mechoman444
@mechoman444@lemmy.world
I am live.
- Comment on The conservatives are calling basic Progressive policies "Communist". 1 hour ago:
EXACTLY!
All those things that the meme mentions are something that the government should be looking into regardless of what economy they institute!
I’m paying $2,000 a month for a three bedroom that shouldn’t cost anywhere above $1100 a month!
I went to home Depot last night bought some cockroach traps, Teflon tape a plunger and a short length of stainless steel tubing for $30. What’s up on tables 98 cents the plunger was $4 the box of cockroach traps was eight bucks and the length of tubing was $15! And none of the prices make any sense!
- Comment on The Billionaires have spent a fortune making sure you hate Socialism. 2 days ago:
This is the second time this exact meme has been posted to this sub, so I suppose this is the second time I have to say this.
Socialism does not inherently guarantee collective worker protections, nor was socialism itself designed specifically to provide them.
At its most basic level, socialism is an economic and political framework centered on social or public ownership and control of the means of production. Worker protections, labor rights, workplace safety regulations, unions, minimum wages, and social welfare programs are separate policy choices. They can exist under socialist, capitalist, and mixed economic systems.
More importantly, there is very little historical basis for claiming that socialism, simply by virtue of being socialism, guarantees the protections this meme is describing. In fact, many governments that have implemented socialist economic systems have had extensive records of suppressing independent labor organizations, restricting worker autonomy, and disregarding individual civil and political rights.
You can argue for those protections. You can argue for socialism. But conflating the two doesn’t make the historical or economic argument any stronger.
- Comment on Ohhhhh, the year was 1778... 3 days ago:
Maybe so but I don’t trust sites like that. Many of them are scams.
- Comment on Ohhhhh, the year was 1778... 3 days ago:
- Comment on Ohhhhh, the year was 1778... 3 days ago:
discogs.com/…/3385853-Various-Sea-Songs-And-Shant…
Sorry I didn’t really feel like doing the leg work but here you go.
I swear to God I have this vinyl somewhere in my house but I haven’t seen it in years and haven’t listened to it in years.
But it is quite quite good if you are able to find a digitized copy of it somewhere or the original which is extremely hard to find nowadays.
- Comment on Ohhhhh, the year was 1778... 4 days ago:
In terms of sea shanties, and I’ll be the first to say for a 40 year old my taste in music is… Eclectic to say the last, but there is a recording out of the 60s that is the quintessential collection of sea shanties and it is absolutely amazing.
- Comment on Why does all AI graphic design have the exact same style? 6 days ago:
I see what you’re saying thank you for the examples that definitely clears up a lot.
I guess I just kind of tune these out in public but you’re absolutely right they do have a very similar styling.
- Comment on Why does all AI graphic design have the exact same style? 6 days ago:
I don’t know where y’all seeing all this ai adverts. Social media?
But I hardly see any of it.
Sometimes on a YouTube ad… By sheer happenstance.
- Comment on A Fediverse genre of Guy 6 days ago:
There is no way in Ba Sing Se.
- Comment on According to the New York Times, Game of Thrones is the 6th best TV show of the 21st century 1 week ago:
I’m glad you liked Shameless and enjoyed it; it’s absolutely fantastic that you did. There’s no issue with that.
But I thought it was, objectively, a very mediocre show. It relied almost exclusively on unnecessary shock value to drive the narrative and keep people watching.
It was so pointlessly raunchy and disgusting.
If you have to rely on gratuitous sex and violence to keep your audience engaged, you’re not making a good show.
- Comment on According to the New York Times, Game of Thrones is the 6th best TV show of the 21st century 1 week ago:
I would say you believe this for two main reasons. One, those are some of the shows that you watched and are familiar with, and you’ve seen spectacularly little of what is actually on that list.
And two, your own subjective experience is dictating what you feel is better versus what is worse, which is ultimately a completely useless way to estimate how good something actually is.
Furthermore, lists like this are intentionally inflammatory. They’ll put several genuinely good entries way too low on the list specifically so people will argue about it and drive engagement.
I mean, Westworld didn’t even make the cut but Scandal did.
- Comment on According to the New York Times, Game of Thrones is the 6th best TV show of the 21st century 1 week ago:
I’m like why aren’t the sopranos in here and I’m like o ya that show came out in the 90s! Then I’m like fuck i’m old.
Also Gilmore Girls deserves to be way, way higher on that list!
- Comment on *Throws grenade and runs* 1 week ago:
I fucking hate holodecks.
They are dangerous, psychologically destructive machines that have no place on earth. We have no idea what prolonged exposure to simulated environments does to the human brain. People are spending hours inside fake worlds instead of interacting with reality. Children are probably going to grow up thinking consequences aren’t real because their parents let them spend twelve hours a day fighting robots in a simulated medieval castle.
And don’t even get me started on the fact that the computer can generate literally anything you ask for.
That is not progress. That is an existential threat to society.
So, naturally, I have volunteered to personally test every single holodeck in the world.
Every last one.
I will spend as much time as necessary inside these horrible, dangerous machines so that nobody else has to endure the terrible psychological consequences of using them.
You are welcome.
- Comment on 1 week ago:
Quality of life? For the two months a person has to live?
They have a deadline with cancer… You know that right?
I don’t know if you ever had to watch someone die from cancer but there is no quality of life. It takes absolutely everything and in the end you have nothing. Not even your dignity.
- Comment on I getting more and more enraged seeing self proclaimed leftists resorting to ghastly Gen AI to bastardise their rather humorous ideas. 2 weeks ago:
Also the fact that this is all you got in rebuttal to what I was saying is absolutely fantastic thank you thank you for showing us that you have absolutely nothing to contribute.
- Comment on I getting more and more enraged seeing self proclaimed leftists resorting to ghastly Gen AI to bastardise their rather humorous ideas. 2 weeks ago:
I’m happy you’re happy.
- Comment on I getting more and more enraged seeing self proclaimed leftists resorting to ghastly Gen AI to bastardise their rather humorous ideas. 2 weeks ago:
Yes.
This response was also AI generated.
- Comment on I getting more and more enraged seeing self proclaimed leftists resorting to ghastly Gen AI to bastardise their rather humorous ideas. 2 weeks ago:
I apologize for bringing your logical fallacies to light. I realize pointing them out is intellectually lazy, but unfortunately it seems necessary when they make up the basis of the rebuttal.
You’re conflating the effort required to manufacture an image with the effort involved in creating the joke. The context of the joke isn’t who manufactured the image; it’s who made the joke. The AI didn’t independently decide that Netanyahu, Trump, and Ed Sheeran standing on a stage would be funny. A person came up with that concept and used AI as the tool to produce it.
You could have made the same image in Paint.NET in 20 minutes. Great. That doesn’t demonstrate that the joke is lazy, and it certainly doesn’t demonstrate that it’s unfunny. It demonstrates that you prefer a different method of producing the image.
And “lazy” isn’t a synonym for “unfunny.” If I spend twenty hours painstakingly creating the exact same image in Photoshop, the joke doesn’t magically become funnier because I invested more labor into manufacturing the pixels.
If you don’t find the joke funny, that’s perfectly fine. But that’s a subjective reaction, not an argument. If your argument is that the joke itself is lazy, then explain why the idea is lazy. The fact that the production of the image was automated doesn’t establish that.
For the record, your rebuttal relies on several logical fallacies. The “you criticize AI while using the internet” comparison is a false analogy because my point was about the irony of criticizing the energy consumption of one internet-based activity while participating in another, not that you are somehow forbidden from criticizing technology you use. Your claim that the image is lazy because it was AI-generated is essentially circular reasoning because you are using the use of AI as both the evidence and the conclusion that the work was lazy. And saying that it could have been made in Paint.NET in 20 minutes is a non sequitur: the amount of effort required to produce an image does not establish whether the underlying joke is funny or whether the person who conceived it was creative. Those arguments don’t establish your conclusion; they simply assert it from different directions.
- Comment on I getting more and more enraged seeing self proclaimed leftists resorting to ghastly Gen AI to bastardise their rather humorous ideas. 2 weeks ago:
Great, another “AI sucks and I’m so much more enlightened because I don’t like or use AI” post.
The irony of this person using the internet on their device to post about AI’s energy usage while using the exact same infrastructure and consuming energy to make the post and complain about it… is… fantastic!
If OP really wanted to rally against AI, they would have stayed quiet and not posted about it at all.
And the fact that he doesn’t like the joke specifically because it’s AI-generated is one of the most pointless statements I could think of. No one cares what you like or why. It’s also one of the most useless pieces of information an individual can provide to another person.
- Comment on reddit banned me, rdrama banned me, even telegram and 4chan banned me, so now I have to post my shakespeare level writings here 2 weeks ago:
No, neither claim survives the light of day; Why set thyself beside the Bard at all? Thy works inhabit not the selfsame sphere; To liken thee to Shakespeare is to ask How well a rusted pogo stick might fare When sent to breach the heavens in a craft Designed by hands that conquered lunar seas.
And cease this strange recital of thy bans; For none may verify the tales thou tell. Thou claim’st that every gate hath barred thy way, Then trumpet’st forth the very words that made Those gates, it seems, so eager to be closed. Perhaps the fault lies not in every door, But in the hand that knocks upon them all.
Turn, then, thy gaze upon the inward glass And ask what common thread binds every gate. For when the world itself becomes the foe, And every forum casts thee to the void, Some modest introspection might reveal What in thy conduct summons such disdain.
And more: thy discourse wanders into realms Of shootings, narcotics, and stranger things, Then wonders why the doors refuse thy name. The cosmos need not conspire against thee; Perhaps, dear interlocutor, the cause Is somewhat nearer than thy theories claim.
- Comment on Over 85% of Japanese game developers use generative AI in game development, 2026 CESA survey shows. An increase from last year’s 51% 2 weeks ago:
Preach brother.
To make the same old tired games over and over again and people go crazy for them.
“OMG this new Mario game is revolutionary they really improve the jump mechanic!”
- Comment on Over 85% of Japanese game developers use generative AI in game development, 2026 CESA survey shows. An increase from last year’s 51% 2 weeks ago:
O no! Looks like most of Lemmy is going to stand on their laurels and not play a single Nintendo game ever again! Right?
Because y’all hate AI so much.
- Comment on This Syrian man hid his private library in his home in the city of Damascus out of fear of the Assad regime, where the mere presence of a banned books could lead you to prison 2 weeks ago:
The casualties in Israel are probably much, much higher than 80k.
- Comment on The teacher challenged his students to remove a mandarin from a glass full of water without spilling a single drop 2 weeks ago:
Schrodinger’s mandarin?
- Comment on 2 weeks ago:
Medical ethics can take a shit for all I care.
Ethics break down when a person’s life is on the line! And what do they have to lose? Either the treatment works or the person dies from cancer. It’s a special case and should be treated as such.
Give them a chance to live, a chance they would otherwise not have.
- Comment on The book I borrowed and was reading became unavailable in the US *while I was reading it* 2 weeks ago:
I’m not necessarily against the gradual removal of physical media, and that’s not because I’m defending Sony or anything like that. We’ve been downloading games digitally for decades, and physical media has increasingly gone the way of the DVD. That transition itself doesn’t really bother me.
That said, I absolutely agree that what they’re doing here is bullshit, and physical media is objectively more consumer-friendly in a lot of ways. I’m just saying I understand the argument from a different perspective.
Because when it comes to books, I’m exactly the opposite.
I want an actual physical book. Paper pages, a cover, the whole thing. I’ve tried reading digitally, and I just can’t get into it. Something about reading a book on a screen feels completely wrong to me.
So I guess I understand the attachment to physical media more than I initially thought. I just happen to draw the line in a very different place.
- Comment on Dealing With An Aussie Phone Company 2 weeks ago:
I like Kyle. In
- Comment on Floating beard 2 weeks ago:
- Comment on STARCRAFT | Announce Cinematic | Dominion 2 weeks ago:
Lol.
Expedition 33 was a turn-based jrpg.
I’m just saying these publishers have lost the plot.
- Comment on This is why Americans hate Socialism. 2 weeks ago:
So, in your previous comment you said I wasn’t addressing your point. I did exactly that, in detail. Now you’re telling me I’m splitting hairs.
I explained why your syllogism doesn’t establish the conclusion you’re trying to draw from it, and rather than address that response, you’ve simply moved on to another objection. So I’ll restate my original argument one more time.
Socialism is an economic system. It does not inherently, nor was it specifically designed, to protect workers. Its fundamental purpose was to address the concentration of wealth and economic power associated with capitalism by changing the ownership and control of the means of production. It isn’t a magical philosophy for solving every social problem.
Socialism has also never historically produced the utopian outcomes people often attribute to it. In many cases, socialist systems produced enormous concentrations of political power and inflicted serious harm on the very people they were supposedly intended to liberate. You can’t simply look at the intended goal and pretend the historical outcomes don’t matter.
My argument has never been that worker protections are bad, nor that socialist movements have never advocated for them. I’ve said the exact opposite: if socialism results in better protections for workers, I’m perfectly fine with that. My argument is that the fact that workers can use collective control of the means of production to protect their own interests does not mean that socialism inherently will do so. There is nothing in the economic structure of socialism that magically guarantees that outcome.
You were making that guarantee. I was pointing out that it was an assertion based on what you believe socialism should accomplish, rather than something inherent to socialism itself.
And, frankly, I’ve never encountered this particular argument before. I’ve never had someone construct a syllogism specifically to argue that worker protection is a necessary consequence of socialism. It was actually an interesting argument to respond to, and I appreciate the different way of approaching the issue.
But ultimately, I still don’t think it establishes your conclusion.
There is no economic system that comes with a magical guarantee that its participants will use it in the way we think they should. And socialism certainly isn’t a universal philosophy for resolving every problem in society. It’s an economic model concerning ownership and control of the means of production.
I don’t understand why people keep treating socialism as though it is somehow inherently going to resolve inequality, protect every vulnerable group, empower workers, and solve all of society’s other problems. We have an enormous historical record to examine. At some point, you have to actually look at what these systems have done rather than what you believe they were supposed to do.
