NoneOfUrBusiness
@NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io
- Comment on [deleted] 2 days ago:
I mean, it has. The history of liberalism is the history of the 1% violencing the bottom 50% into submission.
- Comment on [deleted] 2 days ago:
You don't need more than that.
Counterpoint: Homes in many places cost more than that. Retirement too. There's a good cutoff for a wealth maximum, but 1 million ain't it.
- Comment on Heave-ho! 2 days ago:
Aren't women's pants (other than leggings) with pockets very rare? How do you even have enough of a sample size to draw conclusions about this? Besides, women who decide (or never got to decide) against getting pants aith pockets wouldn't complain about the pockets, would they?
- Comment on At this point, what should we do about the ICE raids? If an ICE agent breaks in without a warrant or holds you at gunpoint, what do you do? 3 days ago:
ICE don't care about the law, as evidenced by everything they've done ever.
- Comment on Heave-ho! 3 days ago:
That's a fair point, I could've said that in a less condescending way, but "customers don't know what they want" is an important piece of the puzzle here.
- Comment on Heave-ho! 3 days ago:
I mean, customers not knowing what they want is a thing. When someone says "I'd like it if this thing had that functionality," they're not necessarily considering all the externalities that might make their preference less desirable. What women have now sucks, but according to a large majority the alternative sucks even more, so the status quo persists.
- Comment on Heave-ho! 3 days ago:
I mean sure, that's why I said "most women" and not "all women." There is real demand for women's pants with pockets, but (especially after the more committed folks buy unisex or men's pants) the scale isn't enough to sustain a large business. That aside, do cargo pants not work if you want pockets?
- Comment on Heave-ho! 3 days ago:
My source here is basically Reddit so I'm not sure how true this is, but I've heard multiple times that businessmen occasionally try to invest in women's pants with pockets but they don't get enough demand to make a profit. There are still some who have managed to make money this way so there are places that sell pants with pockets, but it's a small market. And no, I have no idea what those places are.
- Comment on Heave-ho! 3 days ago:
At least for the pockets thing it's a difference between what women think they want and what they actually want. When most women say they want pants with pockets, what they mean is pants that look the same as the ones they already have, but also with pockets. That's impossible to make so, so women are forced to choose between tight pants that highlight their figure and pockets and they choose the former. As for bras, after a quick google my less than educated guess is that because bigger bras have rapidly increased in demand in the past two decades (and even then many wear bras that are too small), at the turn of the century business execs were right to consider bigger bras to be a marginal market with no point in worrying too much about it. Now, however, they're just out of touch. If I'm right hopefully this will correct itself once someone wakes up to the business opportunity.
- Comment on Without getting into current politics can someone describe to me what an authoritarian regime looks like? 6 days ago:
The country of Tiananmen Square?
True but irrelevant.
The country whose people practically develop an ever-changing coded language to avoid big brother coming down hard on any sort of criticism?
Yes. I never said that China tolerates criticism, but that doesn't mean Chinese people live in fear of their government. An incompetent government will have criticism coming from every which way, necessitating draconian measures and exaggerated crackdowns, which does lead to fear (ask me how I know). This isn't the case for China because, despite their faults and the evil shit they get up to, Chinese people are generally satisfied with their governance. Fear isn't an automatic result of authoritarianism; it appears when there's too little carrot and too much stick.
The country that runs "reeducation" camps for many who do get caught?
True but irrelevant.
The country that has Uyghurs and Tibetans to blame "within," and Japan without? Or the US?
Source? Not for their oppression of Uighurs and Tibetans, or rivalry with the US and Japan, I know about these, but that they're using any of these as scapegoats for their own troubles. Oppression can be motivated by things other than scapegoating, and it's not like China is lacking in real reasons to oppose the US and Japan. Without something that corroborates your claim this is just a non-sequitur.
Where senior cadres of the party magically grow richer?
This is just a non sequitur. Senior CCP officials are rich, but the other half of your claim "everyone else pretty much won't" goes against everything we know about Chinese economic growth.
- Comment on Without getting into current politics can someone describe to me what an authoritarian regime looks like? 6 days ago:
Think of the list of political rights you take for granted. The right to voting, free speech, association, peaceful assembly, etc. Those don't exist or are severely curtailed, meaning that political activity and discourse that anger the ruling class can and will be punished. How much is tolerated and what kind of punishments are doled out varies depending on the strength and heavy handedness of the ruling regime.
- Comment on Without getting into current politics can someone describe to me what an authoritarian regime looks like? 6 days ago:
People live in fear and try to adapt, self-censor. Authoritarian leaders need a bogie man, somebody they can blame for all their failures. So an ethnic group, minority, or another country will constantly be blamed for everything from the economy to ingrown toe nails. The elite will get richer, everybody else pretty much won't.
Not necessarily. Authoritarians are usually corrupt/incompetent, which tends to lead to these things, but competent dictators with legitimate public support exist, China being the best-known example.
- Comment on Without getting into current politics can someone describe to me what an authoritarian regime looks like? 6 days ago:
*Basic political rights. You can have a perfectly liberal democracy where the average person is one missed paycheck away from starving to death. Education for example has nothing to do with authoritarianism, except that authoritarians tend to benefit from lack of education.
- Comment on What's it going to take to truly stop the US? 1 week ago:
Not your goddamn business. It's literally that simple.
- Comment on if I ever have grandkids that is 2 weeks ago:
Wait, why is there a dangerous polio vaccine?
- Comment on What is the difference between an American liberal and a liberal outside the USA? 2 weeks ago:
The problem here is twofold: First, the American political spectrum lies to the right of that of most of the first world (though many are playing catch up now), so Americans feel the need to distinguish between liberals and conservatives far more than between liberals and anti-capitalist leftists, therefore the latter two get tossed together. Second, "liberal" in America includes social liberals, which in the rest of the world would be called some variety of social democrat, but it can also refers to classical liberals (with the right marketing, i.e Harris and the Clintons), again making distinguishing between these groups difficult. So the distinction you want is the one between social liberals and classical liberals, which is as follows:
Social liberalism[a] or progressive liberalism[9] is a political philosophy and variety of liberalism that endorses social justice, social services, a mixed economy, and the expansion of civil and political rights, as opposed to classical liberalism which favors limited government and an overall more laissez-faire style of governance. While both are committed to personal freedoms, social liberalism places greater emphasis on the role of government in addressing social inequalities and ensuring public welfare.
Classical liberalism (sometimes called English liberalism[1][2][3]) is a political tradition and a branch of liberalism that advocates free market and laissez-faire economics and civil liberties under the rule of law, with special emphasis on individual autonomy, limited government, economic freedom, political freedom and freedom of speech.[4] Classical liberalism, contrary to liberal branches like social liberalism, looks more negatively on social policies, taxation and the state involvement in the lives of individuals, and it advocates deregulation.
They're both liberals in that they both believe in capitalism and a free market economy, but they differ on the details of what the government ought to do or not to do within said free market economy. So to directly answer your question: In North America "liberal" usually refers to social liberals, while in the rest of the world it refers to classical liberals.
- Comment on I'm disappointed to the max 2 weeks ago:
Not even a mammal.
- Comment on 102% 4 weeks ago:
Oh, that's a good question. Maybe it's people who like his Nazi policies but don't like the dementia and tariffs?
- Comment on 102% 4 weeks ago:
A significant minority of Germans liked Hitler even after 1945. Plenty of people will just never stop supporting Trump.
- Comment on Are people with High functioning autism allowed to become police officers? 5 weeks ago:
Don't join the army and don't be a cop, especially not in 2025. Odds are you'll be sent to beat up protesters.
- Comment on If the US was partitioned, what new states would you want to appear? 1 month ago:
Africa moment.
- Comment on What's the best way to answer someone who accuses you of being a bot because they don't like what you have to say? 1 month ago:
And BTW I totes am a Russian propaganda bot here to destroy the currently thriving American democracy.
Me in a recent reply to one of these.
- Comment on How will the Military be after this mess with Trump? 1 month ago:
but you have to respect them for that reason alone, above all else.
No, baby killers should burn in hell.
How will they be after it is all said and done?
Nothing will happen to them, except maybe purging the most obnoxious Trump loyalists. People "volunteer" for the military for the money, so they'll just keep doing that.
- Comment on Why do some Americans "feel ashamed" for being American even when it's not their fault? 1 month ago:
America's actions are relatively fresh,
At the risk of being annoying as shit, that is not true. The only fresh part is that Europeans and/or white people are feeling a small part of the heat too.
- Comment on Breaking functions down to their constituent parts is nice and all, but this is a step too far. 1 month ago:
It is, but conceptually it's a lot weirder than the Fourier transform, whose idea at least is very straightforward. I mean, when doing Laplace transforms you do have to assume that int(e^tdt){0}{∞}=-1. I'd definitely rather use the Laplace transform, but you couldn't pay me to explain how that shit actually works to an undergrad student.
- Comment on [deleted] 1 month ago:
Why is Scandinavia's ball sack demilitarized?
- Comment on Breaking functions down to their constituent parts is nice and all, but this is a step too far. 1 month ago:
Added an explanation comment. Should've probably done that sooner.
- Comment on Breaking functions down to their constituent parts is nice and all, but this is a step too far. 1 month ago:
Explanation: Top left is a Taylor series, which expresses an infinitely differentiable function as an infinite polynomial. Center left is a Fourier transform, which extracts from periodic function into the frequencies of the sines and cosines composing it. Bottom left is the Laplace transform, which does the same but for all exponentials (sines and cosines are actually exponentials, long story). It seems simpler than the Fourier transform, until you realize that the s is a complex number. In all of these the idea is to break down a function into its component parts, whether as powers of x, sines and cosines or complex exponentials.
- Breaking functions down to their constituent parts is nice and all, but this is a step too far.fedia.io ↗Submitted 1 month ago to science_memes@mander.xyz | 14 comments
- Comment on Why do some people have so many tabs open on their browser? 1 month ago:
Just checked and I've got 24 tabs open right now. Basically in my case I have a list of things I'd want to do at any given moment (chat on Whatsapp, watch anime, learn Chinese, etc), so each one gets its own tab group with things I'd usually want for the thing in question easily accessible. For example in my anime tab group I have My Anime List, two tabs with different anime and Reddit discussion threads. Also in my defense I'm looking for an oven right now so that's inflating my tab numbers a little.
