consteval

7 ms·

91.
by consteval 2y ago
I think they’re genuinely unaware of this because many, maybe most, people who analyze risk casually don’t think about ease or probability. Because it’s easier that way, and typically allows them to maintain some beliefs about personal free
92.
by consteval 2y ago
> Letting people go should not meaningfully decrease the efficacy of these institutions in the long term. I disagree, of course it will meaningfully decrease the efficacy. The purpose of DOGE is to dismantle organizations which provide a
93.
by consteval 2y ago
The production side of things comes from exploitation - the US is the strongest imperialist force in the world. We don’t just exploit the periphery, we also exploit our own citizens to the maximum they can bear.
94.
by consteval 2y ago
IMO his expansion of the government was a best case scenario. The US was quickly barreling towards a socialist revolution. Any other president, particularly a greedy ultra-capitalist, would’ve stoked that flame. The American people were ang
95.
by consteval 2y ago
You can achieve the need to do something by forming human connections. Mutual necessity between people, a form of fulfillment that long predates any economy. We have the unfortunate combination of being uniquely individualistic and with too
96.
by consteval 2y ago
Rent isn’t optional, most things are. For things that are optional, which is really a sliding scale, we do see consumers just stop consuming. I can’t not consume rent, that’s never an option.
97.
by consteval 2y ago
Or, less pessimistic, a lot of people are happy to consume human relationships all day. That’s what life has always been about for a large segment of people, going back thousands of years. Media is more or less a bandaid. People are busy, p
98.
by consteval 2y ago
Hyper-consumerism took off in the US because it’s a false economic indicator. It makes lines go up, but doesn’t materially improve anyone’s lives. We’re seeing the effects of ~70 years of hyper-consumerist behavior. It worked for a while, b
99.
by consteval 2y ago
I concur. The US has taken an “anything goes” approach to speech and clearly it hasn’t helped us. In fact, it’s only allowed disinformation to spread. I mean, Jan 6th is directly the result of an “all speech is equal” approach. Intuitively
100.
by consteval 2y ago
Au contraire, project 2025 is very detailed and has clear paths to reach their (the heritage foundation, conservatives at large) goals. It’s just that the goal sucks for everyday people. Why would these powerful people want goals that suck?
101.
by consteval 2y ago
Yes, return to monkey. And, somehow, this will make life… better?
102.
by consteval 2y ago
Text, images, and things of that class - human communication tools - are much higher level than guns. Human communication tools are responsible for, say, the holocaust. At its core, you can distill the holocaust to that. Or choose any trage
103.
by consteval 2y ago
Everyone misses this all the time. Most problems can be overlooked because they’re not that prolific. There’s a chain of events that really hinges on that assumption. For example, piracy is really not a problem. In fact I’m pro-piracy most
104.
by consteval 2y ago
You’re being purposefully dishonest, as none of this is what I’ve said. You can’t just ignore what I wrote and fill in something that is easier for you to argue - this makes you look unbelievably stupid.
105.
by consteval 2y ago
It makes zero sense to claim Trump was referring to transgenic mice because nobody cares about that, regardless of political affiliation. He attempted a bit of misinformation, which characterizes most of his address. Certainly, his supporte
106.
by consteval 2y ago
IMO it does, that’s the difference between a sedan and an SUV for a lot of brands.
107.
by consteval 2y ago
> This person is pregnant. From this fact alone we can infer the presence of a female reproductive system. No, no you can't. You can in 99% of circumstances, but not absolutely. They may also have a penis, or testicles, or any combi
108.
by consteval 2y ago
> Similarly, a pregnant woman who for whatever reason has decided to call herself a man is, in reality, still a pregnant woman. Uh, no. Just according to you. “Woman” isn’t easy to just say like that, there’s no one definitive way to tel
109.
by consteval 2y ago
> but the top 10% ALREADY pay 76% of federal personal income taxes Right, which comes out to, oh I don't know... say, 0 dollars if you're a billionaire? These people have no income, they have wealth. The wealth is completely un
110.
by consteval 2y ago
Because we, no matter how arrogant, cannot predict the future. Putin could have a heart attack. He might be assassinated by an insider. The soldiers may even decide the war isn't worth fighting. Putin is not a God, he is a man. The cir
111.
by consteval 2y ago
You can verify who someone is without knowing specifically who "who" refers to. We do it all the time. I give a one-time code to service X and it knows I am who I say I am, but the code I gave is virtually worthless information. A
112.
by consteval 2y ago
According to you. Not according to the trans-men who have undergone c-sections. Whether that is happening or not is not debatable - there are people who identify as trans-men who have gotten c-sections. Just as the sky is blue. The question
113.
by consteval 2y ago
A better analogy is that algorithms are designed to be feedback loops that trigger extremely positive or negative emotions in people. Meaning, they are addiction machines. Allowing minors access to addiction machines is like allowing them a
114.
by consteval 2y ago
Right, because we don’t perform c-sections on pregnant raccoons in hospitals. The term is perfectly inclusive. It includes everyone it should, women, trans men, etc, and nobody it shouldn’t, like raccoons. Your term isn’t like that, which i
115.
by consteval 2y ago
The problem here is that you’re hand-waving people’s identity behind what you believe it “should” be - which isn’t actually easy to tell! You can have ovaries, XY chromosomes, eggs, male characteristics, and on and on and on in infinite per
116.
by consteval 2y ago
I think it’s more complicated - this feels like a psychology and biology issue. Those things are naturally closer to them which then means they generate stronger emotions. Just intuitively, emotions fuel pretty much all decisions. I mean, i
117.
by consteval 2y ago
… and then 40% of the GDP comes from the public sector. Centralized systems are more efficient by definition, it’s why the public sector can seemingly magically multiply money where the private sector cannot.
118.
by consteval 2y ago
Counterfeit meaning not the product they actually paid for. For example, an RTX 3050 probably had thing margins when it came out (or some equivalent GPU with low margins). But! You can still counterfeit it and put in a GT 430 and have the s
119.
by consteval 2y ago
They could do that, but it’s in direct contradiction to the free market. When you implement protocols, what you’re doing is enacting a non-compete agreement on those specifications. It’s a collusion of sorts, it’s just one we allow because
120.
by consteval 2y ago
I don’t think it’s unlikable at all for the government to shrink - in fact, I see it as very likely. But not for the reasons you think. I think it’s likely because the most powerful people in our society would become more powerful. Certainl

More ›