Hamartiogonic

joined 2 years ago
[–] Hamartiogonic@sopuli.xyz 3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

What if there was a federated platform for supporting the channels you like? Maybe something like Patreon? Or how about some sort of merch store for people who can sell the things they make?

[–] Hamartiogonic@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 week ago

And then there’s also emotional maturity. If you don’t process your unpleasant emotions, you’ll end up reacting in unhealthy and unbalanced ways.

[–] Hamartiogonic@sopuli.xyz 4 points 2 weeks ago

Turns out, asklemmy just banned that account for being a bot.

[–] Hamartiogonic@sopuli.xyz 2 points 2 weeks ago

The real tip is in the comments.

[–] Hamartiogonic@sopuli.xyz 8 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

Posting this much isn’t normal. Looks very fishy to me.

[–] Hamartiogonic@sopuli.xyz 6 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Like a cab, but it's your car and you take care of everything.

If you need a car only once a year when going to the airport, a cab will be cheaper. If you need to go somewhere at least once a week, driving your own car will be cheaper. Likewise, if you need only a little bit of cloud storage for your photos, free iCloud or Google Drive might be fine. If you need a whole lot of storage, self-hosting becomes cheaper.

When you take a cab, do you need to worry about maintenance, gasoline, insurance, or other things? No. The same goes for cloud storage. When you throw your photos on Google Drive, you don't need to worry about electricity bills, security updates, or hardware maintenance.

When you drive your own car, you need to be a responsible driver and a car owner. Maintenance is your responsibility. Likewise, self-hosting means you need to be a responsible server admin.

[–] Hamartiogonic@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Sounds like there’s also a lot of potential for soviet style gulags, forced labor camps, or basically just slavery. If that’s what USA is offering, many dictatorships would probably be glad to make a deal. Once USA figures out how to have gulgas on their own soil, the expenses will suddenly vanish entirely.

[–] Hamartiogonic@sopuli.xyz 3 points 1 month ago (3 children)

But isn’t that also a very expensive way to murder people? How can they afford a massive system like that?

[–] Hamartiogonic@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 month ago

On top of that, the rest of chemical industry is largely dependent on oil, with oil-based products literally everywhere. Even asphalt and bitumen used in road construction comes from crude oil. Lubricants, dyes, detergents, waxes and emulsifiers are also derived from oil, just to name a few.

Even when we develop clever new methods to manufacture all of these products from plant-based materials, the logistics chain to manage the volumes required by modern life is not there yet. Building this infrastructure will take a long time, just like it took decades to create the addiction we’re currently in.

[–] Hamartiogonic@sopuli.xyz 48 points 1 month ago (5 children)

The petrochemical industry has significant economies of scale, making it difficult to dethrone. Also, there are some shady political shenanigans to ensure its continued existence. Getting rid of oil is going to require some radical changes.

[–] Hamartiogonic@sopuli.xyz 5 points 2 months ago

You can totally have a "socialist worker's party" that is actually anti-Marxist. You can also privatize some state-owned enterprises to maximize profits while still calling it a socialist party. Might as well abolish the unions while you're at it. These labels are just marketing baits for luring in the working class.

The blueprint is out there, just look up the history of NSDAP, and you'll see what I mean.

[–] Hamartiogonic@sopuli.xyz 3 points 2 months ago

On the downside, they probably ended up spending more money and receiving less in return. If they bought their junk from Amazon, they also contributed to upholding poor labor practices. Nobody wins in this situation except for the corpos.

 

Have you noticed that many quotes attributed to famous people are actually incorrect? When someone sends me one of these fancy quotes of profound wisdom, it looks really suspicious to me if:

  1. It’s a picture (as in, not text in a technical sense)
  2. It’s attributed to someone famous
  3. There’s a picture of that person
  4. There’s no source

When I start looking into it, I usually end up reading a quote investigator article that says the original line was written a few hundred of years ago, got mutated many times along the way, and eventually was coupled with the name of someone like Nikola Tesla, Albert Einstein or whatever.

BTW I put that picture together using Imgflip’s meme generator. Seemed appropriate.

view more: next ›