I think it’s a refutation of unregulated production & resource distribution in general.

In socialism, distribution would be handled by the state or locality, by the producers themselves, by a work coupon system, with money (a la market socialism), or theoretically in a sort of free-for-all all where people just request what they need. Only the last one is really implicated in a tragedy of the commons type scenario, with the money and work coupon systems potentially causing a smaller degree of that sort of an issue (as there would be less inequality, so less possibility of overproduction due to demand). Producers would, in that case, be encouraged to produce more to fill the increased demand, but there wouldn’t be a profit motive for doing so, and so a consumer-side tragedy of the commons is less likely. Also, producers’ access to resources would theoretically be more tightly regulated than in capitalism, but that isn’t necessarily the case.

In capitalism, distribution is dictated by the money system obviously and due the massive inequality there is a big disparity among people’s buying power - but more importantly companies consume the vast majority of resources and are encouraged to grow infinitely in a world of finite resources - creating demand where it doesn’t naturally exist to squeeze more profit out of folks’ savings, make them take on debt, or cause them to deprioritize other purchases.

In capitalism, people are not encouraged to consume infinitely more because it is not possible. You only have so many needs and so much income as an individual. The market invents new needs with advertising and such (you need makeup, you need the newest smartphone with ten cameras, you need glasses that let facebook spy on you), but consumers’ buying power is limited. People can’t really cause a market-wide tragedy of the commons, only companies can because they have the vast majority of the access to resources and the ability and motive (profit motive) to acquire them.

Tragedy of the commons, or some iteration of it, seems inevitable under capitalism, but is mitigated or eliminated under socialism

Beast titan with alopecia lookin mf

Brutalist fast food restaurants? Don’t threaten me with a good time. Fuckin love me some brutalism

It really depends, but ultimately a lot of social interactions can only happen between two people at once. Say you and your wife get into a fight. Instead of fighting it out & making up, she now has the option to stop fighting you and go hang out with your co-husband - and you aren’t invited. She also has the option to emotionally strong arm you to get her way by not only stonewalling you/withholding affection, but also by threatening to push you out of your marriage for another guy who literally lives with you both. Conversely, she does the same thing to the other guy.

Basically, now all those 2-person social interactions that happen in a marriage become much more complicated due to the presence of a 3rd person.

You’d need to have a lot of trust in your wife (and this other guy too) - she’d need to have a tremendous amount of emotional stability and be non-manipulative. She’d suddenly have a lot more power in the relationship in a very inequitable way.

My wife and I are very into monogamy. But she has a serious temper and can be very manipulative when she’s angry (she’s gotten better about this, but it’s a known issue). It’d be very easy for her to do something hurtful. I’m not talking about sex, just the emotional threat of turning to someone else for relief from me - and the implied threat of pushing me out.

Fake: is living a lie

Gay: jerks off to guys

It’s fine and not at all contradictory to care for existing people with Downs and also work to eliminate the condition.

No it’s actually a type of large automobile, a sport utility vehicle

@aihorde@lemmy.dbzer0.com draw for me Lemmy user ComradeMiao prompting an ai to create an image of the db0 admin as a power hungry reddit mod

This could be a good use of AI. Since this regime is doing it, and since some of their claims are pretty unrealistic, it probably won’t be. But, ML has been used for a while to help identify new drug compounds, find interactions, etc. It could be very useful in the FDA’s work - I’m honestly surprised to hear that they’re only just now considering using it.

The Four Thieves Vinegar Collective uses some software from MIT ASKCOS that uses neural networks to help identify reactions and retrosynthesis chains to produce chemical compounds using cheap, homemade bioreactors. Famously, they are doing this to make mifepristone available for people in areas of the US without access to abortion care.

You can check it out here. It’s a good example of a very positive use-case for an AI/ML tool in medicine.

Business idea:

AI powered bot farm generates thousands of AI agents who get lonely guys to marry them, fully aware they’re bots.

Each bot is a financial and legal entity, organized as an LLC.

The botwives convince the guys to put the bots on their will.

The guys die or you have the bots divorce them and take half of their stuff.

Profit.

I guess, if they answer “No” or “Your simple rebuttal has made me realize the problem of free will is nbd actually”.

But if they say “Yes. It does matter.” Then suddenly it isn’t defeated and you’d need to provide a compelling argument for it not mattering, which would make for good conversation.

Oh I’m just… a … regular type dude >!.. with a big-ass dick!<

Depends on your goals. I’d say learn the one you have the most use for. If you don’t have a use and are just learning for fun, then pick the most interesting one. If you’re learning intending to acquire the language as quickly as possible, then either Italian or French would be good choices.

I am learning Chinese (mandarin, aka 汉语, aka 普通话) and I personally find it very logical, interesting, and fun as a native english speaker who used to be conversationally fluent in Spanish. There are definite difficulties with the language (soooooo many homonyms, characters (汉子) take some getting used to, tones, etc) but if you learn it, there is a lot of reading material and media that will become accessible to you. Additionally some things about it are easier than other languages - like the grammar is very simple, you don’t have to worry about conjugations and tenses as much. Also, I think that it provides more cognitive benefits because of how different it is to romance languages.

汉语是很酷。我推荐你！

Except, since each vote toward good/rotten is binary, it really means that a high score is not “best” but is instead “least objectionable”

0420 6942 0694 2069 4/20 069

It’s illegal unless there’s a bonafide occupational qualification that your disability prevents you from performing. Like you couldn’t apply for a job as a furniture mover if you’re a quadriplegic and cry discrimination when they don’t select you. And the employer can ask things like “this job requires that you lift heavy objects of up to 600lbs with the assistance of another person and a back brace. Do you have any medical or other reason you could not perform these duties?”.

Now if that weren’t a real occupational qualification, that’d be discriminatory. Like if they said you had to be a man for that moving job - there’s no reason you have to be a man, you just have to be able to move 600lb things.

Airports are infrastructure buildings. This is like seeing a billboard telling you not to hatecrime gay people and boycotting the highway.

Pro-tip: replace the water in your instant ramen with coffee to make it taste like shit.

Well that sucks

The main problem with the train would be that once you get to those cities, they are massive, sprawling, and lack good public transit.

So hopefully they improve the transit situation in the cities & surrounding areas as well.