deleted by creator

My take on it is that it’s just a tool, and as with most tools you can use it in a sensible way that’s positive, although many people choose not to.

I mean sure a screwdriver is “just a tool”, and you can use a screwdriver to pick ice; but it’s not the most efficient tool for the job. It was designed for something else entirely, which makes it awkward and finicky to use as an ice pick. This is why so many people use screwdrivers for their intended purpose, rather than manipulating them to fit into a different workflow.

(The intended purpose here is disrupting creative professions, making creative labor cheaper and more efficient in order to maximize capitalists’ profit from it. Not to make artists’ lives easier or increase their effectiveness as laborers and business owners, although yes it can be used that way and, yes, that is arguably a limited side effect of the original intention.)

hahahahaaaa stay mad fascist

Are you saying the Republican party and their mouthpieces are not far right authoritarians?

Most Nazis were “regular people” “just right wing” until the opportunity came for them to commit atrocities.

One that wants to recruit more fascists and fascist sympathizers?

Yeah, we all know the nazis only became fascists the day they killed their first victims. All those nazi propagandists and theorists were actually blameless because they didn’t personally assault anyone publicly, which is famously the only form of violence.

You sure are having fun being mad over a single word when you still compared humans to controlling the population of dogs. The word “sterilize” does not improve the ethics here in the slightest. Euthanasea is not a very far leap to make once you’ve done the work of, I repeat, reducing human beings to the level of dogs. But nevermind that. Nevermind the indigenous people, blacks, immigrants, and so on, that have been sterilized against their will. That was actually to reduce suffering, you see, and not fascist at all!! Nevermind the 8 other paragraphs I wrote about why that’s unnecessary in the first place and is more an expression of your contempt for humanity than it is an actual solution to anything.

What a weird thing to gloat about and not think about the real world implications of in any way whatsoever! I am the one who cares about words, my words say absolutely nothing about me at all! Soothe your ego and backtrack because you have been called out and bested in debate! Bet you feel real bad right now!! Lmfao you fascists are so funny sometimes.

Anyways, I’m busy fighting fascists like you in real material ways. Kindly fuck off and have the day you’re very clearly already having.

lmfao project harder fascist

and while you’re at it, pick up a fucking book. Your reading comprehension is atrocious.

That’s wild of you to think that not wanting kids is facism.

That’s an insane reduction of my argument

I’m merely emphasizing the ridiculous of your claim that one can only improve the world by birthing kids and raising them to do good. You don’t have to birth kids to do that, just fuckin do it yourself.

That’s also not what I said, and “just fuckin do it” is the point I was making. I was saying that having kids and raising them in that way had relatively better potential to reduce suffering than not having kids at all, not that it was the only or most effective way to do it.

You clearly didn’t read or try to engage with what I wrote. You’re the one that compared human population control to euthanizing dogs, as if that would actually solve anything, and refused to elaborate when I pointed out that it wouldn’t. I’m not the one in bad faith here and I’m done responding to this thread. No, I don’t care to learn about ideologies that seek to “improve” the human condition by removing humans from the equation that aren’t even materially responsible for these conditions in the first place.

I’m not talking about “birthing the next Einstein” or “nobel prize winner”, types who again, likely had above-average means that contributed to their positions and therefore are less likely to fundamentally question the system that afforded them that. There’s a certain level of arrogance in assuming that only a “great man” in a great position could come along to change things. There’s even more arrogance in acting like you’re taking on some noble cause to “reduce the world’s suffering” by simply deciding not to have children.

I’m talking about collective struggle. You don’t need to be anyone special to engage in that, it just doesn’t work that way. No, that is not the world we have, and it won’t be easy, but is it not one worth fighting for? Does it need to be “instant” to be worthy? Population control isn’t some quick or easy fix either, by the way.

The system is able to adequately distribute resources, that’s what I’m saying, it simply lacks interest in doing so. It’s not the number of people that is straining it. Even with fewer people, it will be strained, because that strain is by design and necessary to the system. The people in power, the ones who design the system, are the ones that design it to fail in that way because they benefit from doing so. The more of our class who are conscious of the class war raging around us, to fight with numbers rather than capital, the better.

Other places like cuba, china, and the USSR have had revolutions that created what they could of that world on a national level, under worse conditions. Haiti was a literal slave colony under one of the most powerful nations at the time of its revolution. It’s on the rest of us to learn from their examples and bring our corners of the world to meet them, to complete their revolution. It won’t be overnight, but we can make revolution in our lifetimes. In the grand scheme of things that is not a long time, at all, and each successive generation can build on it if we only teach them our struggle and enable them to have greater power over their own lives.

You’re definitely showing on full display here, some commenters’ points about eco-fascism and “giving up” on improving the world because you’re too small-minded to imagine a better one and and acknowledge your own role in fighting for it. So might as well just cull the working class population, who use the fewest resources but who you personally find less worthy of life; including your own potential children; to make it more comfortable… (for exactly the people who cause the suffering you seek to address.) Up to and including literally putting them down like dogs, apparently. Real classy thing to gloss over btw. Yes, this is a fascist ideology.

The world is beyond overpopulated and there is no ecologically sound reason to have more kids.

This is just wrong. There are more than enough resources to go around. More homes than homeless, more food production than food insecure, more clothes than anyone could ever wear in a lifetime; things like transportation, energy, and production could be greatly optimized via collectivisation; and so on. The problem is endless profit-seeking and exploitation, not overpopulation.

The people that have access to these resources, many of which are extracted from the global south, consume way more than their fair share because of the infinite growth drive of capitalism. There is never “enough”, regardless of population; because to stagnate or to shrink is to fail under capitalism. Overconsumption is a problem that could be solved, quite comfortably I might add, if we were enabled collectively to put our minds to it.

You would do more to lessen suffering, by having kids and raising them to fight for that world; because that world is in fact possible; than to prevent their personal suffering by simply not bringing them into existence. Assuming anti-natalism is the only thing stopping you from having kids, of course; not everyone wants or needs to reproduce and I completely agree with destigmatizing that decision, but at least be honest that you just personally don’t want to be a parent. Don’t introduce new stigma for people that do want to be parents.

I take issue with this universal suffering idea. Sounds eugenics-ey. Cause it’s reasonably predictable which children will struggle more than others simply based on material conditions of their parents. It’s less of a “gamble”, for certain people who, often enough, just so happen to be directly responsible for some amount of suffering in the world. Even if I grant you that suffering is universal even in the most optimal conditions, it’s not like someone with optimal means is questioning the ethics of becoming a parent. And if they are, it’s most probably in the hyper-natalist, “populating the world with my superior spawn” direction like the musks of the world. Doesn’t anti-natalism kinda indirectly suggest leaving the world in those kinds of hands?

Also, humans are not cats and dogs and any ideology that leads you to make this comparison, especially w/r to population control and euthanasia, should be rejected just on the face of it. Point blank period.

Who said anything about streaming services? What an absurdly silly way to throw away money in this day and age. In this economy?

I kid, but yeah OP was asking about browser/jellyfin streaming.

Can you say anything about privacy?

I’ve yet to see a convincing explanation of why China would even be interested in this data… what good would it even be to them?

We know American tech, media giants, and government contractors and agencies use it for profit and domestic control but, even if you believe China is just as much of a dystopian capitalist surveillance-state as the USA, what profit is there for Chinese capitalists to extract from American data that they can’t already extract much more efficiently through American data brokers? As for the government end, is the interest in having control over Americans in American territory even comparable to that of the American government? It’s not like the vast majority of the data would even be actionable or relevant to the Chinese government.

It just doesn’t make sense for Chinese capitalists/government to be even a fraction as aggressive in surveilling Americans as their American counterparts. It seems more like a distraction to me and an excuse to avoid talking about American surveillance being every bit as bad as you imagine Chinese surveillance to be.

As for being the “largest exporters in the global market”, if the profit was all that enticing on a private scale, the US capitalist class certainly could have chosen to compete with China in that avenue. They chose to boost their short term profits by deindustrializating instead. What does that tell you?

Sure, if you assume their “political enemies” are the Republicans. Rather than assume incompetence; because, you’re right, this is a pretty glaring oversight that only bumbling incompetence could begin to explain away; you could make a much more fitting assessment with the “political enemy” being the working class.

That is who this law is being wielded against, the only ones who were ever threatened by it, along with being completely disempowered to abuse it against the ruling class who passed it. Those are the enemies that fit your description.

Is the implication that new developments or information may have come out in the <4 months since this article was published which invalidates some or all of the information it contains? I’m having trouble seeing why this is an issue that needs pointing out in this particular case.

Where would you prefer content like this be posted and discussed?

Nah this definitely sounds like a situation where “it’s the end of your senior year and there’s no other way we can effectively reprimand this behavior” and he might have already been a problem student.

There was a kid that shit his pants at my middle school. Left a little nugget that slid out of his basketball shorts in the hallway. I guess there was also some on his seat which nobody noticed until a girl in the next class sat in it.

The problem is that a capitalist system will not allow itself to be reformed in this way, as the “reforms” that Marx poses are antithetical to the very foundation of capitalism.

To give some accessible examples; you can’t house homeless people or give people healthcare and higher education because homelessness and debt is a whip to keep the workers working for whatever wage and conditions are offered by a capital owner. You can’t deconstruct racism because it was invented in the first place to keep the working class at war with itself rather than struggling against the conditions set by the ruling class. You can’t stop imperialism because infinite growth requires infinite and unrestricted expansion into new territories.

The system of capitalism manufactures its own required conditions through cruelty and social inequality (and yet, it’s these very things that lead to resistance), and without those necessary components the whole system collapses. The ruling class will not allow this to happen, because this system serves their material interests, and thus fundamental change cannot happen until the working class; whose material interests are directly opposed to those of the ruling class; is in power. The ruling class will pay lip service and the occasional half-measure in order to obscure this reality and make “reformism” seem possible, but 1) that is all they will do especially in the absence of a real threat to their power and 2) they will always eventually claw back even the smallest and hardest-fought of crumbs. Crumbs are good and all but there comes a point where our energy is better spent fighting for the whole cake.