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/)O
Posts
0
Comments
512
Joined
3 yr. ago

  • Unless I'm missing something new in later civs, the civilization series is missing the "real tine" part. Unless we're talking about the fact that it takes place during real time periods. Hah.

  • edit: original post was in response to another comment. My bad.

    Yeah, once it stops being collaborative, it becomes a problem. The original act of just proposing a stupid idea is fine, because it's collaborative, but as soon as one person (company,entity...) becomes too imposing to say no to, it's just bad times.

  • I don't, give me more amazing updates. Infinite updates.

  • We use oil and gas because it's the option that has been made most available to us. This isn't an individual problem. As long as the alternatives are prohibitively expensive for the average person, in terms of time, money, availability, etc, then we're going to always have the bulk of people choosing the easiest option.

    We all have so much to worry about each day, trying to fit biking to my job a 45 minute drive away just isn't feasible. The options for changing that are either we go fuckin full on anarchy, burn the system down, and start anew, or slowly, systematically. Set an easily achievable baseline the average person can work to adopt, encourage it via subsidization and education, and give it time.

  • I'd rather live with absolutely nothing than die forced to work for something I don't care about for an owner I've never seen not allowed to drink water that's right there, or take a break during the hottest parts of the day.

    Burn it down often isn't literal. They mean walk away, disrupt operations, make it impossible to continue. It won't be easy, for sure, but often, advocating for one's self hurts now to save a lot of pain in the future.

    I'd guess that a big part of the reason we don't see more people burning it down is this exact sentiment. People saying it won't solve all your problems. It won't be easy. It isn't possible. Maybe we should start empowering people. Do these things. Burn it. For us all.

  • No.

  • That's the nature of collaborative problem solving though. I've proposed some dumb ideas before. I'm sure you have too. There's nothing wrong with stupid ideas being proposed. The issues arise when you either are surrounded by yes-men or are too forceful and ignore the advice of everyone else.

  • It's not even that more people get in the way. A cake, and a baby, and in some ways dev work, take a set amount of time under which you just can't do, or you get an undercooked baby, or a miscarried cake.

  • The idea is that AM is more rugged, it'll be up when other more common forms of emergency communication is down. Internet and TV are both fragile, relatively speaking. FM covers less range. So yeah, while few people use it actively, when a true crisis hits, it's nice to have a stable fallback. ;)

  • Don't put words in my mouth. You're the one refusing to move past the fact that I chose to refer to your idea of a refund as part of the fine. Get back to me when you make an effort to understand the actual points I'm making. Actually, don't bother, you're not worth my time any longer.

  • Okay so you take issue with the 10% part. We can talk about that, for sure. I think 10% is low too. But you're attacking me as if I'm thinking it's all well and good they're doing this shit. It's not. We're on the same page philosophically, you just really don't like the specific terminology I'm using, and would rather argue than try to get to a common ground. Take care, bud.

  • Right. As I said, you can use the past to color your present, but the thing that matters presently is present actions and, to a lesser extent, words. So, judging him based on his actions during presidency, which should show us either his current beliefs or, at least, his willingness to listen to constituents.

    During his presidency, he's been... Well, I won't say stellar, but his actions have been more in line with someone who actually wants better, rather than someone who wants to cling to old habits. Again, could he do more, yes. But his record -recently- has been, for a politician, pretty good.

    You bring up the RAVE act. That was 20 years ago. 20 of the most eventful years in at least modern history. Do you think someone is incapable of change for 20 years? I know I've changed drastically just in the last 2 or 3 years. I mean, yeah, he's old, but I've seen old people change too. Might not come full revolution, change is slow, but again - any progress is worth acknowledging and celebrating.

    Is there something he's done during his presidency that leads you to believe he's still got those same values from prior? We can talk efficacy of some of his planned solutions, and some of his lack of a spine, but I think overall his actions are consistent with his words, in this regard.

  • See, this is EXACTLY my point. We all get obsessed over the things of the past, and while those can help inform us of the present, they're not actually the present.

    Yes, he was a proponent of the RAVE act. That's one of those "don't forget the bads" that I mentioned. We can accept that, and also accept that he seems to have lightened up on that BS in recent times.

    No one's perfect, everyone changes their minds about things. You did horrible things in your past too, almost certainly. That's not you, we can accept that, but for politicians it's this unchanging thing - you supported one thing, you will always continue supporting that thing.

    Let people grow. Let ideas be brought up, and shot down. Let mistakes be in the past, and start focusing on what's actually happening in the present.

  • He's had some policies I agree with, that move us towards a less police state level. I admit, I haven't followed him super closely, he's less interesting than things have been lately, but at least the federal decriminalization of marijuana and pardons (I know they were effectively useless, didn't really do anything - we can get into exactly why) show he's at least trying to do what constituents want, which is a far cry more than a lot of other politicians.

    Can he, should he, do more? Yeah. But credit where it's due, he seems like he's trying to steer two giant ships - his own past biases, and the United States political climate. Both of those are slow and hard to do, so anything moving in that direction should be celebrated.

  • Several? Hell id do thousands of times.

  • Because people want to. People like society. There's no shortage of people who would do whatever needs to be done to keep things running, they just don't want to be forced to.

    The things that end up dying? They're not important to society, and so we're wasting energy keeping them running. If it's important, people will do the work.

  • One of my go-tos for karaoke.

  • Remember, though, that people, opinions, and political landscapes can change. Yes, Biden was pretty shit back in the 90s, but it actually feels a little bit like he's trying to move back in the other direction. Don't gotta forget the bad, but also can't forget the (attempts at) good

  • Who actually cares what you call it? The point is, you remove whatever money they got from being shitty, and then hit them with a fine.

    Do you think 10% on top of the "refund" is not enough? I think that's got more teeth than any fines we use today. I can get behind it not being a steep enough penalty, but say that, instead of arguing over "refund" versus "fine" and "earnings" versus "acquisitions" or whatever terminology bugbear you have.