[-] [email protected] 12 points 2 years ago

Any chance that they'll disavow it?

[-] [email protected] 15 points 2 years ago

I don't know and I've asked myself the same question, but I think you should try kombucha if you haven't. It doesn't taste the exact same but it's the closest thing I know of to what you're looking for

[-] [email protected] 13 points 2 years ago

slippery slope fallacy

[-] [email protected] 13 points 2 years ago

reduced access to treats = life is harder

[-] [email protected] 15 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

yeah a well executed punch definitely doesn't need to have your whole body strength behind it in order to fuck someone up, and whatever lands is infinitely more damaging than what doesn't

I'd also recommend training combat sports. even if you never end up in a violent altercation the compound benefits are fucking amazing

[-] [email protected] 13 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

The real kicker is that there are plenty of good theoretical applications for blockchain technology and all we get are shitty investment commodities and grifts

The technology never gets employed to a productive end because the entrepreneurs are in charge of deploying it

[-] [email protected] 13 points 2 years ago

save for the few who experienced the interactive documentary known as "stalker shadow of chernobyl"

[-] [email protected] 15 points 2 years ago

DRY means Do Repeat Yourself, when the alternative is cooking up some awful OOP abstraction

[-] [email protected] 14 points 2 years ago

Just you wait Donald Trump is so done after this mugshot he might as well be called DONE-ald Trump or should I say Drumpf

[-] [email protected] 12 points 2 years ago

I'm told there is a H scene haha, according to a friend, or least that's what I've heard

[-] [email protected] 13 points 2 years ago

Where's my 3 hour long Mario character study directed by Paul T. Anderson

Starring Joaquin Phoenix as both Wario and Waluigi

[-] [email protected] 14 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Frankly, you seem like a decent enough person. I see no point in being condescending anymore. But before we seriously talk about housing, we have at least two hard problems to solve. The first being :

without devolving to "I have a philosophical disagreement"

It may very well lead to that. If I believe that not only housing but also housing security are inalienable human rights, and you instead believe that these things should be earned, then what we have there is a hard contradiction. If you and I agree on that, and you happen to believe that capitalism with well implemented reforms is the best way to achieve that goal, then we could get somewhere.

Even better if you have a real alternative for people that doesn't involve stealing people's property.

This also poisons the well a little bit. When the French overthrew their monarchy, they effectively "stole" land from the royal family and privatized it. Was that going too far, in a nation where serfdom was practiced? In other words, are property rights more important to you than human rights?

Conversely, when the soviet union collapsed, how do you think all that land was de-collectivized? Did they go back in time to 1917 and retrieve all the deeds of long-since-dead people, trace their descendants and just give the land to them? What if those descendants did not exist? No, what happened was : gangs armed with AKs and armored vehicles roamed the streets and enforced their claims. The Russia we know of today is the product of that period of time.

They are not unique in that way. In the western world, probably every single inch of private land was at some point under the dominion of a now-extinct polity and taken by force of arm. Is there a statute of limitations on "stealing" land? It's kind of a big question right now, since we're re-litigating the status of native Americans and all that stuff.

Now, if I argue that our economies should serve humanity rather than the other way around, are we in agreement?

If I argue that the simultaneous existence of empty houses and unhoused people on its own should be interpreted as a massive failure of our economic system, are we in agreement?

I suggested earlier that repeating strong and succinct messages was far more effective at shattering axioms than any form of long-winded debate. You interpreted that as promoting demagogy, and I can't really blame you. Still, we can argue if we are comrades. Otherwise we're in conflict. Does that make more sense now?

view more: ‹ prev next ›

ennemi

0 post score
0 comment score
joined 2 years ago