Lurker > IfGodCouldDie

masterpug53 posted...

Even putting aside the dystopian hellscape undertones, the era of smartphones and bodycams has already proven that being heavily surveilled does nothing to improve peoples' behavior. Quite the opposite, arguably.

Yup. It's strong social safety nets, a feeling of belonging and a lack of financial desperation that are the strongest factors in reducing crime.

UshiromiyaEva posted...

Oh yeah he's really wrangling them in.

https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1836914979225612488?t=JHB7hY25TKiMbYzAk_K9Rw&s=19

@Corrik7

You still think he isn't going down a Hitler route?

Right.

Yea sorry guys, new Apex split so I've been playing that a ton but they broke the game, so I probably won't be playing it until another update to fix. I'll get some KH in until then.

Maniac64 posted...

I'd say a big part of it is that young boys are allowed to run wild at home more than young girls.

To speak in generalities thay i still see all the time, if boys run around like crazy or don't settle down when told to it's "boys being boys" and "you know how little boys are". If a little girl does it that's "unlady like" and they are more likely to be forced to practice sitting still and being quiet. The standard way of raising girls in modern times is much better for the school environment and school success.

Lol oh man. It's funny because my kids are the exact opposite of what you'd consider boy/girl behaviour in that regard. My daughter is buck wild while my son is a bit more reserved.

As a Canadian even if it was 2 mill USD I'll pass because it isn't enough to make me want to fuck over everyone.

foolm0r0n posted...

This is totally confusing. I don't think you're defining "deserve" at all here, but I do see the monopolistic hoarding problem you're describing. If that hoarding is what you mean by profit, then yeah I don't agree with it, and it's obviously a violent act. But when defining profit here, you say it's just the fruits of labor? In that case, of course I do think people deserve profit, and it's similar to my definition which involves mutual benefit. I don't get which you mean here.

Communists do usually refer to profit as the portion of the fruits of labor that is stolen by a capitalist from a laborer. e.g. If I pay you $10 to make a shirt that I sell for $15, I make $5 profit, which means I have stolen $5 of your labor. This is an exploitation of the laborer, equivalent to stealing, and underpinned by violence (i.e. if the laborer tries to get their $5 back, the capitalist fundamentally must use violence to stop it). That's the definition that communists use to say profit is immoral.

So yeah if being confused makes me bad faith then fine, no skin off my back.

What is it that you are confused about and can you define deserve for me so I can better clarify my point to you?

foolm0r0n posted...

You're using 2 very loaded terms here

I mean if you're just going to argue semantics about what I've posted when the intention of what I am saying should be pretty clear it becomes obvious you're not having this discussion in good faith. So I'll restate what I said very specifically and I will only do this once because I want to give you the benefit of the doubt.

I'm not going to go through the entirety of what I posted and rewrite it but I will address the the two point things you are being semantic about.

Deserve - I believe that you'd be hard pressed to find anyone that agrees 1 single person or small group of people should have the power to withhold the necessities of life and society based on the sole premise that they claim ownership of them. In so that if they decided to stop providing them humanity would die out or society as we know it would crumble and fall to apocalyptic levels.

If you do agree that a single person or small group of people should have the power to control human/societal necessities based solely on their claim of ownership I would like you to explain why and explain how it benefits society and humanity on a fundamental level.

Profit - The fruit of the labour. I would imagine this is pretty simple to understand, maybe the fact that I didn't specify I'm not imagining this a cashless/money-less society threw you for a loop, but anything that requires you to enlist the help of another to provide your service or product to everyone that needs or wants it should result in them getting a fair share of whatever it is that is exchange for the labour they put in to help you provide that.
foolm0r0n posted...

You're essentially using profit as a synonym for violence here

No I am not and there is absolutely no fucking way you can be serious in even claiming to think that.
foolm0r0n posted...

If you are able to define profit as something crucial to life, like reducing CO2 production or saving water

Is there a common conception that profit is defined as reducing CO2 or saving water I am unaware of? Like you seem to be under the assumption that the vast majority of people that invent products, devise new ideas or work to better humanity do it solely for capitalist gain when that is rarely if ever the actual case. It is capitalists that typically get their hands on these kinds of things and attempt to profiteer off of it, in an attempt to gain power, influence and wealth.

I do not disagree that if a person discovers some way to advance humanity or society they deserve some kind of compensation. The problem I have is that when a capitalist gets their hands on it they hold that advancement behind a fucking paywall.

Sweet

/sarcasm

Hayame_Zero posted...

I think the friendzone is a thing, but it has more to do with the guy putting themselves there by not being open about they want in a partner. The concept is based around just hanging out with women "as a friend", but not actually trying to ask them out.

Women don't "put them in the friendzone" like it's some sort of banishment or curse.

It's this
Proto_Spark posted...

The Friendzone is a completely real thing - it's just what happens if you express a romantic interest in a partner and they reject you (but you also have a pre-existing platonic relationship). It's a totally normal thing that happens. It kinda feels bad, but the only response is to kind of get over yourself and move on.

The reason Incels harp on it, is because they don't respect the partner they were expressing an interest in. And it's much easier to wallow in their own misery than be okay with respecting someone else's feelings. Because these incels typically never actually had an interest in a platonic relationship with these girls. When the only reason they were even trying to be friendly to someone was with the expectation of eventually leading to sex or a relationship or whatever, it'll lead to problems when that step is finally rejected.

And this is a thing that will always exist, so its always going to be something for incels to harp on.

And this
BlackScythe0 posted...

I thought friend zone was when you ask a girl out and she rejects you and then starts spending time around you to manipulate for feelings for various forms of help and money?

And unfortunately sometimes this

Edit to clarify: the last is sometimes unfortunately misconstrued as being in the friendzone because if a person is treating you that way they are not actually your friend

Sorozone posted...

Hell yeah! Are you actively trying to lose weight?

Not actively. Like I would like to start exercising again, but essentially I was diagnosed with sever ADHD. Apparently I tracked higher than most children that would be considered server. So I was put on Vyvanse(stimulant) and lamotrigine(mood stabilizer) turns out I was allergic to the lamotrigine so they switched me to Wellbutrin and it's just been mostly a case of better impulse control so I'm not actively seeking out shitty fast food. I'm not dopamine seeking as much which helps too. I've also switched away from a lot of sugary shit I used to eat(I'd drink like 2L of pop a day with a large Slurpee from Sev and a buch of pther really shitty foods) so my weight has just naturally been coming down. Also i find myself eating normal portions because im just not craving food/over eating like I used to. I'll typically have a bagel in the morning with an iced cap, nothing all day(occasionally I'll grab a midday bite if I'm actually feeling hungry) Like I was 330lbs at least, before I got medicated and it's been about 6 months. So it's coming down at a healthy rate too. My goal is to hopefully get myself down to 225 and go from there, but I'm like 6 1- 6 2 and have a pretty sizeable build and I know if I actually started working out I could probably put myself at a healthy as fuck 250.

So I'll preface my response with: I did say that I don't believe that we are there yet as a society; the reason being we still have too many people that are easily divided and susceptible to capitalist propaganda.(I'm pretty sure I said the first part or at least meant to. The second part I'm adding as a part of the preface)
foolm0r0n posted...

So my main criticism is you haven't figured out the most important part, which is how the system would work with any existing government, how you would get there, and how you would stay there. It's a nice idea of a single moment in time, but that's not a society.

The system would work with any currently democratic government the same way the current system works, with government just having more control over industry/business with an importance in making sure its people are taken care of.

How do we get there?

It starts the same way every attempt to better society for humanity starts. Slow, arduous building into a movement, that movement then requires politicians brave and stupid enough to tell the people constantly fucking over and turning average people against each other to basically fuck off.

Then you start with the businesses and industries that are essential to to society as it is, nationalize them to insure that the people are taken care of, because no one person or small group of people should be able to profiteer off of humanity's essentials.(I think you'd be hard pressed to find someone that actually believes that someone deserves to be allowed to profit off the things others need to live and instead just accept that it is currently a fact of life)

After that legislation is required to overhaul the current economic system. You force companies and corporations to split profit and say equally among every single employee. Obviously in this situation like I explained earlier taxes and expenses and anything else relevant to insuring the company can operate/prospers is subtracted from revenue first.

How do we stay there?

That's actually the easiest part. Once a system is in place where everyone knows that everyone is going to prosper equally and everyone is going to be taken care of it will only be the tiniest percentage of people that would want to dismantle it and I feel like any attempt to reverse it would be highly scoffed at.

I'm not sure what you're saying isn't a society.

foolm0r0n posted...

It also seems like lots of your ideas have very complex details which require full participation with no exception or opposition. It seems like the meme of "REAL communism has never been tried". There's many horrible historical examples of various elements of your ideas, but not as extremely or completely. So I imagine, like most theoretical communists who enjoy developing ideas within the safety of a western hyper-capitalist state, you would say that those horrible examples don't count because they were missing X Y or Z. Unless you do have real world examples that you would point to for your ideas?

I mean humans are very complex individuals and we are moving towards more and more complex societies all the time.

I mean "real communism" hasn't ever been tried but a lot of the ideals from communism have been and do get implemented over time through socialist policies. Humans are naturally communal creatures and a strong sense of community is at the very least subconsciously important to the vast majority of us.

And to claim that people only theorize about ways to better society from comfort is a little weird. I feel pretty confident that most ideas about how to improve society have actually come from people that either are living in a shitty society or recognize that society is shit for a lot of people. If a society was perfect there would be no need to improve it.

I am unaware of any society that has fully implemented the idea in which I am proposing so if it exists or has existed and failed it would be good to know.

And yes obviously there is always pushback to attempts to improve society for everyone(I honestly have no fucking clue why) it is a part of why I honestly don't think we are quite there yet. There is unfortunately still a lot of bigotry, prejudice, and aversion to change that exists because there are vast amounts of people that have decided that society is already perfect and see no reason to improve it.

foolm0r0n posted...

bro, no, come on

What, you don't think that's an apt description of everything called woke?

foolm0r0n posted...

I've never met a white person who did know what woke really was and it's your fault if you care about their opinion on it, so I won't blame him for it

I'm a white person and can tell you exactly what woke is. It's the idea that people of varying creeds, colours, religions and cultures deserve an equal amount of respect and a chance at representation when their inclusion in anything doesn't equal the exact amount or proper population distribution. Meaning that instead of them getting the representation that is equal to what exists in real life any representation for them means they are instantly being over represented.

The problem with the people that use woke is that they don't want to admit this thought process makes them a fucking bigot and they can't admit to themselves that this thought process is an active demonstration of how fucking privileged their shitty fucking lives are.

TheSultanOfSlam posted...

We love you igcd

I know, and it wasn't meant to be pity fishing or anything like that.

UltimaterializerX posted...

One game shouldnt get you down. Not your fault you got emotionally manipulated when you were at a low point.

I skip one game and this happens. I totally would have had your back like always !!

Lol thanks Ulti. It's not for me, it's more for the people that might still be legitimately upset over it.

Probably not, I think I'll continue a hiatus until everyone would want me in a game again

Bump for some playtime tonight after work.

Wasn't sure which "health" topic to post this in, but I just weighed myself and for the first time in close to 20 years I am under 260lbs, sure I'm 259.9, but it's a start lol

HashtagSEP posted...

I don't mean to get aggressive with you. It just felt weird that you were calling me out when several people were reacting the same way because we all (well, most of us, apparently) know this TC's history.

Now I do mean to be aggressive with Guide, because he just flat out decided he doesn't like me, but...

It's all good.

The short answer really is I just replied how I did because TC has a history, and it's a way to kill a Sunday evening while watching football. Nothing more.

Ok fair enough, I've been fairy on and off CE for the last year or so and previous to that I was much more of a lurker, and before that I only really played Mafia on CE, so I don't really recognize TC and thought it was a fairly mundane realistic topic so your replies came off as oddly negative towards him. With a little more context it feels like a similar typical response to a No_U(I think was the username, maybe a 17 thrown in there) topic.

HashtagSEP posted...

Several people have been negative to TC in this topic. You chose to have a problem with me.

Go ahead, spill it.

Your first post just stood out I guess, then I saw repeated posts that seemed like you were way more invested than your claim you were just replying to a dumb topic. If it's a case that you hate TC and just blast him in any topic he makes, that's fine. It's not really that big of a deal and ultimately I don't care enough to keep a conversation going with you if you're going to get aggressive with me.

HashtagSEP posted...

What about my reply bothers you so much, exactly?

I'm not bothered, was just curious why your first instinct was to be negative to TC. Just seemed odd. And your subsequent replies just seemed like you were getting overly invested in something that really doesn't matter.

HashtagSEP posted...

Because I felt like wasting 30 seconds replying to a dumb topic?

Weird point of contention.

So you got overly invested on being negative towards TC because you felt like replying to a dumb topic? ....ok

HashtagSEP posted...

Exactly, she doesn't owe you anything.

Because you're not dating.

That's why she didn't want to talk to you.

Because you're not dating.

Does she know you're telling people that you're dating?

Honestly, why do you care so much?

Honestly, fuck yes. That is super easy money.

008Zulu posted...

No need, I take care of my stuff.

So do I, but I work a job that has a lot of dust/fine dirt particles flying around and just use it for extra protection.

God fucking damn it, the right is so fucking unhinged it's not even fucking.... I don't even have words. They are just unbelievably un-fucking-hinged.

bluezero posted...

Or comments

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/f/f0737642.jpg

Other: rational thinking

Patty_Fleur posted...

She's not ugly at all. She is pretty. However, I see lots of better looking women all the time daily.

Euripides posted...

Pretty? Yes

Sexy? No

Pretty much these. Like I know I'm ugly as sin so it's well beyond my scope to talk about others looks, but she definitely isn't ugly but I wouldn't consider her super hot either.

What

Ha ha ha

Fucking lol

Dungeater posted...

retro gaming sucks

the amount of good games before 2001 can be counted on one hand

Uh, the topic is asking for hot takes not needlessly edgy opinions

foolm0r0n posted...

Right. I do think in this case that there's tons of strings attached, especially getting help from the US and EU. That's why in the case of Ukraine, I think the war needs to be treated as a US proxy war primarily, not as an oppressed country defending itself.

I don't see any reason it can't be both. It's very common for people and countries to use fighting between each other for their own benefit even when one is clearly in the wrong.

foolm0r0n posted...

Oh I got these mixed up. I thought you were saying the exception was going to war against a fascist/genocidal country that you're not involved with (i.e. world police Bush Doctrine). Defending yourself against aggression is obviously justified. And like I said, even some amount of escalation can be justified when you're deeply oppressed (which def doesnt apply to the US).

Haven't read the rest of your post but I will.

My exception in that regard is that if that fascist government starts some kind of war with other governments it's ok for the people they attack and their allies to defend themselves. I don't believe that any single country should be world police, but if people ask for help it's ok to help them.

HylianFox posted...

Kicking out migrants also kills children, huh.

So that would mean the one that prevents suffering before it begins is the lesser of two evils.

skullbone posted...

Got infinite with that Storm War Machine deck so thanks for sharing that!

I swapped white widow for Madame Web because I don't have WW though. Madame web definitely won me some games when I didn't draw War Machine. Moving into Ebony or Storm lanes is clutch.

Also being able to snap immediately when you draw Storm, Legion, and WM is basically guaranteed 2 cubes.

That's how I won my games in gold, I'd hit the combo and they would just straight up leave lol

foolm0r0n posted...

Any exception is the inch that become the mile unfortunately.

I wholeheartedly disagree, in the same way that I don't consider defending yourself from a real physical threat to be an act of violence.

foolm0r0n posted...

For example right now a ton of Americans are ok with aggressive war to fight for civil rights, which is a very popular excuse for the past few decades of war against Sharia Muslim countries who are anti woman and anti LGBT.

I do agree that fighting another country over their human rights violations is not a good reason to go to war. Cultures and people have to come to the realization themselves. Which is where the cultural and economic exports help, you show people there is a better way and they will fight for it themselves(not necessarily violence).

In that moment I do feel it is ok to help them with whatever they may need(medical aide, supplies, provisions), because at some point their fight is going to end up being a fight against facisim if their government decides to not listen to its people and give them what they desire.

foolm0r0n posted...

But yeah it seems like in the ideal you're pretty strongly aligned with classic liberalism aka libertarianism. The exceptions are what truly define our philosophies though.

For somethings sure, but economically I'm a straight communist and I do believe that the government plays a vital role in society.

Like in all honesty, I think the best possible economic system we could have would be anything to do with natural resources or basic necessities should be government run so that way the people can reap the benefits of their countries resources and be taken care of because their needs are being met.

Basic necessities should be provided for free because any entities that provide them should be government run.

Businesses should be entirely socialized(I'm not really sure what other term to use for this) with one exception.

And by socialized I mean that regardless of who starts a business anytime an employee is hired they are given an equal stake in the company. So if you start a business and you or your family are the only people that work there you and your family can keep 100% of the profit(this is the exception.)

If you have to hire outside help because your business is growing to the point that you need to hire people they deserve a fair share of the profits(like if you have a company that has 100 people each person gets 1% of the profits). At a certain point company decisions become group decisions voted on by the entirety of the employee body in a kind of a mix between a board of directors and a union. It would also cause people to be much more invested in the companies they work for. Obviously if an employee leaves they give up their share of the company and it gets redistributed among everyone else.

Companies would have to pay taxes to make sure that government run entities could provide for the people that work in government run industries.

Then after a companies expenses(materials, equipment, etc.) are paid everything else would be divided among all employees.

People themselves would not be required to pay taxes as it is already deducted due to the company paying it.

Healthcare, schooling, natural resource harvesting/production(lumber, precious metals, oil, etc), utility companies(phones, internet, power, water, etc), basic necessities(grocery stores, I'm sure there are other things I'm not currently coming up with), infrastructure(roads, housing, etc) would all be handled by the government to make sure that everyone is provided for.

The taxes that companies pay would be used to pay the people that work in those specific departments/industries so that way they are also taken care of.

Government positions(workers, politicians, teachers, etc) would be paid a salary based on the median or mean of the rest of the population(I think it would depend on what incomes looked like across the board.) People unable to work due to age, disabilities, injuries, etc. would also be given a similar salary.

If you decided you didn't want to work for any reason, you would be provided with the bare essentials to live a very basic life.

At the age of retirement anything you worked for and earned throughout your life is obviously yours to keep and you are given an income to continue providing yourself with luxuries.

I got so much more to say but realized I've been off and on writing this for quite a while and I'm tired nodding off. I'm more than willing to expand or answer any questions about the system that you or anyone may have. I've legit got it all figured out. The biggest hurdle is convincing the vast majority of people to stand united against the most "powerful" people that are keeping us dived and held down.

The biggest reason I feel this way though is because we as a society need each other and should look out for each other, and typically I think we are pretty decent at doing that on micro levels, we just have to learn to do it on a macro level.

foolm0r0n posted...

The straw man that fighting Hitler can possibly be considered pro-war is itself clearly pro-war propaganda. Don't fall for obvious warmongering just because it makes you feel good. It's absolutely stupid. Ulti-tier ideas.

I'm pretty anti-war in the same sense I think I understand you are, but facisim and genocide are the exceptions I am ok with. I'd rather those things be dealt with as little fighting/death as possible but it's unlikely that the oppressors ever will just stop because they've had enough. I also believe that in our planets current state, countries have the right to defend themselves from invasions.

Like I'm a person that thinks we'd be better off with open borders worldwide because ultimately the idea of countries is pretty weird to me. It's just another level of tribalism that humanity subscribes too. I know a lot of people tie culture/customs to countries but in all honesty those kinds of things are way more regional than they are country wide. Like I mean yea some things ingrain themselves into a countries "identity" but I honestly think that's only because the country exists in the first place. If countries didn't exist those kinds of things would still very much likely take root with the people they resonate with, in whatever regions they happen to start.

foolm0r0n posted...

Not any more important. A sum of several can come close I guess.

Can you define what you consider to be pro or anti war?

MMXcalibur posted...

The fact that the race is still this close when America was presented a respectable choice against all the insane, stupid bullshit coming from Trump leads me to believe we are a very, very stupid country.

"Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that."

-George Carlin

Lopen posted...

Not to dredge up yesterday's discussion but I had a lot of work to do and missed this

While I don't necessarily disagree this is "correct" this is a mindset that will do more harm than good and is ultimately what I'm concerned about.

Basically an endless feedback loop where sides delude themselves more and more into thinking people that don't agree with them deserve punishment or whatever. The more people who are more concerned with being morally "right" than trying to put forth an attitude that promotes progress.

You should focus your hate on the people pushing the hate, not the bystanders. I'm not saying to praise the bystanders, but trying to shotgun everyone that doesn't 100% get behind your cause and call them all deplorables is just a way to get people to not listen to you. Which is basically the path modern politics is walking down

You can be sanctimonious or you can get things done. Not both.

I have never advocated hate(not respecting disrespectful people is not the same as hate.) I believe that the vast majority of those "bystanders" and even a lot of the intentionally hateful ones are severely misguided and have been subject to decades of propaganda. That's why I said earlier that as a person they would consider the "default" or "normal" I believe I have a moral and more significant duty to help educate them. I just don't think the PoC, LGBT+, or any other minority that doesn't want to deal with their shit is unjustified in feeling that way.

Like I mean behind closed doors I'll talk all the shit about racists, sexists, bigots, etc. but when face to face dealing with their shit I try and take a more proactive approach and do my best to try and convince them to change by doing my best to help them connect the dots because I believe that when a person comes to a realization themselves it is more powerful.

Now obviously if I see a couple of people legitimately attacking someone physically or verbally I step in because I don't take that shit and I won't allow others to do that if I am in a position to stop it.

RikkuAlmighty posted...

Rogue and Echo stocks are up

Basically this.

I'd say it's likelier that both are true at the same time

yunalenne10 posted...

$2,000,000 a week is doable.

Came in to say this

Grand_Kirby posted...

I don't really feel good about dumping on other people's appearances but... seriously, what the fuck happened to her?

There are a few things that likely cause it, body dismorphia, trauma involving what she might consider or percieve as looks related(rape, emotional abuse, bullying), mental illness

Waluigi1 posted...

Steal incoming <_<

I lost my first match after posting that lol

She legitimately reminds me of this girls mom I used to know, when I was 16-23. She would sleep with every guy the girl tried dating. She was 31 when we were 16 and she never grew out of her party phase and would always creep on all of us. I saw her a couple years ago and time has not been good to her, she still behaves the same way and at close to 50 she looks about the same as laura.
(My math was wrong she'd be about 53 now)

RchHomieQuanChi posted...

Democrats are always tasked with fixing Republicans' fuck ups, blame always gets shifted to them.

I was just explaining to someone the recency bias that typically favours conservative governments, because con gov'ts will enact policies that fuck everyone over but you won't typically see the effects until the next gov't takes over because they will push that shit through when they know they are on their way out. More liberal gov'ts will spend their time trying to fix as much as they can for what is currently most pressing, which quite often lead to a feeling of not enough, allowing cons to get back in and fuck more shit up while reaping the benefits of what the previous gov't fixed and just rinse/repeat

I literally have not lost a match with this deck...
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/7/78889dfb.jpg

And I recreated the only deck to even come close...
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/7/7cd871cc.jpg

I have literally turned 7 gold tickets into 7 infinite tickets