The virtual greenery is a nice touch on the display. The last hints of it the privileged, final dregs of humanity will have left will be on a screen.
what in the sam fucking hell is that? I'm with the old man on this one, why can't a fridge just be a large box that cools your food? I don't need it to be a statement piece in my house. Some advancements in fridge technology can be handy, like the little front door for getting to your beverages easily without opening the entire main door, but other than that the $500 one that doesn't need a masters in Computer Science to run is fine. I mean my god its a fucking FRIDGE.
The most annoying part is the idea of paying 3 to 6 grand for a fridge that might not even last two years, with fancy gadgetry that will break down long before you have to disassemble the thing to take it in for repairs.
I like the idea of an opaque door that you can tap to see the contents inside, but I'd rather have something I could trust to be in good condition for at least 20 years. I like the idea of a Jetsons-era AI kitchen hand telling you what you're running low on and recommending recipes, but I'd rather not read 4,000 pages of draconian terms and conditions only to be inevitably presented with a singular accept button after finding out just how much of your privacy will be auctioned off. I'd be reluctant to even install such an appliance if it were free.
My dryer can hook up to wifi. But it once ate a sock and stopped working. How long have we had dryers? Why are they still eating articles of clothing? In the event an unsecured sock slips through the cracks, it should be deposited in a catchbasin. Not work its way to vital components.
Dilbert, this is your fault.
stand by for at least 400 days for a follow-up interview. don't call us; we'll call you.
natural hair colors in hetero style only.
I like the idea of an opaque door that you can tap to see the contents inside, but I'd rather have something I could trust to be in good condition for at least 20 years. I like the idea of a Jetsons-era AI kitchen hand telling you what you're running low on and recommending recipes, but I'd rather not read 4,000 pages of draconian terms and conditions only to be inevitably presented with a singular accept button after finding out just how much of your privacy will be auctioned off. I'd be reluctant to even install such an appliance if it were free.
My dryer can hook up to wifi. But it once ate a sock and stopped working. How long have we had dryers? Why are they still eating articles of clothing? In the event an unsecured sock slips through the cracks, it should be deposited in a catchbasin. Not work its way to vital components.
Dilbert, this is your fault.
plus 15 years in the field (and 2 years experience with a feature per 1 year of release), forward understanding of theoretical computing, references from your childhood friends, and a mandatory signed contract of subservience and non-competition. starting wages $13.50 an hour for the first 6 months, then we can hard-negotiate up to $16.50 over the next ten years. no medical, no dental. mandatory unpaid teambuilding exercises. sick time and vacations technically allowed, but go against the grain of company spirit. must be willing to work hard and cover for other roles.pirana6 wrote:
a masters in Computer Science
stand by for at least 400 days for a follow-up interview. don't call us; we'll call you.
natural hair colors in hetero style only.
Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2023-08-16 14:39:31)
browser ui logic:
right click somewhere in an open tab, shortcuts as displayed:
back: alt+left
forward: … shift+backspace
alt+right also works, but isn't listed. liberal conspiracy confirmed.
right click somewhere in an open tab, shortcuts as displayed:
back: alt+left
forward: … shift+backspace
alt+right also works, but isn't listed. liberal conspiracy confirmed.
I am fiscally progressive but socially conservative. I find that not many people are like that and nearly everyone will disagree about me with something no matter the circle. I don't fit in with the left, right, or even the centre. Lucky politics isn't a big deal here, living in America would be skating thin ice I imagine.
Last edited by Adams_BJ (2023-08-17 01:14:23)
so are you like a deus volt social conservative, or what? it's such a broad global brush.
I don't know what you mean by deus vult solial conservative. I feel like there should be help for the needy, everyone should have access to quality free and affordable health care, I feel like those without means should still have access to tertiary education through programs, scholarships etc. There should be affordable housing and no-one deserves to go hungry and homeless. I don't think that gender, race, sexual orientation or religion should be a defining factor for those 'in need' though. Unions are important.
I believe that people should be more personally accountable and not blame every issue on being 'oppressed' by the system, everyone knows what the rules are and the consequences of your actions, and people should look at what an offender did rather than the colour of their skin before passing judgement on the police. Parents need to parent their children and guide them to live a better life than they did. I don't think the police should be de-funded, and I think the police are overworked and under appreciated. I believe that everyone is by their existence born equal and should be treated as such. Like MLK said, by the content of their character not the colour of their skin. I will call you by your pronouns but I don't have to believe them. I have an issue with drag queens not because I think they are dangerous to kids but because of their over-the-top personas, same as I don't like 'woo girls'. That doesn't make me a bigot, I just find you annoying. I believe sexuality is on a spectrum and I believe it can be influenced by your surroundings, that doesn't mean its bad though.
I speak only for Australia though, arguably the most multicultural country on the planet where for the most part every culture has assimilated well into a larger cultural identity, but I feel like some people like to turn americas problems into our problems even if they don't exist, creating more division rather unity. America seems to have a big complex mess on their hands and way more people than us.
e: oh and just because you were a bit weird growing up and maybe watched too much anime and couldn't differentiate that from real life that doesn't mean you are now xenogender or some-such. Too many people construe character quirks with gender and I do believe that gender-politics can be damaging to kids that are a bit more out there or have trouble fitting in. You can just be a weird boy or girl, its ok.
I believe that people should be more personally accountable and not blame every issue on being 'oppressed' by the system, everyone knows what the rules are and the consequences of your actions, and people should look at what an offender did rather than the colour of their skin before passing judgement on the police. Parents need to parent their children and guide them to live a better life than they did. I don't think the police should be de-funded, and I think the police are overworked and under appreciated. I believe that everyone is by their existence born equal and should be treated as such. Like MLK said, by the content of their character not the colour of their skin. I will call you by your pronouns but I don't have to believe them. I have an issue with drag queens not because I think they are dangerous to kids but because of their over-the-top personas, same as I don't like 'woo girls'. That doesn't make me a bigot, I just find you annoying. I believe sexuality is on a spectrum and I believe it can be influenced by your surroundings, that doesn't mean its bad though.
I speak only for Australia though, arguably the most multicultural country on the planet where for the most part every culture has assimilated well into a larger cultural identity, but I feel like some people like to turn americas problems into our problems even if they don't exist, creating more division rather unity. America seems to have a big complex mess on their hands and way more people than us.
e: oh and just because you were a bit weird growing up and maybe watched too much anime and couldn't differentiate that from real life that doesn't mean you are now xenogender or some-such. Too many people construe character quirks with gender and I do believe that gender-politics can be damaging to kids that are a bit more out there or have trouble fitting in. You can just be a weird boy or girl, its ok.
Last edited by Adams_BJ (2023-08-16 22:15:03)
"deus volt" is one of former us vp mike pence's many, many sobriquets from merely the category of his electroshock therapy brand of homophobia. see also: lgbbq, ohmosexual, mike "queer medicine from thomas edison" pence. here at least, social conservatism is usually described including homo/transphobias in opinion and legislation, in addition to espousing traditional 'gender roles,' patriotism, religious traditionalism, "put god back in schools," and 'family values,' among other things (such as restricting women's rights). church conservatives. reagan and w's crowd.
"the salt of the earth.
you know, morons."
"the salt of the earth.
you know, morons."
Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2023-08-17 01:28:41)
Whats the difference between that and regular ol conservatism?Sounnds like the same thing to me, church and god, no queers, no abortions, drags are bad, thats just every stereotypical right of centre person. Also, I'm not religious.
Last edited by Adams_BJ (2023-08-16 22:40:00)
probably that social conservatism is more or less to conservatism what fiscal conservatism is to conservatism. variants, schools, subtypes depending on who's categorising. using your previous post as a brush, by american standards people might consider you a moderate conservative or a right-leaning democrat.
imo on your previous, "judge not by color of their skin but by the content of their character" (paraphrased) to dismiss racism as a generations-spanning institution still in living memory and in practice may be an abuse of the quote. parts of my country are literally shutting down classes and banning books that try and discuss these things fairly and objectively. how on earth is the country supposed to realise unification and integration with some of these old attitudes still in place and even defended?
if you were six when this photograph was taken, you'd be in your 70s today.
U.S. Approves Voluntary Plans To Desegregate
https://www.edweek.org/education/u-s-ap … te/1984/02
if you were six while trump was pushing segregationist rhetoric in the last few years, you'd still be in school today (doing drills for the next school shooting).
--
depending on who you ask, 'defund the police' might mean shifting money from police to social services to do the jobs police shouldn't even be responsible for, addressing social issues like education, housing and poverty, health and mental health care. or it could mean comprehensive police reform. either way, police reform and upscaling social services are something usa is in desperate need of.
what do you mean by being a fiscal liberal?
imo on your previous, "judge not by color of their skin but by the content of their character" (paraphrased) to dismiss racism as a generations-spanning institution still in living memory and in practice may be an abuse of the quote. parts of my country are literally shutting down classes and banning books that try and discuss these things fairly and objectively. how on earth is the country supposed to realise unification and integration with some of these old attitudes still in place and even defended?
if you were six when this photograph was taken, you'd be in your 70s today.
U.S. Approves Voluntary Plans To Desegregate
https://www.edweek.org/education/u-s-ap … te/1984/02
if you were six in 1984 while people were still arguing about segregation, you'd be in your 40s today.The Reagan Administration last week filed its first school-desegregation suit, then immediately resolved it by approving a desegregation plan for elementary schools in Bakersfield, Calif., that will rely totally on voluntary student transfers.
[…]
Civil-rights groups were quick to condemn the settlements, claiming that voluntary measures such as magnet schools generally work only when crafted as part of comprehensive plans requiring mandatory student reassignments.
But in defense of such agreements, William Bradford Reynolds, the assistant attorney general for civil rights, said the Administration “continues to believe that school systems can be desegregated by voluntary means that eliminate racial isolation and improve education programs.”
“Mandatory busing is not acceptable,” Mr. Reynolds said at a press conference in Washington to announce the signing of the agreement with the Bakersfield schools.
if you were six while trump was pushing segregationist rhetoric in the last few years, you'd still be in school today (doing drills for the next school shooting).
--
depending on who you ask, 'defund the police' might mean shifting money from police to social services to do the jobs police shouldn't even be responsible for, addressing social issues like education, housing and poverty, health and mental health care. or it could mean comprehensive police reform. either way, police reform and upscaling social services are something usa is in desperate need of.
what do you mean by being a fiscal liberal?
Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2023-08-17 01:18:55)
I meant to say progressive, and edited it as sich. I'm on my phone now doing a fantastic poo. But basically that there should be a social safety net to stop homelessness, poverty, being food insecure etc. Tertiary education should be affordable for anyone, there should be quality affordable housing, unions are important. Everyone should have access to quality free or affordable healthcare. Money should be allocated to try and help kids get out of generational poverty by improving their school attendance and education, and have guidance into trades and professions if they don't know how or what's available. I also don't think anyone deserves, or should be a billionaire. I recently watched a video that asked you to see how long a million dollars could pay your rent vs a billion. If a million paid it for 50, a billion would pay it for 50,000. It's a staggering amount of money that no single person can earn ethically. There should be no one working for companies like Amazon, google, Facebook etc that are living in poverty levels.
In any first world country no one should be homeless, hungry, or suffering from a treatable illness.
In any first world country no one should be homeless, hungry, or suffering from a treatable illness.
the real first world problem here sounds like you've been stuck doing a poo for the last ~5 hours.
sounds like socialism.Adams_BJ wrote:
I meant to say progressive, and edited it as sich. I'm on my phone now doing a fantastic poo. But basically that there should be a social safety net to stop homelessness, poverty, being food insecure etc. Tertiary education should be affordable for anyone, there should be quality affordable housing, unions are important. Everyone should have access to quality free or affordable healthcare. Money should be allocated to try and help kids get out of generational poverty by improving their school attendance and education, and have guidance into trades and professions if they don't know how or what's available. I also don't think anyone deserves, or should be a billionaire. I recently watched a video that asked you to see how long a million dollars could pay your rent vs a billion. If a million paid it for 50, a billion would pay it for 50,000. It's a staggering amount of money that no single person can earn ethically. There should be no one working for companies like Amazon, google, Facebook etc that are living in poverty levels.
In any first world country no one should be homeless, hungry, or suffering from a treatable illness.
i'd asked what adams meant by it because there is some confusion/overlap between economic liberalism, fiscal liberalism, and fiscal conservatism in the us. normally when an american tells me they're fiscally liberal but socially conservative, it means they like the emotional shelter conservatism provides against "over-the-top personas," but don't mind some social programs, are otherwise a both-sides centrist, once read atlas shrugged in high school, and don't really know enough about liberalism or conservatism to specifically define their views based on either.Cybargs wrote:
sounds like socialism.
a self-proclaimed fiscal conservative but social liberal might think gay marriage is fine but be upset with emissions regulations interfering with the free market or something, i dunno it's kind of a crapshoot.
Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2023-08-17 01:55:24)
Well not really, most of these things come from marketing.unnamednewbie13 wrote:
Dilbert, this is your fault.
"Ooh wouldn't it be great if your car could wish you happy birthday on your birthday, and flash its lights and have the dials swing backwards and forwards, could we do that? Could we?"
"Erm, well its a stupid idea but I suppose so"
"JUST GET IT DONE STOP WASTING TIME CUT ANY CORNER COMPROMISE ANYTHING MAKE IT SO THE CAR IS DISABLED IF THE USER DOESN'T ENTER THEIR BIRTHDAY EACH TIME THEY GET IN"
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
It would to you you commie prick.Cybargs wrote:
sounds like socialism.Adams_BJ wrote:
I meant to say progressive, and edited it as sich. I'm on my phone now doing a fantastic poo. But basically that there should be a social safety net to stop homelessness, poverty, being food insecure etc. Tertiary education should be affordable for anyone, there should be quality affordable housing, unions are important. Everyone should have access to quality free or affordable healthcare. Money should be allocated to try and help kids get out of generational poverty by improving their school attendance and education, and have guidance into trades and professions if they don't know how or what's available. I also don't think anyone deserves, or should be a billionaire. I recently watched a video that asked you to see how long a million dollars could pay your rent vs a billion. If a million paid it for 50, a billion would pay it for 50,000. It's a staggering amount of money that no single person can earn ethically. There should be no one working for companies like Amazon, google, Facebook etc that are living in poverty levels.
In any first world country no one should be homeless, hungry, or suffering from a treatable illness.
<3
This has been tried many times.Adams_BJ wrote:
Tertiary education should be affordable for anyone, there should be quality affordable housing, unions are important. Everyone should have access to quality free or affordable healthcare. Money should be allocated to try and help kids get out of generational poverty by improving their school attendance and education, and have guidance into trades and professions if they don't know how or what's available.
Pretty well no country can afford its own healthcare, especially not now with people living longer than they've worked.In any first world country no one should be homeless, hungry, or suffering from a treatable illness.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
Ofcourse the perfect scenario isn't possible, just like you can't become a trillionaire and run a company of tens thousands who are starving and homeless because you don't pay them. It's a spectrum and right now the spectrum is far too one sided. In Australia alone since like 08 or 9 at least 90% of the economic growth has gone to the top 10%, while the bottom 90% have to fight over less than 10% of the economic growth. That rate of growing inequality is staggering, unsustainable and you if believe it is ethical something is wrong with you.Dilbert_X wrote:
This has been tried many times.Adams_BJ wrote:
Tertiary education should be affordable for anyone, there should be quality affordable housing, unions are important. Everyone should have access to quality free or affordable healthcare. Money should be allocated to try and help kids get out of generational poverty by improving their school attendance and education, and have guidance into trades and professions if they don't know how or what's available.Pretty well no country can afford its own healthcare, especially not now with people living longer than they've worked.In any first world country no one should be homeless, hungry, or suffering from a treatable illness.
It used to be the other way round where the bottom 90% got the lions share. The rich got richer, but for most it was an achievable if not difficult aspiration, or at least you could dream that one day you could 'make it'. I've got nothing against working hard, building a business and taking on that risk and earning well to become well off. I have got an issue with fancy accounting to take advantage tax loop holes, hedge funds, not drawing an income because you get paid in stocks etc. At least until im rich and then I'm calling cybargs to do me some deals.
You could have a billion bucks, have 950 million of that taken away to support the other 90% of the rabble and never work another day of your life and live in absolute luxury off the interest alone. No one needs a billion dollars. But no one will ever do that and I wouldn't support it either. But I believe everyone should be able to go to school, work 38 hours a week, own their home, have kids, take a holiday and not worry about what they are going to eat, and not worry they are going to die from diabetes, and I believe that is doable. And is it really too much to make sure that those that most need it have a roof over their heads and some rice and veg in their bellies? They don't need an indoor pool and day spa to go with it.
Australia has a lot of things right, I never need to worry about dying from diabetes, I love a decent quality of life, I grew up poor and while I am not well off now I am doing ok, homelessness is low, education is high. I don't think at this rate my kids will be able to have a better quality of life than me though, which historically was pretty much a given.
Last edited by Adams_BJ (2023-08-17 04:03:14)
I'm still no closer to finding out who I should vote for though.
Couldn't hurt
- SuperJail Warden
- Gone Forever
- +635|3728
Which is more important to you: social issues or economics issues? If you are having trouble reconciling the two it is because you can't. You have to choose which one you like more and accept the baggage that comes with it.
tl;dr oversimplification
The two feel more interlinked than I normally hear discussion of. It seems like sometimes people ignore other variables to conflate good economics directly with "growth," which may not translate to a better life for people in a society or even long term economic stability. People should feel secure in their finances with a reasonable amount of labor if they're able, and backed up by a healthy network of social safety nets (that don't punish people who get that 50 cent raise lol) and public services, and not have to desperately ration things like food, medicine, and shelter against the other. It seems to me like this would be a greater boon for a healthy economy than bailout-sponge companies habitually reporting profit increases and celebrating with executive bonuses and worker layoffs.
A country enabling the rich and the powerful to hoard ever increasing amounts of wealth and resources among an ever decreasing number of individuals instead of focusing on nation building and quality of life sounds like a good way to collapse.
I don't really want to hear Republicans chastising Americans to go out and buy more to save the economy when Americans can't even afford bare necessities.
The two feel more interlinked than I normally hear discussion of. It seems like sometimes people ignore other variables to conflate good economics directly with "growth," which may not translate to a better life for people in a society or even long term economic stability. People should feel secure in their finances with a reasonable amount of labor if they're able, and backed up by a healthy network of social safety nets (that don't punish people who get that 50 cent raise lol) and public services, and not have to desperately ration things like food, medicine, and shelter against the other. It seems to me like this would be a greater boon for a healthy economy than bailout-sponge companies habitually reporting profit increases and celebrating with executive bonuses and worker layoffs.
A country enabling the rich and the powerful to hoard ever increasing amounts of wealth and resources among an ever decreasing number of individuals instead of focusing on nation building and quality of life sounds like a good way to collapse.
I don't really want to hear Republicans chastising Americans to go out and buy more to save the economy when Americans can't even afford bare necessities.
Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2023-08-18 17:32:01)
shootersAdams_BJ wrote:
I'm still no closer to finding out who I should vote for though.
Emu Reparations Party.
There, I did the research for you.
There, I did the research for you.