recently been finding it a lot easier to find my stuff on Soulseek rather than torrent sites.
recently been finding it a lot easier to find my stuff on Soulseek rather than torrent sites.
I just use RSS feeds to follow YT-channels. It’s doesn’t seem any less convenient than a YT account.
Can’t be that much work, can it?
Open source government, eh? Don’t know if this would work completely but I like the direction.
That was an interesting read. Thanks. Do you study economics as part of an education? Or did you just dive in to it out of personal interest?
Thanks for the elaborate response. To me the ‘taxes don’t pay for public infrastructure’ seems bizarre. Are you saying public infrastructure shouldn’t have to be payed for by taxpayers, or that it isn’t payed for by taxpayers? I can understand you making a point about the first given your MMT explanation, but taxpayer money IS actually being used for all sorts of public infrastructure, isn’t it? A government could use money creation for every project, but they don’t, they also collect taxes…
I would also worry that the risks of (hyper)inflation are being downplayed in this theory. But too be fair I’m not an economist, nor do I have knowledge about MMT, so I’m really not the person to refute any of this. It’s interesting and I’ll look in to it with an open mind. Thanks
There is a lot wrong with what you’re saying. Taxes don’t remove money from the economy, because it all goes back into the economy. Tax money is most definitely used for all sorts of things including for infrastructure. A government can’t responsibly create endless amounts of money. The amount of debt a country can have should be related to the size of the economy. Where you’re right is that taxes are a way of redistributing money in order to influence society in all sorts of ways. Which can be good or bad.
Europe is voting this weekend. If you care about copyright reform, you should consider voting for the European Pirate Party. IA is probably in the wrong here, legally. But many would argue it’s morally right to have free access to information. Sure, shadow libraries are popping up everywhere and we have access to more information than ever before, but if we really want access for everyone, we need different copyright laws, and for that we need politicians.
I never said I don’t mind them, and I also never said I’d join them. I’m just suggesting we keep the conversation going and settle things with words rather than violence. It’s difficult to have a conversation when you are unable to understand a point someone is making. Not saying you should agree at all. It’s fair to have a difference of opinion. But you just misrepresent what I’m saying, that doesn’t really lead to an interesting conversation in my opinion, so I’m out.
You literally talk in your other reply about how you’ll join them
you did actually tell me in your comment that you don’t really mind nazis as long as they’re not being violent towards you.
This is becoming quite bizarre. Reading back my comments I don’t even know which line you are misinterpreting cause I don’t think I’ve said anything that even comes close to your accusations. Of course I’m not advocating to join nazi’s. I think you’d be better of sticking to what people actually say, or else every online conversation is going to derail as much as this one apparently already did.
You don’t have any sort of morality or ideology underlying your objection
You make a lot of assumptions
Also, punching Nazis is always morally correct.
I know the idea behind the paradox of tolerance, I’m just saying that at the very least, it’s not as simple as that. There are definitely grey areas, and IT IS complicated. You really miss the bigger picture if you say it’s always ok to punch a nazi. I’d advise you to read up on the Spanish civil war, how that spun out of control, violence from both sides leading to more violence. You shouldn’t just look at the act of punching a Nazi no it’s own, you should take a helicopter view and see that a punch, will lead to counter punches, which will lead to potentially full blown civil war. You shouldn’t pride yourself in taking a firm stance if doing so is ultimately counterproductive. So what’s the alternative? The alternative is sitting down, having a talk, drinking some tea and talking about our differences. And simultaneously trying to take away the breeding ground for fascism, for instance an upper class that’s treating society as their farm animals, getting all the riches, while looking down on them from their high horses. Punching these people and limiting their freedoms is putting oil on the fire.
It’s with polarization that things spin out of control. When the left thinks the right are nazi’s and the right think the left are commies, that’s when people become less critical of themselves and hatred spirals into a civil war, and the one that’s on top will do anything to prevent the ‘enemy’ taking over. Tolerating verbal intolerance is a good thing. That’s why your own statement is tolerated, it’s literally advocating intolerance (be it indirectly in favor of tolerance). I really don’t believe your statement is correct. Tolerance leads to tolerance. Intolerance leads to more intolerance. Not tolerating intolerance doesn’t make it disappear, it just makes people feel more strongly about it. When I cant think something or people look down on me for it, I am definitely gonna think it some more. Actual violence should of course not be tolerated. Ergo: is it ok to punch a nazi? No ofcourse not… unless the civil war has started yet and all tolerance is gone, but let’s not go there…
There are more scenarios in which humanity will run itself in to the ground, we could survive for another while but I’m definitely not certain.
Soulseek/Nicotine+
That link you added is being very very negative about it and even after reading it I really don’t understand why…
Same here, all the people I care about did. Those I don’t really care about use sms to contact me if they really have to. Of course I miss out on some groups on Whatsapp, but honestly I’m glad. It’s not really useful to be in a lot of Whatsapp groups, it mostly creates a lot of uninteresting messages for you to read.
deleted by creator
Here people use WhatsApp, not Facebook messenger, but the idea is the same. I left WhatsApp last year. My dearest friends and family have installed Signal after I did. They haven’t left WhatsApp but they use it to contact me. We have group chats on Signal. If colleagues need to reach me I tell them they can sent me an SMS or join Signal. They mostly just send SMS. I used to be in a group chats from my 2 jobs. Luckily I don’t necessarily need to be in either of them, it’s mostly used for trading shifts and there are other ways to do that. Important communication goes through email.
When one method of communication is the norm it is obviously very difficult to move away from it, and for some people it will feel almost impossible. We shouldn’t deny that there is a choice, because there is, but obviously for some it will be a lot easier than for others. I was in the lucky position that it felt possible, and it worked out great. I am very relieved that I am part of fewer group chats now. They’re quite a burden actually. I hope in the future when things shift a little further from the current norm, it will be possible for you as well.
Maybe billionaires should be filmed and streamed continuously, since their behavior has such a big impact on the world. If they don’t like it maybe we shouldn’t allow them to control such incredible assets. I’m sure billionaires have nothing sketchy to hide, right? What we will see is probably how they are hard working people who are not at all detached from normal folks. Right?