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/)TE
testfactor @lemmy.world
Posts 0
Comments 301
Biden introduces Zelenskiy as ‘President Putin’ at Nato summit
  • Heck, 15 years ago, way back in 2009, Obama said, "During the second hundred days, I will learn to go off the teleprompter and Joe Biden will learn to stay on the teleprompter."

    The dude hasn't been able to keep his words straight for a while...

    But the timing is... very poor to say the least...

  • 'I'm not leaving': Biden expands effort to tamp down calls to step aside
  • I think it might be a bit of a bold assumption that everyone who thinks Biden is too old to do an effective job and should step aside is a huge Trump supporter.

    There are plenty of people who hate Trump with a passion that thinks Biden isn't up to the task of winning this election.

  • Do billionaires work monday to friday like all 9-5s?
  • Okay, to be clear, are you arguing that the dichotomy we are choosing between is Notch becoming a billionaire or a corporation reaping the benefits of his labor? I think if those are the options, I prefer the universe where Notch is a billionaire, lol.

    I don't think that's what you're saying, but I'll admit I've read your comment a few times, and couldn't really latch on to what you point was.

    But to just free associate off of what you said, I think there's a lot of value to many in the safety of a job vs the life of an entrepreneur. I'm in that situation myself. I know I could easily make 1.5-2x my current salary if I just stood up and LLC and did all my work as a 1099 employee. I'd be able to keep all my current clients and basically nothing would change. I could set my own hours and not have a boss to answer to. But it comes with a lot fewer safety nets, and it means that all the unpleasantness and risk of "running a business" would all fall on me.

    Am I running the risk that I could build a billion dollar product and giving all that surplus capital to my company? Sure. But the odds of that are terribly low, and honestly, it's a gamble I'm more than willing to take to avoid having to deal with the overhead and risk of striking out on my own with no top cover.

  • Do billionaires work monday to friday like all 9-5s?
  • The issue is that becoming a billionaire has more to do with being lucky than it does with direct exploitation.

    If everyone in the US chipped 5 dollars into a pool, and it was randomly given to one person, that person would be a billionaire.

    And yes, they have a huge concentration of other people's labor represented in that cash. But the person who won the pool isn't a bad person because of that. They didn't exploit anyone themselves. Just because someone somewhere at some point under capitalism was exploited, that doesn't lay the moral condemnation at the feet of the lottery winner.

  • Do billionaires work monday to friday like all 9-5s?
  • Sure, but that argument is specious as hell, right? Like, if everyone in the United States decided to give you a $5 bill, does that instantly make you a bad person who exploited labor to get where you are?

    "There is no ethical consumption under capitalism" is simply a rhetorical device to outline the flaws in the system. It completely breaks down when used as justification to villainize someone.

    Your position could be equally stated as, "anyone who has more money than me is a worse person than me, and anyone with less money than me is a better person than me." It's a misuse of the "no ethical consumption" idea on its face.

  • Do billionaires work monday to friday like all 9-5s?
  • A fair point. It's been a while since then. I didn't recall that.

    That said, he's just an easy example. There's a few other people who could be used. There's a billionaire who was an early Bitcoin adopter for example.

    And it certainly would have been possible for Notch to become a billionaire without hiring people. The company only had 25 employees in 2014, and was doing $330million in revenue every year. There's certainly a path he could have tread to still becoming a billionaire without hiring anyone.

    It would have been harder, taken longer, and not been as profitable for sure, but doable.

  • Do billionaires work monday to friday like all 9-5s?
  • Sure, but if that's the argument, then everyone who has ever bought a laptop that shipped with Windows on it is equally guilty.

    Perhaps even moreso. Those people are giving money to Microsoft. He took a billion dollars away from them.

    But like, this is classic motte and baily. Your initial position was "all billionaires exploit labor for profit," but when under scrutiny you just retreat to "there is no ethical consumption under capitalism, so he's guilty by virtue of simply participating in the system."

  • Do billionaires work monday to friday like all 9-5s?
  • You're moving the goalposts though, you realize that right?

    Your initial position was that you have to have exploited people to be worth a billion dollars (with an implicit "directly exploited," since if you can't make any money without indirectly exploiting people, which would make your point even more pedantic than I'm being.)

    Other people later exploiting others to profit off your product is irrelevant. Hell, it'd be irrelevant if you made your billion dollars and then started exploiting people yourself. You still would have, in fact, become a billionaire without exploiting people to do so.

  • Do billionaires work monday to friday like all 9-5s?
  • Notch is a billionaire. He made Minecraft as a solo project, it became what it was, then he sold it to Microsoft.

    Not saying that most billionaires didn't get there via exploitation, but I don't think it's a strict prerequisite.

  • How to make an EV tire that won’t pollute the environment
  • Why not just compare the model 3 to an 18-wheeler then? Those weigh way more. Would have made his point better.

    And it's a completely meaningful comparison, as long as you throw away the fact that different vehicles are used for different things.

  • How do you stop feeling the desire to be in a relationship?
  • Do you do those things because you truly get enjoyment out of them, or are they simply your drug of choice to help you cope through to the next day?

    Those are all things that can be enjoyed in a healthy way certainly, but if it's just "wake up, work, binge internet, sleep," every day, then I'm afraid you have a problem. Maybe not a full blown addiction, but at least an extremely unhealthy coping mechanism for some deeper underlying issues.

    This is something that you can work on though. Ideally with the help of a professional therapist who can help you identify why you feel the need to cope in this way and help you start breaking those destructive patterns in your life.

  • How do you stop feeling the desire to be in a relationship?
  • You say you don't like anything or give up on everything, but what does that look like? I assume that you don't spend 8+ hours every day staring at a blank wall. You must do something to fill your time.

    But if you are truly finding it difficult/impossible to be interested in the world around you, then your issue isn't that you don't have a girlfriend my dude. It sounds like you're suffering from pretty severe depression.

    And I hate to break it to you, but untreated mental illness is definitely a mood killer, and not just with the ladies. You're gonna need to get yourself into a better place, or you're gonna drive more than just romantic partners away.

    But I'll tell you, you're awfully fatalistic for 35. Women tend to pretty holistically prefer guys in the 33-40 bracket. You're not past your prime in the slightest. A little self confidence and a little investment in the world around you, and I think you'll find that you will attract people no problem.

    And hey, maybe I'm wildly off base. I know I'm making a lot of assumptions based off a very small paragraph. And maybe I'm reading you super wrong. If so, I apologize.

    One thing to keep in mind though. The idea of a relationship and sex you have in your head? That's a fantasy. Both are great things certainly, but when I was younger I feel like I built them up to be something deifying in my head. That once I had them, all my greatest desires would be met, and that life would be finally "complete" for me.

    Understand that relationships are work. Fulfilling work, but work nonetheless. They require just as much "sticking to it" as any hobby that you haven't stuck with, if not substantially more. And let me tell you, you're absolutely not going to want to do it all the time. It requires a lot of dedication and perseverance.

    And don't build up sex to something more than it is. Its great, certainly, but I promise you're putting it on a higher pedestal in your head than it deserves.

    But all that to say, right now, you're in love with the idea of a relationship, not the reality of one. I'm confident that you'd find the reality to not be what you've dreamed of it. And the problems and struggles you have in your life are rarely made easier by adding more work and responsibilities.

    Take care of yourself and get to a point where you love yourself and the world around you as it is, and I think you'll find that the rest of this will kind of take care of itself.

  • Trump world reportedly flirts with a return to mandatory military service.
  • What about it being mandated makes it unethical?

    Is it the "military" part of it? Cause I think that neither of us are proposing this as a "fight and die" thing.

    If it's just the mandate in general, would you say taxes are unethical? It's the government taking a portion of the fruits of your labor for civic gain.

    Is mandatory schooling unethical? It's the government mandating what you do with your life in large part between the ages of 6 and 17.

    I just fail to see what makes this meaningfully different from any number of things that we already happily accept.

  • Trump world reportedly flirts with a return to mandatory military service.
  • I mean, I still prefer my pitch to yours, but I wouldn't be sad with your idea either.

    I don't think your pitch really combats the "people won't actually want to do the work" issue. I think in either example you'll have a lot of people who are "just here so I don't get fined," as it were.

    But I think you're overstating that issue in either case. Will it have that issue, sure. But so does the military writ large. Does it impact efficiency, sure. But making an efficient, well oiled machine isn't exactly the point.

    But other than that, reading your proposal again, I kinda think that the only thing that makes your proposal different from mine is the mandatory nature of the service.

    The benefits you outlined are commensurate with the lower enlisted ranks in the military, so like, yeah, that's what I'm proposing I guess.

    I think the benefits of forcing people to leave their bubbles justifies the forced nature of mandatory service. It a means of helping young people escape cycles of abuse, and exposing them to other cultures. It's also a great equalizer, in that it effects poor and rich alike, where your system ends up just admitting poor people who are desperate (not unlike the military as it stands.)

    I'd also be open to having a program option where you can defer up to 5yrs to pursue a college degree if it's in a relevant field (civil engineering, etc) and do your mandatory service afterwards utilizing those skills. The program still pays for that college time but gets relevant use out of you at the end. This prevents people who know what they want to do from having to delay and gives them relevant job experience right out of the gate as a resume builder.