Mustard

joined 1 year ago
[–] Mustard@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 month ago

This criticism only really works when it's a woman speaking of their personal experience with men, not when it's someone making a generalisation about all men.

Nothing was brought into the conversation, it was an all men/ not all men thing from the beginning.

[–] Mustard@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 3 months ago

Take that moffat you fuckin coward.

[–] Mustard@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Eh? State? Municipal? I'm talking about Wallingford in Oxfordshire.

[–] Mustard@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 3 months ago (3 children)

Wallingford huh, I worked on an industrial estate by a Lidl there and it fucking sucked.

[–] Mustard@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 4 months ago

Thanks for the formatting, helps me a lot. I'll do my best to have the discussion you want.

  • If it's your opinion it's your opinion. I don't think that 'wanting more power over more things' is something inherent to socialism. All governments take power over things when they think it's necessary. A particularly controversial example would be abortion restrictions. That is an extreme intrusion by a government into the literal organs of its citizens but to a religious capitalist it makes sense. Need more workers and more consumers after all.

  • I don't see that there's any meaningful difference between an interest free loan and a subsidy. Say the farmers don't pay up and ask for another loan, are you gonna starve on principle?

  • Lots is wrong with dirt roads, they're just inefficient. So much money and resource spent on fixing and maintaining vehicle suspensions and the extra time needed to go slowly which is all unnecessary with a proper road. I love trains but they can't do everything, we're not running tracks to every home in order for the mail train to come deliver your package etc.

As for private parties, this is also just the least efficient way to do things. Roads need to be compatible with each other, have the same spacings the same areas for communal services like electricity water and gas and so on. Who's gonna enforce all that with no profit motive? It would have to be a government entity, at which point the government might as well just build the roads in the first place and charge everyone a general usage fee, but since it's a government this is called 'Road tax' and is already implemented in most European countries. This isn't even socialism it's just the basics of what governments are for: taking care of 'societal chores'.

[–] Mustard@lemmy.blahaj.zone 17 points 4 months ago (3 children)

Your point is not very coherent, I'm struggling to understand you due to how much you've written and the lack of formatting.

Some brief things to pick out:

  • Corruption is not just a socialist thing it's everywhere. India has huge corruption problems and is capitalist.

  • Taxes are not 'accepted feudalism' they are the basis of communal living. Even anarcho-capitalists recognise the need for roads and farming subsidies.

  • You're right that good can be done in any system but the idea of all of this is to find a system that encourages good and discourages greed. If we could rely only on everyone just deciding to be good there would be no need for any politics. You'll notice this has never happened in millions of years of human existence.

[–] Mustard@lemmy.blahaj.zone 18 points 7 months ago

Yeah except the focal point of those mirrors is measured in meters not 100s of kilometers. You can't use them to focus on something that far away.

[–] Mustard@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Do you have a means of securely and reliably getting it? Cause I don't.

You really come across as coming from a place of privilege whilst lamenting that the reason poor people are worried about this is because they're just not as nice as you.

[–] Mustard@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 8 months ago (3 children)

Believe it or not I need to eat food. Crazy I know.

[–] Mustard@lemmy.blahaj.zone -3 points 9 months ago

They've all already done that haha. You could argue that a human has only one life in which to remix that art but an AI is theoretically immortal, so it's a different category of customer.

At any rate, it's clear that AI should not have free access to copyrighted works, like news articles, academic papers, stock images, and various kinds of non deviantart art.

[–] Mustard@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Unironically yes, if AI companies paid for training data everyone would be much happier.

I sincerely doubt that NOBODY is willing to sell data to them. It's far more likely that they have not offered anyone a fair price yet, which makes sense because that would set a precedent.

Even then, if people don't want to sell them their copyrighted work then tough. You can't compel people to take customers they don't want.

[–] Mustard@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 10 months ago

There's buttloads more states of matter than that dingus

 
 
view more: next ›