No no, that’s a farse and a uniquely human construct. Name me even one other species of creature that utilizes anything even remotely similar to money to survive…
We don’t need money to survive, we just submit ourselves to the government that orders us to use it.
Edit: I guess the downvoters don’t understand any other way of life, like owning a piece of dirt you can live on and grow your own farm and survive self sufficiently…
And yeah it sucks, I’m not in a self sufficient area myself anymore, because government and corporations have taken that from most of us.
Point is, if money didn’t exist in the first place, we wouldn’t literally have to pay for a box and piece of dirt to sleep on.
That’s basically the original scam, charging people to have somewhere to sleep. Like, doesn’t the Earth belong to all of us? Why do we live in a society where not only do you have to pay for facilities, you can’t even grow your own garden in said facilities?
We’re literally paying to get screwed. Everyone should have the right to find themselves a piece of dirt and go build themselves a log cabin and a farm if they so choose.
Again, humans are totally capable of being self sufficient, we’re just too fucking lazy and oppressed by big business and government to do anything about it.
Other species don’t need clean water, clothes, complex tools and growing food. This makes their life simpler yet limits their number and habitat.
Try to live in a village growing own food. It’s a hard work, especially if you have cattles or other domestic animals. Villagers work from early morning to evening because there’s a lot things to do. Living in a city is much easier.
Is it not true though that this is seasonal and overall people that live this way work less than the average person living a modern life?
It is not like you get home from work and have no chores etc. Realistically a lot of the work these people do is something that a person with a house would call chores / upkeep.
I don’t deny that the labour is physically harder, I’ve worked in my life retail, office and landscaping, I know that physical labour is tough. Though hard overall is subjective, I undoubtedly hated and found most every other job harder than my stint of about a year in landscaping, which was physically very taxing. The landscaping gig might have been the favorite job I’ve ever had.
But, no, I am not talking about people who work as farmers / labourers commercially, but instead the question is mostly about self sustained homestead / village living.
Growing uo I had small scale farmers in my family and had a countryside house where I knew a lot of the beighbours who lived there full time. Generally they seemed to have a couple of bursts of work during a day but most of the day was slowly and steadily attending to one or another chore / upkeep task
I would vager people living this way actually work far less hours in a given year than a person living a modern capitalist life, especially if you factor upkeep you have to do for your house after work etc, even if we assume a 40 hour work week, which lets face it, the average person probably exceeds (64 hours for me, personally).
Why would anybody use NTFS? btrfs ftw. Also all EFI partitions are FAT. And lastly, if you want a USB stick to be portable across operating systems, FAT is still the way to go
Btrfs with compression can substantially “increase” capacity of your USB stick. IIRC I managed to fit 20-30% more data on 64Gb stick than its maximum capacity!
Everything uses FAT32. ATMs, the fare machine on transit systems, the sorting system at your post office, traffic lights, nuclear power control systems. Literally everything that isn’t a Unix, MacOS, or a Windows machine uses FAT32. All that stuff has worked for decades and will probably keep working for decades more.
There are downsides to nuclear these days. Incredibly high cost with a massive delay before they’re functioning. Solar + wind + pumped hydro + district heating is where it’s at in 2024.
Also, tie together more countries’ power grids to even out production and demand of renewables, and reduce the need for other backup sources.
For a fraction of the cost of nuclear, increase the storage capacity as well. We’ve had days where the price per MWh was negative in many hours, because of excess production.
The barriers to carbon free energy aren’t technical, they’re purely political.
it has got cheaper, but it has to get cheap enough that you can buy enough batteries with the difference. I’m not sure it has become that cheap. Maybe these sodium battery things will get developed.
No, there is pumped storage. Honestly, despite the plethora of start-ups claiming to have a solution (sodium batteries, molten-salt, etc) The only really proven way to store electricity for later is pumped storage, but that relies on geography (hills) which not everyone has. Batteries are great for phones, and cars but they simply don’t scale to countries.
That is actually very impressive. Thanks! I remain a bit skeptical as its only 1/5th of what they need and it’s only one region of one (rich) country. Still, 10GW of lithium battery would be one hell of a fire ;-)
Or convert excess to hydrogen and provide resilience, or have arrangements for industry to consume the excess. Or ramp down your generation at those times. Or shift excess to neighbouring grids.
This is wrong. Right now, europe is experiencing high pressure and doesn’t have any wind. Check this out its map that shows you how much wind is being produced right now! Can you provide a source that says " the wind is always blowing somewhere" or is it just a platitude?
You probably also didnt heard about Thorium based molten salt reactors, they are much safer than conventional nuclear, also cheaper, and you can have a 50MW installation in space not much larger than a shipping container. A 50MW solar installation is close to 1km2 and thats without any storage included. It even can be modified to run on spent fuel of conventional nuclear power plants.
Please understand that negative prices are the market for electricity breaking down! That is not a good thing. It should mean that if you have solar panels on your roof you have to pay to participate in the national grid because you are dumping energy into the grid when it can’t use it, but special rules have been made for renewable plants. Literally, imagine a contract-to-supply for wind or solar…
I understand very well the implications of the negative price, which is why I advocated NOT to spend trillions in nuclear, when issues of balancing demand and production can be solved for a fraction of what nuclear costs.
Still not a reason to not build them, the entire point is for nuclear to handle the load when solar/wind can’t provide due to weather. Other renewables will still be producing the bulk of the power we need, but at night nuclear will be handling any demand spikes, each of them would greatly reduce the number of batteries required to satisfy the demand. They can stay until our solar output is so high we can just start electrolyzing water into hydrogen as energy storage.
Though pumped hydro is sometimes opposed by environmental groups because it does absolutely decimate local environments.
I have high hopes for sodium batteries. The ones that have been released on the market are simply perfect (if scaled up) for local grid storage in countries with a lot of space and will hopefully get better energy density in line with Lithium Iron Phosphate with time.
Salt batteries have been the cold fusion of battery tech for like 10 years, but now it is finally coming to fruition. I hope to install a solar installation with salt batteries in 5 years or so, myself.
If you’re suggesting using Nuclear as a peaker plant or to turn it off and on whenever wind/solar is not up for it then I’m sorry to say that it’s not viable. Nuclear generators don’t handle well being turned off and on.
You can make Thorium reactors much smaller and cheaper, basically a 50MW unit is not much larger than a shipping container, while being much more safe than standard nuclear plants. The largest issue is over-regulation of the nuclear power in general.
A 50MW of solar installation is HUGE, and thats 50MW at the sunniest part of the planet: newsaf.cgtn.com/news/2019-12-15/…/index.html, We are basically talking about close to a square kilometer installation…
there is simply no way to call a 50MW solar plant cleaner than nuclear and its probably not even that much cheaper in the end. Compare that to a shipping container sized reactor… Only thing in the way, is the nuclear scare and government regulations.
The cost is less from the design and more from the safety regulations. Best case scenario the state just starts making nuclear power plants, it’s just not a good idea to mix profit incentive with nuclear.
Biologically and functionally speaking, he’s whatever and everything. Practically speaking, he chooses to have a dick and look like a big muscular man that looks nothing like his previous form (so its even more deliberate), so it seems the only thing that survived his ascention was his gender identity.
In my headcanon, the further into the future you go the less attached to his humanesque form Dr Manhattan becomes, and eventually he just becomes a sentient force that does things that are beyond comprehension without needing a physical body at all.
All addiction advertising should be illegal… Imagine struggling with withdrawal and giving up, and then cigarettes appear, bam!
Or alcohol - addicts actually need that shit to get through the day. The offramp for these things needs planning and consistency and this is just reinforcing the impulses
Sometimes merely purchasing things is an addiction, one that many members of my family have. Adtech feels like a weapon designed to exploit anxiety and dopamine pathways.
“body type” has always been a general term to express the entire shape, size and proportions of a person, including excess weight and obesity.
When I was obese I couldn’t pull off crop tops because of my body size, it was incredibly unflattering, and now that I’m a healthy weight I still can’t pull off crop tops because of my body proportions, I have a short torso.
Body type encompasses both scenarios, so it’s often thought of as a polite way to tell someone something is unflattering without singling out specific “flaws” in their body.
That makes a bit more sense. I was initially reminded of the various pseudo-scientific attempts to classify variations in human body shapes, which usually don’t factor in great variations in body fat content. The way it’s used in the image made me think this was an attempt to frame an unhealthy lifestyle as something inherent that can’t be changed.
I’m aware that any of the past attempts to classify body types are extremely pseudo-scientific and I’ve explained as much in a different comment in this thread. The point is that “body type” isn’t just necessarily just a generic way to refer to someone’s body shape. Plenty of people still believe in that made up nonsense.
He’s right, though - unless there are real legal repercussions or it’s an impossible task, just say “yes”. Worst case scenario, you’ll do a bad job of it and whoever requested your service won’t do it anymore.
Right. This is what I see in the quote. No one, in my entire life, has ever simply offered me an amazing opportunity. I’ve had to apply, interview, fight for that opportunity.
Who is getting opportunities handed to them they’re not qualified for? What world does this guy live in?
When i worked IT my first task was to fix a printer, convinced my boss i had no education or experience with printers. Did not have to deal with printers while i worked there.
I dont think this is limited to printers though… I bought a nice hp convertible laptop for uni. Now the pen tips that came with it are used up and the only way to get new ones is to buy 110 tips for about 100€ (which are very hard to get too) or to buy a new pen for 40€. I tried contacting hp support where I first had to fight through a “chat bot” (basically a fancy way to navigate through their faq) to finally be told that my warranty is voided for 2 months now and if I wanted to contact hp support I might have to pay fees on their hotline … Printers are worse for sure though but I will never in my life again buy any product made by HP.
Edit: to be clear 100 tips for over 100€ is insane and you can basically only get them from aliexpress and they are not even sold in the official hp shop.
This is why I like it when I see men wear skirts/kilts, wear eyeliner and/or paint their nails. It’s not something I’m into but I think it’s cool when I see it.
Is it tho? Being gay is liking other men. Why must those things be feminine things? Who decided? Warriors wore war paint. Now covering your face in whatever you like is for women. Pink used to be a boy’s color. Lesley was a boy’s name. We’re all just people doing shit.
High-heeled shoes were invented in Persia for cavalrymen and later used by sharpshooters. Men wear flowing cloth garments like skirts/dresses in many extant cultures. Men used to play all of the female roles in Western plays, in full clothing and makeup. Men have been removing and shaping body hair since the ancient Egyptians, Romans and Greeks. Even as recently as the 1970s men would wear cropped tops and short-shorts.
There are so many examples to deconstruct things that we view as feminine or masculine as being entirely arbitrary, culturally-locked and era specific. It’s all socially constructed, and therefore can be deconstructed - but only if you’re willing or able to engage in reflection.
The instant I saw this picture, I thought of the Parks and Rec scene:
"That's not really the attitude I expect from an award winner."
"Everything I do is the attitude of an award winner, because I have won an award."
That should be the case for the picture "Everything I do is manly because I am a man." And the same for the person you are responding to "Everything I do is gay/straight/other because I am gay/straight/other." That one part of someone's identity has no bearing on defining the rest of them - ie, being gay means that he's attracted to men but doesn't define what he wears, how he acts, etc.
Anyone can wear makeup or nail polish or wear a skirt, doesn’t say anything about their sexuality. Nor do all gay men do those things (I’d hazard that most don’t).
You are conflating two very different things. About half of the gay men I’ve known were fairly or very masculine, they just were attracted to men. And I’ve known plenty of straight guys that ranged from feminine to downright flamboyant. The way you tell if someone likes men or not is either if they tell you or flirt with you, and if they’re a man, then they are gay (or bi or whatever non-strictly-straight flavor).
Incidentally, most of the (non-trans) men I’ve known that were feminine or flamboyant were artists of some flavor, which tend to be a group with less inhibitions, so I would guess there are plenty of non-artist men that would show more femininity if they felt more comfortable with doing so.
You’re the only person on earth. Does your gender matter anymore? Hair colour or length? Cock or boob size? What you put on your face or wear? Whether you like sewing, math, fishing, dancing, or frolicking through a field? No one’s there. You don’t have an identity because you’re never being identified by anyone. You’re not goth, gay, feminine, trans, or Scottish—you don’t know what those things are and actually never will because they won’t be invented. I mean, you could invent them by some astronomically improbably chance, but how, why, and what for? They’re all made up things along with all the socially expected tropes that come with those “identities”.
So what you perceive as “gay” is just nothing for a lot of people. They wouldn’t have considered it, nor would care, you’d be struggling to hold their attention as you tried to explain it and they’d forget it in moments anyway. These people say “I am me”, not “I am a…”
Some of those things wouldn’t exist anymore but others while the words and grouping may not the concept they represent would. I am gay, not because society puts me in that box, but because society has drawn a box around where I sit and given it the label gay. If I were the only person I would still crave the touch of another woman and not of a man. I may not feel insecure about the size of my breasts but I’d be uncomfortable if I didn’t have them.
Nope, it’s more common with those groups but gay men are into other men, what they do is unrelated. Goth is a whole thing as is Scottish. And trans is not identifying with the sex you were assigned at birth. Part of the reason why these groups are more likely to do these things is because of those assumptions. If a straight cis man just feels like he likes the way he looks better dressed like that that’s cool and while people may make assumptions they aren’t necessarily true.
Gender roles, and thus gender presentation, are cultural for the most part. Some are common enough to multiple cultures that it approaches being just human culture.
But even in western (us, canada, europe) cultures, there have been periods where the presentation of masculinity would be considered feminine in other eras. So gender roles & presentation aren’t fixed in a given culture.
If I, regardless of what my genitals are, present as a man, then I am effectively the same as whatever a man is in my culture. If that also includes taking on the gender roles of “man”, then that’s another layer.
However, this also means that when enough men shift their presentation and roles, anyone holding to the previous roles and presentation are now “less” a man in the cultural sense. It really, truly is a majority rules situation, and the minority are what get relabeled (usually).
The more men that reject an arbitrary paradigm of masculinity, the more we shift to an open, loose definition of what is and isn’t masculine, with the eventual possibility that gender becomes so loose in definition that masculine and feminine become irrelevant terms, if the labels also lose relevance to the majority. And I believe that if enough people reject fixed gender paradigms, the terms would inevitably cease to matter.
I mean, we’ve already started to add qualifiers. We have traditional gender roles as a specific thing as separate from current gender roles.
This isn’t to deny that hormones and genetics will push people into behaviors that are linked to gender because they’re mostly linked to sex. But even with those pressures, we usually have room how we express those behaviors.
It’s why I always tell folks, particularly younger folks, to not worry much about labels. Be who you are, as long as who you are isn’t a douche, and you’ll eventually find the labels that feel right. And there’s a good chance you’ll end up shifting your self over time anyway, which is fine. As long as you don’t fixate on labels as defining the person, the self, you can freely shift labels as the self shifts. It’s when you pick a label and think that you have to fit it in all ways, forever, that you run into trouble.
So, fuck yeah. If you feel “girly”, be girly. Enjoy that shit. Be your best self. It’ll eventually work out :)
Exactly. I think labels are useful as communication tools, but they’re an active hindrance to self exploration. One of the greatest things I ever did for myself was completely setting them aside when exploring my gender until I knew what I wanted. It was a lot easier to run off a checklist of options than to sort through a variety of labels, even when I fell solidly into some labels.
memes
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.