

That’s wrong.
The current economic model is based on the Keynesian model, popularised by explicit detractors of the Austrian school.


That’s wrong.
The current economic model is based on the Keynesian model, popularised by explicit detractors of the Austrian school.


Right, the labour theory of value is not pseudoscience then? It’s based on empiricism? Care to substantiate that with literally anything other than “Marx said so”?


1 was purple and 2 was orange, green was the last color left.


Most people still don’t know anything about AI, whether it be llm based or otherwise; they just think it’s magical, knows everything, and they should use it for absolutely anything without any discernment.


Because less and less legitimacy and authority is vested in the individual and their bloodline, meaning even dictators can be replaced.


I assume “how” is referencing the “change your habits” part, because getting off social media is simply a matter of choosing to do so, so I’ll answer accordingly.
Changing habits is not easy, in my experience finding hobbies you like is a great way to get out of your routine which then helps you notice what habits make you less happy since you’re no longer just going with the flow, but YMMV on that.
In general, it takes time and effort to vet your habits.
I’m not a professional, so I don’t have concrete methods other than my own, which is to “test” them: stop doing the thing for a week, assess how you feel afterwards, then go back to it and see if you feel better or worse.


It does not matter if you look at twitter on the official app, a frontend, your neighbour’s door’s peephole, it’s still twitter, it’s still a cesspit, curate your feed better or leave it altogether.
Socialism is an adventist secular religion. It provides no tools to alleviate suffering because it is based on the whole concept that problems will be solved “when the revolution comes” and “when we abolish private property” and so on (see this comment for a perfect example).
If you want to feel better, do what you can to improve your situation now. This means: find a better job, change your habits for better more fulfilling ones, stop doomscrolling social media designed to rot your brain keep you engaged, find a better friend circle if the people around you reinforce these feelings of doom.
The feelings of “can’t find love” have a lot to do with the people you hang out with, or lack thereof if your social media diet takes up enough of your mental energy to impact your feelings.
Go touch grass, find a hobby to do with others, preferably groups of mixed age, background (sex, race,etc), and beliefs.


Usually, financially stable parents who pay for their kids’ clothes, phones, cars, etc. will say, “I paid for it, so it belongs to me.”
Financially “stable” just above the poverty line or formerly poor parents, yes.
In my experience, rich people don’t look at the bill or who owns what.
They will occasionally use the concept of having supported someone financially as a cudgel, depending on the person, but they will never go “well those shoes I bought for you are still mine because it was my money” cause the shoes don’t matter nor does the money used to buy them.
It is literally “the thought that counts”, because the dollar amounts are trivial.
As for who owns what in the broader sense of family fortunes, that really depends on what kind of wealth and the culture they are from. Are they old money? are they nobles? are they new money? This will largely dictate who is actually in control of the “family” holdings.


I bought a WiiU for Bayonetta 2.
Not only was the WiiU itself little more than a paperweight beyond running it, the game itself was extremely lackluster and simplified.
I didn’t even bother emulating bayo 3.


The latest in a long line of walking simulators aimed at sad over-the-hill American millennials.
Everything I see of it feels borderline focus tested to hit the dopamine centers of random game journalists like a stinger missile annihilating a civilian target.
Hard pass.


I don’t see how replacing one form of sycophantic validation slop with another would help, if not maybe for the fact that socialist theory is non-interactive.


You wouldn’t have been able to stop yourself from buying a copy for yourself and everyone you know if it were available, huh?


He’s been a plumber for 40+ years, he will know what it would have cost you, if you tell him what happened.
You can be matter-of-fact about it and not belabour the point by catastrophizing a possible outcome.
“Hey dad, we dodged a bullet. A fitting was loose but they caught the leak and there is no permanent damage, I’m going to go fix it”
If he’s not an idiot he won’t need reprimand, he’ll know he fucked up, and the potential size of the fuckup.
You’d probably end up shooting yourself twice in the back of the head after posting this if anything you knew was actually actionable.


You seem to think I recognize your authority to give me orders. I don’t.
No, he’s giving you free advice on how not to be an insufferable dickhead in public; advice that you seem to desperately need, and this is coming from an atheist, before you think I am playing team sports.
It’s a very simple concept: if all you’re contributing to a conversation is the equivalent of coming into the room and violently jerking yourself off while going “hurrrr look how big my dick is” you’re being actively detrimental to the conversation no matter if you’re right or wrong.
You can engage with the conversation while disagreeing with the premise, that is not what you’re doing. You are just being a smug teenage dickhead who needs to butt into every conversation to, if nothing else, reinforce the idea that there should be harsher barriers to being on the internet in the mind of everyone looking at your “contributions.”


There are a few contributing factors:


Tbf, of all consoles, PlayStation games are the easiest to actually dump legally owned copies of, all you need is a bluray reader and you can do all of them.


Brown lentils.
Dice onions, celery, carrots, in equal volume.
Stirfry them in a pot with some olive oil.
Throw in a sausage or some other meat with a strong flavour, just a small amount, stirfry until the outside is seared.
Add a can of lentils and a can of tomato chunks and sauce, cook until the chunks have rendered.
Serve with polenta or another neutral side.
How is this proving anything about broader economics? Or any of Marx’s boondoggle social claims?
This just says that calculating the summation of all labour costs is a good predictor of the overall cost of production and thus price, Marx makes way broader and wilder claims than that.
Defending marxist views on the LTV with this paper might as well be a motte and bailey; there is no substantial dispute that the sum total of costs is a decent predictor of an industrial good’s price (industrial production per-product margins are notoriously slim), while there is plenty of dispute that the generation of “surplus value” causes “alienation” and “dehumanization”.