• 3 Posts
  • 204 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: September 1st, 2023

help-circle

  • People who choose to suppress a growing power with the idea that they can easily win,
    then make it look like they’re the victims when the victims decide to fight back,
    with the ones standing up to themselves becoming stronger and stronger over time,
    and the suppressing people choosing to never negotiate a losing battle/war
    apart from demanding that the winning party makes concessions to let them win,
    deserve to die through the consequences of their own actions.

    Bonus points for those people who fly banners of freedom and progressiveness
    while their organizers get paid by doing the bidding
    of oppressive conservative foreign agents
    who want their country to regress for their own gains of power.
    And while displaying their wicked pop-culture chants, posters and gestures,
    are often demanding their government to retract a reasonable proposal such as
    ‘murder, and that includes any incel strangling his perceived girlfriend to death,
    should be made illegal, even if you’re on a vacation’
    or ‘stop taking money from foreign agents’
    that are mild copies of laws from said foreign agents’ country.

    And even more bonus points for the appointed new leader
    legitimized through a so-called international award of good behavior.

    And I say this because while all the hypocrisy is absolutely infuriating,
    to top it off by trying to chop off the hand and head
    that tries to give you mercy, then there’s no redemption,
    only more and more defense against
    a more and more deadly risky liable escalation





  • It’s been my experience throughout the years.
    I haven’t personally heard “I have nothing to hide”
    since Huawei phones started to become banned in my country.

    The moment they became popular they went from
    “I’ve got nothing to hide” to “I’ve got nothing to hide, but this is different. Huawei is subject to the Chinese State.
    Those other phones are made by our allies. We may have found time after time again that all phones of all our politicians have been tapped by the US and it’s true that no matter how hard our best security experts searched for listening bugs in these devices, they found diddly squat, but if you own one of those Chinese phones and think you’re not being listened to, than you’re being naive. Naive naive, !be scared!, naive national security naive.”.


  • folaht@lemmy.mltoLinux@lemmy.mlWhich distro should I use?
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    25 days ago

    Yes and the manual install taught me how to deal with DEs refusing to start without having to do a full reinstall.
    It’s such a pleasure to be able to save your setup no matter what the issue, apart from the time I accidentally erased my hard drive with a sudo rm -rf * command that was supposed to wipe a USB drive.







  • Lojban for now
    Certainly not Esperanto

    1. Lojban like Esperanto has been created to be a neutral lingua franca.
    2. I’ve heard that it’s a logical language that tries to do away with ambiguity and that sounds interesting to me.
    3. Esperanto feels like a language made for the EU rather than the world and so do all Esperanto look-a-likes.
    4. Lojban sounds like a cross between Romansh and a lost native American language. Not good compared to my two favorite sounding languages, Japanese and French, but at least more neutral than Esperanto. Esperanto sounds Spanish and Interlingua sounds like an Italian that thought that Esperanto should sound Italian and I don’t like how either of those two languages sound.

  • Yeah, so I have a problem with #1 and #2 as to what we were taught.
    Because what usually happens is…

    1. Observe a phenomenon
    2. Wonder how that works
    3. Search for information on wikipedia
    4. Gain knowledge

    You don’t need to raise questions then.
    The only time you raise questions is when there’s a lack of knowledge on the thing
    and I think it’s more often the case that your theory starts when there IS knowledge,
    it’s just that you think it’s either externally wrong (that’s not how the balls fall when I drop them from the leaning tower of Pisa)
    or internally wrong (This author is saying balls and objects in general fall due to air pressure, but in another book the author says balloons float due to air pressure, huh?!?)


  • I got that part and most of it from another person, though I added a bit here and there.
    So this part has been a bit confusing for me as well, but I think that once you have done your
    ‘perceived discovery of external error’ by dropping metal balls from where the author’s claim doesn’t match your observation,
    you will need to list all the things that you think are relevant to what led up to your discovery.

    Now I stole the above image from wikipedia, but it’s stuff like that that I assume you should have a gallery of,
    so that everyone and your grandmother knows what we’re talking about and don’t mistake it for anything else.

    So one’s list (the hypothesis) should at least consist of

    1. The leaning tower of Pisa (A nice little picture, where it’s located)
    2. A big metal ball (what it’s made of, where did you get it)
    3. A small metal ball
    4. Planet Earth
    5. The air (and why you think that’s relevant)
    6. The dropping mechanism (I’m assuming one’s hands)
    7. The exact section (book, page, paragraph) where it says that they should be falling at different speeds
    8. The above image showcasing what and a video of you dropping the balls

    And that’s for the observation that lead to the perceived discovery of external error.
    Then you will need to add to the list of what your experiments need.
    You know, a stopwatch, more objects, 3D models of those objects,
    a better dropping mechanism and a 3D model of that so that people can recreate your experiment,
    an air chamber, where you can increase and decrease the pressure.
    Stuff like that.





    1. The ‘assumption as hypothesis’ should be replaced with a ‘picture gallery of relevant objects and dynamic object group concepts (tornado’s, fire), with a description and argumentation why you think these objects or concepts are relevant’ as hypothesis.

    2. Before hypothesis, an incubation phase should be added where you start with an event that led you to making a hypothesis for your new theory that either led to a (perceived) discovery of ‘a lack of information’, ‘an external error’ (the theory doesn’t match your observation) or ‘an internal error’ (the theory says A on page 28, but !A on page 76 in the author’s previous book without acknowledging the inconsistency).

    3. This also means that during the new method, the entire paper should be inspected for internal errors by going through a complete list of fallacies and checking each sentence for any internal inconsistencies, unaddressed external inconsistencies and any absences of information.

    4. And this means that a glossary should be added that’s similar to the hypothesis, except the terms are without argumentation for why it should be included the new theory.

    These might look like small nitpicks, but this ‘fallacy checking’ and ‘explain by picture’ method can turn into a philosophy of it’s own that’s more fundamental than ‘the laws of physics’.


  • The difference is how leaders are voted in and by extension, how they rule.
    People’s democracies and liberal democracies basically have two main different ways of doing that.

    For a liberal democracy you have:

    1. The two-party-system, where there’s a first-past-the-post voting system so in practice only two party can be realistically be voted in.
    2. The multi-party-system, where the winning party in practice always needs a coalition of parties in order to function.

    The problem for these “democracies” is systemic campaign fraud that puts oligarchs in power and, in practice, for all-countries-but-one this means foreign oligarchs only and this in turn turns into a one-nation-rules-all empire, where all other national leaders are simply vassals to the oligarchs of the dominant nation.
    The most blatant example of this are the concept of interim presidents, but only for non-compliant nations to the liberal democratic dominant nation of course.
    I mean, do you really think you would accept an interim president of a national from your country that fled to the country choosing the interim president, let’s say a US socialist that fled to Venezuela or Edward Snowden coming back from Russia?

    For a people’s democracy you have:

    1. The vanguard democracy, where a socialist committee chooses a candidate and have just one person on the ballot, people can then vote for or against this person. If voted against, the committee chooses its next candidate.
    2. capillary democracy, where you vote locally and those local leaders vote upwards until the national leader is chosen, with a socialist committee that filters out candidates through having them take civil service exams.

    While it should be obvious that a capillary democracy is superior in getting people their voices met,
    even a vanguard democracy solves the giant issue of systemic campaign fraud benefiting the oligarchs.