Incus better

Mostly ignore it

Gotta gamble sometimes since the odds that there are truly milfs in the area is never 0.

OK I’ll be serious for a second. The comment was ant-Marx. I think that the idea that capitalism would inevitably lead to a socialist revolution is not a real thing. I’m looking at all the capitalist western countries and see that there is no real need or even desire for people to overhaul the whole financial and governmental systems. Although socialists are becoming more prominent over the years especially on the internet, I believe that this is only relegated to the internet. The only thing close to socialism that we have is Bernie Sanders and he’s not really a powerful politician so others would probably not emulate him in the future.

You can think that this is a cope or a soyjack-like post all you want, but at least I live in the real world where we’re not waiting for a fantasy revolution that would make us work in socialist utopias where everyone is a farmer in a small garden or a hair stylist or whatever the fuck people thing it’s gonna be like. I know the issues that would plague something like socialism or communism and know that capitalism solves all the problems there. Just look at the USSR in their last years and how much the US was outpacing them in terms of technology and production. The quality of life in capitalist countries was and still is leagues above any socialist or communist countries.

I can understand when people criticize the current system we have since it’s 100% not perfect. But to just call for a socialist revolution instead of better methods of regulation and closing loops as we discover them is just stupid.

And lastly, the post is pretty stupid on another level since the “woes of capitalism” are there because of events that mess up global trade like the pandemic or the current Houthi attacks on the red sea, when you know for a fact that any country that’s not extremely closed off and protectionist would be just as impacted.

We are truly on the cusp of socialist revolution just like Marx said. If we extrapolate the lemmygrad instance to the rest of the world, that means it’s only a couple years max until we behead those pesky billionaires starting with wrren bffet. It’s simple math if you read this philosophers textbook " Das Kapital."

He is 100℅ better at that job, but you’re mistaken if you think that GN has nearly as much influence in those things as LTT. Not that I’m saying that GN is not good enough, but he doesn’t fill the market that LTT does only GN’s own very technical niche.

I was too retarded to realize this was a joke and was in the middle of replying seriously.

But yeah I just bought a one-way ticket to Athens.

How else would you convey that information?

They are not using money from revenue but are using investment money to do their work

They are a private company not held by the public

They have to turn a profit eventually

Growth phase and startup are redundant but they’re true, they’re a new company

Use lxc/lxd to get all of the performance benefits of docker and all the freedom of a vm

I would guess they’re a fire hazard because of the overclocking they do. They’re either a long term (heh) project and they’re immaculate, or they know they need to squeeze every bit of value and abuse the fuck out of those GPUs. I think you can tell if a rig is dangerous so you should be ok

OK I see the problem here. When I see the word “minor” I think of a teenager. Usually when someone says minor they mean not-quite-an-adult, not necessarily all people under 18. I don’t think your interpretation of DeVault is fair here to be honest.

Stallman said

As an example of exaggeration: one mailing referred to these teenagers as “children”, even the one that was 18 years old. Many teenagers are minors, but none of them are children.

So I believe that he thinks that a “minor” is someone who is below the age of 18. “Many teenagers are minors” meaning not all of them since 18 and 19 year-olds are not minors but the rest are. I think this is a good-faith interpretation of what Stallman means. Stallman also said

In this case, the effect of that mislabeling is to smear Wilson. It is rare, and considered perverse, for adults to be physically attracted to children. However, it is normal for adults to be physically attracted to adolescents. Since the claims about Wilson is the latter, it is wrong to present it as the former.’

Thus, he most likely means that the adolescents he was referring to are minors. Unless he counts 18-25 year-olds as adolescents which is very unlikely in my opinion. Unless something is wrong here with my interpretation, DeVault asserting that Stallman thinks being attracted to minors is normal is a totally reasonable thing to say.

You’re right, DeVault probably made a leap in accusing Stallman of describing sex with teenagers socially acceptable. But I can see where he comes from since Stallman is very insistent on the delineation of children and teenagers especially when child sexual abuse cases are in the news.

On the second point, I think he did say that attraction to minors is normal. He defined adolescents as minors before and he’s saying attraction to them is normal here.

Examples please

What do you mean?

He said that Stallman had some fucked up views, showed quotes on what his views are, explained how this is a pattern, and finally said why this should make it so that we reject him in the Free Software community.

Which part was the non sequitur?

Then I can’t see them in the chat since they’re in a different location.

Is that my homie Joseph?

I think a lot of people in this community consider it a lifestyle to pirate media.

Do you know what community this is?

dd=disc destroyer

What does bank reform mean? Banks already give loans to small bussinesses.

You can start a company that does what you want them to do. You can create all the innovative processes you want and open source them in the existing system.