective truth and trans narrative in and of itself.
Of course, fascism can hide under a veneer of civility. It can be expansionist and nationalistic as long as it's expansionism is Machiavellian instead of overtly aggressive. It can be nationalistic by redefining the nation as a meta-nation which exerts overwhelming control over member states. It can be violent and censorious as long as it follows certain rules in its violence or censorship.
For what postmodern fascism looks like, look at the "rules based international order" and it's reaction to Donald Trump, brexit, AfD, and the war in Ukraine.
It uses violence and censorship to silence opposing views.
It seeks to expand itself (I've even seen the idea of the EU consuming Canada in response to the "threat" of Donald Trump!)
It doubles down on more government control.
It presents anyone who doesn't agree as totally "ontologically evil"
And in Ukraine, the intention was to pretend the new global order is not militaristic, but the moment the United States says they might not want to play war anymore it's a global outcry.
If you're a modernist you'd take the above and declare the current world order evil and probably start railing against it, but all you do is replace one absolute for another. In reality we need to balance multiple, often contradictory, truths among reach other. That's why a more advanced worldview is both more accurate in estimating the world and weaker in terms of rallying people under a single banner -- complex and nuanced solutions that actually take multiple things into account are more correct, but resist being reduced into a slogan or a tweet.
Honestly, minetest with mineclonia is so damn good now I have no need for Minecraft (I own a copy, but it just doesn't make any sense to play it)
Even people with money don't keep their money in money since they're not retarded.
I bet more millionaires than you think live in their overdraft.
I bet more millionaires than you think live in their overdraft.
All we wanted was a hollowed out side of a mountain shaped like a skull with lava coming out of the eyes so we could store retirement documents, and we can't even have that one thing!
I feel like if the conservatives were smart they'd be pointing out that this is the natural consequences of acting like a bunch of little mean girl bitches for the past 10 years.
Hey, Liberals and NDP -- I think there's someone in Nunavut you hate that you haven't called "Canada's Donald Trump" yet, better go off and do that.
Hey, Liberals and NDP -- I think there's someone in Nunavut you hate that you haven't called "Canada's Donald Trump" yet, better go off and do that.
[Admin mode] I was getting pretty annoyed that we weren't getting streaming updates and I wasn't seeing notifications without a refresh, so I looked into it and found something that needed to be cleaned up in the reverse proxy config to fix streaming. Looks like it's working now.
Behind the scenes, we're fully on http3 now, which I probably talked about before but I still think it's a really cool protocol -- it's done using UDP, and it takes way less time to send content because it doesn't establish a connection so there's a bunch fewer hops.
Behind the scenes, we're fully on http3 now, which I probably talked about before but I still think it's a really cool protocol -- it's done using UDP, and it takes way less time to send content because it doesn't establish a connection so there's a bunch fewer hops.
It's the same mechanism, you're basically leapfrogging the galvanic series by putting something with a better potential for ions to chip away at instead of your iron. With a sacrificial anode you're basically making a battery, but you could just as easily use a power supply and do the same thing.
Both forms of corrosion protection do behave differently depending on water type including water hardness.
Both forms of corrosion protection do behave differently depending on water type including water hardness.