Unlike therapy, installing Arch on a Thinkpad works more often than not
International worker solidarity!!!
Omg guess I’ll go buy gold about it
I was really hoping for a fusion of Lisa Frank + Frankenstein, like rainbows and bright colors and chimeric monsters stitched together from the parts of cute animals
I just bought a Thinkpad, also use mostly for programming, installed Fedora, very happy
Thanks for your input! I’ll see what I can find on Haldane, that seems like a good place to continue for me
You shouldn’t reject parts of evolution because Malthus used them to justify his political theory
This is not what I said. I said that, according to David Harvey, Darwin based his theory of evolution on the writings of Malthus. I’m saying that I believe that this has flawed the theory, as it is based partially on a flawed premise. It doesn’t make the theory completely unusable, a good, incomplete, flawed theory can still make correct predictions. but in certain circumstances the inherent logic, the way it handles certain questions, it will produce flawed conclusions. This is true for every system of formal logic, it is an inherent contradiction of all logical systems (epistemic crisis and incompleteness.) But to varying degrees, and to what extent, and how it produces these flawed conclusions is important to consider.
The best example I can think of while sitting in my car about to go unload groceries is gynecology. Does it effectively diagnose or treat disease and abnormalities? Yes. Do we have a good enough mastery of human reproduction to alter the likelihood of pregnancy? Also yes. The science is sound. But the practice of gynecology is often needlessly, senselessly painful, almost cruel, even when practiced by conscientious caring doctors. Why? It’s because the founder of gynecology made his discoveries by torturing and experimenting on living slave women, without anesthetics, and many parts of that tradition persist. Because they haven’t been readdressed or reconsidered. And maybe because it serves some other social purpose as well.
Science often fails as a form of critique and self discovery. So I’m just out here asking questions to improve my own understanding. I’m a little skeptical of your use of the term “scientifically sound.” Especially coming from a fellow hexbear who should know about bourgeois scientism.
So is a crucial part of the theory no longer “survival of the fittest?” Because that’s straight Malthus. I’m not a biologist, but I study and read and try to pay attention.
Yeah but the theory of evolution writ large needs shaking up. The whole theory reeks of Malthusianism, a disproved economic theory, since Darwin was influenced by Malthus. Many of the sick consequences of “Social Darwinism” are a result of the theory’s flawed precursory logic.
That being said I tend to skew cynical. Still I’d like to see parts of a mostly-correct predictive model questioned and reevaluated
Blinken gaslights other countries for not believing flimsy justification condoning genocide
I guess I don’t totally agree with calling everyone that exists within that weird administrative class “cops,” but it isn’t a critical disagreement. I get what you mean though, thanks for the explainer
This makes me feel incredibly validated, thank you
Mayonnaise on corncob
Take your time! I appreciate your willingness
Fair enough!
Sorry I still don’t get it. Cops embody the violent coercion that is needed to enforce contracts and laws. Laws determine how contracts are made and what penalties for breaking them. Contracts are a legal confabulation that serve several functions, probably most relevant is they are the mechanisms that makes property ownership possible, such as land. Landlords have the personal property “rights” as outlined in property law and defined by the contract. Cops enforce the laws and contracts with violence.
Cops can only be landlords if they own property and collect rents. Landlords don’t have the ability to use violence to enforce their property rights, they have to call the cops. They both occupy this weird class middle zone that is neither bourgeoisie nor worker: collecting rents doesn’t necessarily make one a capitalist, land isn’t really strictly capital; cops aren’t proletarian workers though at one time they may have been working class with nothing to sell but their labor. Both are crucial to underwriting liberal private property relations which is the basis for capitalist exploitation and the class rule that emanates from it. But landlords have a completely different relation to production than cops, so they don’t occupy the same class position.
I’m not debating and I’ll read or watch anything recommended to me. I’m also mostly interested in specific and correct formulations of class, I study a lot and have high standards. If this is one of those things that is more agitational than strictly correct, I can live with that but if there is a critical formulation that I’m missing, or if this is a paradigm that other leftists are using to help formulate their views then I would very much like to understand
What’s the theory justification for “landlords are cops?” Fuck cops and fuck landlords but what is the connection?
Super Smash Brothers but with jetpacks (ssb already has jetpacks but the game isn’t really tuned for them offensively and with big levels and lots of platforms)
Oh I have a good one. I worked at a paint store for like 15 years. One day, this guy drives up in a Mercedes, wearing a Burberry scarf, and asks me for “Black Marine Paint.” We were a housepaint store so I told him we didn’t have it, we didn’t sell paint for boats, and what was he wanting to paint. He said he wanted to paint his front door, and the doors at Buckingham palace are painted with black marine paint, and did I know what he meant. I said I didn’t know about the doors on Buckingham palace, and he indignantly says, “What?! It famous like the doors of the White House!” I told him I wasn’t familiar with the doors of the white house either.
But I start showing him some oil based paint and he seems happy with it. He’s about to buy when he asks what he should do to strip the paint off of his door, since its latex and this new paint is oil. His eyes narrow and he skeptically asks me, “can you put latex over oil?” I said sure, if you use a primer. He gets real angry and, as two new customers walk in, screams, “You’re a fucking idiot!” storms out and gets into his Mercedes which the two women had parked beside.
They give me a look, I shrug and walk over to help them pick out colors. When they are done they go out to there car, but a minute later come back and ask me I I knew the guy, and to come outside.
Someone, I presume the Burberry guy, had kicked in the door to their car, leaving a huge foot shaped dent. I assume he thought it was my car or something.
I’ve definitely had bad experiences at that job, but that entitled freak stands out to in my memory years later
