also goes from happy to sad if you read it backwards

which category does NixOS belong to?

not conservative in the political sense, just conservative with regards to tech

it reads like you’re trying to censor which exactly service you’re talking about! 😆

“I read A on B”

the screenshot says “Financial Times” at the bottom left and “Source: FT analysis of CDC WONDER” in the bottom right

politics aren’t genetic, but they are obviously still inheritable

i’m assuming that “other purposes” are other categories that each are smaller than the ones listed. they are probably available on a website or something that gives the full list.

it would be nice if they had merged them together in wider but more informative categories though

no, it won’t. where did you get that idea from?

wasps as in actual stinging wasps (like yellowjackets and hornets) or just their close relatives that are (mostly) harmless to humans?

i think it would have worked if it had the word fake before disasters, implying the conspiracy theories that all of those were hoaxes made by the government instead of just being about the reactions to them

“the economy” is a social construct that is affected by reality and affects reality, but it still is not reality. it reflects what expectations people have and how they are planning based on these expectations, but all of these are choices, not inevitable forces of nature

you’re beautiful and so is your self-portrait. excellent job!

uBlock can do everything that uMatrix can do it just has a different interface, so there’s no need to use the deprecated uMatrix

what’s the original non-anti-joke version of this?

There are only THREE states of matter, everyone knows this! It’s basic physics!

sure, it’s a war and violence might be necessary, but it’s a question of proportionality. you don’t meet a peaceful protest with artillery fire either

you also seem to be under the belief that anyone who dissents or in any way acts against the will of the state are doing so because of foreign interference instead of simply from their own volition. in neither case do deserve to be killed unless they are themselves violent or otherwise explicitly soldiers. i guess a more common issue than powerhungriness among communist leaders is the related issue of extreme paranoia which leads to tons of innocent people being killed or imprisoned. this is an example of something that can be triggered by CIA, but not excused by CIAs actions

why do leninist states even have a singular leader in the top if they’re trying to abolish hierarchy? why not cap it off with a committee with some further safeguards to prevent the power from getting to their head instead?

i doubt you yourself believe that all the actions of people in the top of the party represents the class of the proletariat that they are trying to represent instead of a hybrid between that an actions to further the class they themselves are now in as elite party members. this issue is furthered by corruption which all communist states are vulnerable to (especially since they are initially centralizing a lot of power) and which a very large amount of precautions need to be taken against to prevent it from collapsing the system on its own even without outside interference. now, capitalism isn’t better with corruption since the system is essentially a case of legalizing corruption under a formal system, but that’s also why it doesn’t collapse from corruption

i don’t mind the bureaucracy of a communist state at all, i don’t see where you got that. just the extreme actions against any dissenting voices, especially since they usually are talking about some real problem that needs to be addressed rather than just destabilizing for the sake of destabilizing

i also hope that you agree that russia is no longer in any way a communist state?

wait, so you’re saying that even the fascist states (e.g. the nazis) were only trying to defend themselves against foreign powers trying to destabilize their state? or am i misinterpreting you?

a state doesn’t have a mind of its own, it consists of people and those people are often power-hungry and do actively want to suppress dissent regardless of what would be good for the state. the whole point of socialism is to dismantle hierarchies, but by placing a powerful leader without accountability on the top you have undermined the whole concept

maybe cia actions were what caused them to be authoritarian, but that doesn’t excuse their actions in any way. the moment they became authoritarian, cia had already defeated socialism

suppressing “dissent” in the form of e.g. refusing to follow laws about distribution of resources (within reason) is one thing, but suppressing dissenting voices is a whole different thing altogether and those two shouldn’t be lumped together in one category. the former is a part of the normal job of a state while the latter is authoritarianism

no, it’s actually not edited. that exact frame appears at 23:03 in the episode on coal from june 2017: https://youtu.be/aw6RsUhw1Q8?t=1443