jwiggler

jwiggler , 3 days ago (edited 3 days ago)

I dunno, I see your point but does the guy on the left really have a dented head? I thought those were forehead lines from emotional agitation. Also, where is the drool? I only see tears. I don't really see the inherent ableism, as much as I see a negative representation things like lack of emotional regulation, "neckbeardyness," etc. I agree moreso on the whiteness and general tidyness of the chad, and the association of beauty with good and ugliness with bad -- I kinda buy your argument there. It is pretty shit that we do that, but I don't necessarily think it's wrong for the OP to use this meme template. Ignorant? Maybe.

I feel like you could use similar strategies to decry any meme. For example, the glorification of violence through imagery and use of the word "weapon" in your own meme. Obviously, I'm not going to seriously suggest you're perpetuating the glorification of violence through your meme, but I kinda think its the same with OPs meme.

Edit: to be clear, all my thoughts on this are entirely from the last 20 min. I assumed you've thought more about this subject than me, so I consider myself pretty swayable. But idk, my initial reaction is that we're looking too far into a meme.

jwiggler , 3 days ago

Oh yeah that one is bad, you're right. Also the meme with the bell curve is definitely ableist. Hmm, you definitely bring up good points. Gotta chew on it a little. Much of this is just ingrained in us.

jwiggler , 11 days ago

I kinda like the idea of a phone that is usually small, but I can make big by unfolding it if I want to. But I do agree that the fewer moving parts, the sturdier and more BIFL. It's just that BIFL is not really attainable anyways in the current state of the phone market due to software support obsoletion.

I'd like to see a small eink phone or the tiny matchbook from Her.

jwiggler , 11 days ago

Sorry, buy-it-for-life

jwiggler , 11 days ago

Can you explain your last sentence? I don't see how landlords are providing capital, at all. If anything, landlords are depriving you of capital, and using your money (rent) to gradually gain capital (increase in ownership of property, through mortgage payment) for themselves.

But maybe I'm misreading you somehow.

jwiggler , 11 days ago

Sorry, I know you're not the original poster, but that doesn't actually answer my question. The question is "what capital does a landlord provide?" and the answer is, none, because when we talk about capital in this context, we're talking ownership of money or assets.

The landlord does not provide either of these things, and in fact only takes them in order to increase their own personal wealth.

jwiggler , 11 days ago

Capital, as in ownership of money or assets that combine to a persons overall wealth -- A landlord does not provide this, and only takes it from the renter in order to increase their own capital. You can make an argument that a landlord provides a service, sure, but not that they provide capital, because they really don't. Maybe you mean they provide a means for a renter to accrue capital? Even then, that's shoddy, because you have to drill down to owners who actually care about their tenants vs those who charge as much as the market allows.

You can bring up risk, and sure, the landlord incurs risk. That risk is losing their property and becoming a renter. The "service" they provide is entirely dependent on their ownership of property, and I don't have much sympathy for a person who uses their ownership of property to exploit another person's need for shelter in the name of accruing more capital.

Those are kinda my quick thoughts, and I'm not totally prepared to defend the absolute shit out of them. My initial point was that landlords do not provide capital, and I stick by that.

To be clear, I don't think being a landlord automatically makes you a bad person, considering the economic system we live in. But I also don't think landlords provide a good, generally, to society. I don't think we need landlords, and I don't think they become landlords out of the kindness of their hearts, or that they wish to provide a home for someone. They just own more, and as such they can use that ownership to further increase their ownership. I don't think your example about you with extra cash is wrong in the context of the society we live in -- hell, I'm pretty much in that exact situation with my roommate, with whom I was renting before I bought a house. Sure, you could say I'm doing him a favor by letting him live in my house for a low cost, but mostly I am the one accruing capital at his expense. It doesn't make me a saint for doing that, it makes me greedy that I'm charging anything at all. That's part of the disgust I personally have for this system, is that we are all compelled to own more more more more. It's really not work hard and you'll succeed. It's own hard.

jwiggler , 11 days ago

For the record, I think most people confused about your position do not believe the basic principles your stance is based on, such as profit = wage theft. Would you say so, or am I putting words into your mouth?

jwiggler , 10 days ago

That totally clarifies it, thank you. I was confused. Still, that does not increase the renter's capital, and puts them at a disadvantage, because as they lose capital, the landlord gains equity. That's where we were disconnected, but I see now how you were using the term.

jwiggler , 20 days ago

Could you tell me where I can read more about this ? specifically the french-canadian new england stuff ?

jwiggler , 1 month ago

Hate saying it, but Ubuntu just works for me. I'd rather focus my computer configuration and maintenance efforts on clients rather than my own laptop. If I have to reinstall for whatever reason, its pretty easy because I'm already very familiar with the (shitty) installer, and I don't do much customizing because I'd rather not have to go through that every time I reinstall.

Granted I've never even bothered to run Arch, or any really other desktop distro for that matter. Ubuntu + Gnome looks nice, seems to just work, all I need to do is apt install nvidia drivers and firefox post-install and I'm up and running. I don't want to do work on my laptop, I want my laptop to enable me to do work.

jwiggler , 1 month ago

I dont really fuck around with the GUI stuff tbh...I've always just done ubuntu-drivers autoinstall

I guess my issues with the installer have mostly stemmed around the software raid and manual partitioning. Simply installing on a single drive isnt bad.

jwiggler , 1 month ago

Ideologically Ubuntu makes me cringe, but I also use Google and a host of other technologies that fuck my privacy, so I guess I have accepted the world we live in.

In the same way that I think it's noble when people try to live waste free, I think it's noble to use things like GrapheneOS, or selfhost all your services, or de-Google your tech. But it's unrealistic for all of the world to live waste-free or customize their tech so as to be private. In the end, the government needs to step in and force these giant-ass companies to behave better, because they are the primary forces pushing forward the destruction of the environment and personal privacy.