This sort of comes down to the classic debate of “Depth vs Quality of Life”. To quote Steak Bently in his excellent video essay on Metal Gear Solid 4:

Depth of game play, to boil it down, is usually defined by the number of ways a player can approach any given scenario. More tools with more unique properties. More hardcore players tend to value depth more and consider additional depth to be generally how you measure improvement in game play.

But more casual players value ease of play and think additional depth and challenge at the cost of accessibility is more of a downgrade. Hence why the general public considers Bayonetta 2 a straight upgrade from Bayonetta 1, but the crazy combo junkies don’t like it as much.

Morrowind’s mechanics have a level of depth that vastly exceeds Skyrim’s in almost every conceivable way, but is often referred to as “janky” and “clunky”. Skyrim’s mechanics are far more intuitive accessible, but is often referred to as “shallow as a puddle”. Which of these you prefer will largely dictate which game you think has the “better” mechanics.

I’ve watched multi hour video essays that have failed to make this point so well. Morrowind truly was where the series peaked.

And now we find ourselves at the beginning of the meme.

Also, I find “people are greedy” to be an uncompelling reason to support a system that incentivizes greed and exploitation. If people bending a system to benefit themselves is a problem, then the system should be designed to be resistant to this, in a way that incentivizes promoting the common good. Or at the very least shouldn’t encourage these problems.

Capitalism encourages these problems.

But it’s also not like the person who runs the whatevers has to be beholden to shareholders and profits. They could instead be incentivized to prioritize the collective well being of the workers.

And for that matter, politicians and the bureaucracy also live in a system that incentivizes (to the tune of millions in bribes) them to prioritize the interests of businesses owners, and thusly shareholders and profits, at the cost of the common good. Which is a major reason they can’t be trusted.

I dunno, I think it’s a bit more clever and less desperate than that. The teacher knows the kids are saying it a lot. Getting them to even lightly associate it with their learning objectives will help at least some kids academically. Mnemonics are stronger when they are memorable and repeatable after all.

There is no way the teacher thinks this will make learning “cool”. And the fact that co-opting it speeds up the process that skibidi will become “uncool” is probably just a fringe benefit to the teacher. Really, it’s a masterclass in psychology, a win-win.

Hey, give me a little credit…

I’ve managed to misrepresent two sides of an argument in this one.

I dunno Yogi. I get that you are cool with jokes about trump and religion, but you immediately came to the defense of “dark humor” mfers. Seems like even you have your sacred cows.

naw man, I’m just fucking with you. I knew what you meant.

Dark humor mfers: “Everything is fair to joke about, race, gender, orientation, disabilities, everything”

Someone: makes joke about dark humor mfers

Dark humor mfers: “Now you’ve gone too far!”

Better to look the fool than open your mouth and prove everyone right

What’s updog?

Their not worried about it

Certainly true for a lot of use cases, but not all. Many folks, like my father, only need access to a web browser anymore. Got him in Linux Mint well over a year ago, and neither he nor I have had to touch the terminal.

For him, Linux is easy, Linux removed the problems Windows caused, troubleshooting has not been needed.

Linux can be all the things you said, but trying to over play the complexity of the learning curve can also be disingenuous and scare away new users.

More than you are implying. An Apple product means you have to buy from Apple. At least with android you can order a Fairphone. Which, while not perfect, is significantly better in the “slave labor” category.

lol, holy shit… I can’t believe I didn’t notice that.

So I apparently have too much free time and wanted to check. So I asked ChatGPT how long the border was exactly, and it could only get an approximate guess, and it had to search using Bing to confirm.

Saying “maybe you should reevaluate” =/= “must be true”. People did reevaluate if Trump won the 2020 election (a bit too many times frankly), and every time it came up to be a false claim. As is the case with your definition of Communism.

Furthermore, I did not try to setup a Utopia, nor did I call Russia, China, or Communism in general a Utopia. So I’m kinda confused about why you even brought that up… Regardless, even if Russia and China did add market economies, that wouldn’t change the definition of Communism, just the type of economies those countries have.

I think what you meant to say was “If countries that have tried to implement Communism consistently add Market Economics, then perhaps Communism is not a self-sufficient system, and as such it is not a comprehensive solution to the ills of Capitalism”. Which again wouldn’t change the definition of Communism, but would at least be a coherent argument.

Perhaps you need to change your definition of re-evaluate, and of… definition.

P.S. Just curious, do you ever get tired of misrepresenting the positions you are arguing against?

Fair point, the majority was laid by private companies, but the research for modern fiber optic cables was done at publicly funded universities.

Typing it all in caps doesn’t make it not true. Words have meanings, Russia and China both have private corporations run for profit. They do have some socialist policies, but they certainly do not have economic systems characterized by the collective ownership of property and by the organization of labor for the common advantage of all members.

If you keep having people tell you “those aren’t real communists”, then just maybe you should reevaluate your definition of Communism.

First off, just because something is developed in the public sector does not make it Communist. If you don’t know what words mean, don’t use them please. I don’t have time to go over definitions.

Secondly, the ground work for undersea cables, radio towers and satellites were indeed a direct result of work and funding from the public sector. The private sector wanted nothing to do with the internet until the mid 90’s when enough work had been done that it was deemed “profitable”.

A better example of what Capitalism does best would be adding advertisements to the internet, or the fact that Americans pay more per megabit than any European country on average.