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/)D
Posts
0
Comments
117
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • No, only seen the show. Just a bit of nuking south america and water slavery. Seems optimistic enough, but perhaps the books show it's worse then it looks in the show. But the post asks about movies, not books.

  • We have an optimist here.

  • 🤣

  • I want a lot of things that I can't have. They can want it, but the system doesn't have to allow it or can discourage it.

  • I don't know in what context this parable is used in the book, but this does not explain the need for growth in reality. It does not even show why you would need growth in the parable. No matter how many chickens or how much wheat the village produces, there still wouldn't be more tokens.

  • Well, partially maybe. In the past, investors were happy with dividends instead of growth. There are extra factors making growth be preferable over dividends nowdays.

  • I think your are confusing company growth and prices growing, mixing them together.

  • no. You can pay interest out of your profits without growing. And many businesses don't have significant loans.

  • There are many answers to this.

    First, this is not a general capitalism thing. It is more the specific flavor we have. Second, it is not an absolute rule, there are companies that don't focus on growth, but it is rare amongst massive companies.

    The original idea of capital investment is that when you need investment for your company (e.g. to buy better machines, expand production, etc.) you let people invest (by buying shares) and then give them a portion of the profits gained from that investment (in the form of dividends).

    However, most companies have figured out that if they don't pay dividends but re-invest the money, shareholders are still happy because their shares get more valuable as the company grows and they get to grow the company, which is good for CEO paychecks and lot of other things.

    There are things like economies of scale (if you produce million units of something per year, it is almost always cheaper per unit than if you produce ten per year). So if you don't grow, your competitor that does grow could sell cheaper than you and put you out of business.

    And a lot more.

  • Care to elaborate?

  • I had a feeling playing the victim and name calling was coming next after your last message.

    But just in case anyone arguing in good faith needs it spelled out: Not every thing has to cater to every audience. Lemmy, at least for me, is primarily for sharing information, whether news, opinions or just memes. On such a site, I believe it is more important to avoid echo chambers and misinformation. So it requires a moderator or an admin to ban people. It's not as if Lemmy is an unmoderated hellscape, it just leans more towards free speech over creating perfectly safe spaces than you may like. Avoiding echo chambers and misinformation benefits all users, including minorities. Therefore, every site hast to find a balance for it's use-case. I would expect many people, whether minorities or otherwise, can handle occasional mean words or words they disagree with on their screens. But it is also alright if you are more sensitive or not in a good place psychologically and don't want to deal with this. There are other places on the internet you can go, that do have the kind of blocking you want. Some places will lean towards free speech, some towards heavy moderation. That's the great thing about the internet, not every place has to be the same.

  • Then go to a private platform. This is a platform for public discourse, not private communities.

    PS: You could even make a community on lemmy and ban people as it's moderator. Although a different platform may still be a better fit.

  • If you care what they are saying, you shouldn't block them. If you don't care, you shouldn't care they are commenting on you.

    I don't want other people being able to hide criticism of their posts/comments they don't like from me. Allowing you to completely block engagement with your posts would just strengthen echo chambers and bolster misinformation IMO.

  • I guess technically. This makes me wonder what actually qualify as stars. Do neutron stars? Do black holes?

    UPDATE: By the definitions on wikipedia, miriam-webster dictionary and britanica, a brown dwarf this cold may not actually qualify to be a star. I will search further for astronomical definition.

  • I just finished refining my Jellyfin setup. I use caddy as reverse proxy and use authelia as authentication in front of Jellyfin. This way only users logged in to authelia can access my Jellyfin. And there is an SSO plugin for jellyfin to avoid double login. The tricky part was getting apps to work.

  • So naive to think the bad guys did not steal the source code. The bad guys just don't share the zero days and the good guys don't get to see it.

  • Hmmm, you make an interesting case.

  • Tailscale now supports buying Mullvad subscription through them and using it with their app. So it solves this issue, although the control you have over your Mullvad tunnel is less and it misses some advanced Mullvad features. Still probably good enough for most people.

    I ended up going a different route by buying a VPS and hosting Caddy as reverse proxy. Then I only have my VPS and NAS on tailscale and other devices use the reverse proxy. This allows me to also share links to cloud files or other stuff I host with friends that are not on tailscale.

  • Feels like B, because it would be the easiest to migrate back to Europe. Technically that is also true for K but you are crazy if you think I am going to the land of biological horrors even for a few days, let alone few years.