postingpals

From your website:

"Admit Nothing. Deny Everything. Make Counter-Accusations"

Why am I not surprised to see this kind of instinctive reaction. I don't want to debate your points because that is way out of scope for this thread and I don't want to be chased out.

Why do you have to make work fun, shouldn't you already be enjoying it if you are doing what you want to do? Are you not doing what you want to do? See, that's the kind of problem that creates the infantilisation.

This is Capitalism. Everything has to be family friendly so it can reach as wide an audience as possible. When you're waiting for customer support, you have to hear a fun jingle so you don't get upset. People have to be talked down to like children so they know their place in the wealth hierarchy. It's an ideology, not in the sense of political beliefs, but rather false ideas that dominate society that we all subconsciously hold to maintain the social system we built on contradictory premises.

I don't think I've presented the full picture, but you asked where this trend is coming from, and to me this is the only common factor and starting point of investigation.

The idea that the alternative to copyright means artists working for free is an ideological conflation not even the wealthiest, most cynical person on earth could have dreamt up.

The argument a layman would make in favour of this is:

"if people know they could rent seek with their intellectual property and potentially make millions of dollars charging people for licenses / gatekeeping their work, well that's going to motivate them to create really good work! Without this motivation, no one would create good work"

And it's like, ignoring all the well-established counter-arguments to this, it kind of seems to justify its own existence through contradiction. It says, in essence, "We have to coerce people into making really good work by not giving them the building blocks that they could use to make really good work"

The alternative is trusting corporations, who also give your data to the government. Who do you trust with power then?

I find the show to be incredible, not just in terms of rhetoric but actually just aesthetically, it's got very pleasing visuals and there is no overuse of edits and sound.

But sometimes i see the way david simon acts on twitter and i reconsider how good the show actually was. It's hard to believe it was even made by him.

Aren't teachers supposed to provide the annotations themselves with their english knowledge?

>They saw no evidence of a crime and had no authority to enter his home or fenced property

Weird, this hasn't stopped the police before.

Are you suggesting you'd kill someone if they tried to tax you slightly more highly? Or if they took some of your child's inheritance according to a means tested solution? That is very weird.

This is a lot of odd, complex moral statements used to denounce a comparatively simple and separate idea, that wealth should be distributed somewhat more fairly. Inequality is going to persist in other areas and probably even in financial areas, but that doesn't make taxes robbery.

Liveable necessities like water, food, and housing, that are either wasted on inefficient food production methods or given to rent-seekers (by the economic definition of the term). No one is claiming we are post-scarcity and that everyone can have the standard of living of a millionaire, though I would argue that one having a standard of living like this could take away from other people's standard of living.

Basically my argument, since this thread is quite far down now, is that over-population is not robbing the globe of resources in any amount worth worrying about and therefore population control is not going to solve inequality since it's a distribution problem.

It's a big topic to get into, but what I really mean is there are certain resources that we either throw away or don't distribute that wouldn't require relocation, and could be given to people without needing to police them for having kids or whatever. Do you not think Nigeria and Bangladesh have this problem as well? It's not just the developed world. Underdeveloped countries have resource allocation problems and definitely have excess resources in some cases.