As Hasan Piker often says, lying is OP. You can't hope to compete on even footing with someone when you're constrained by facts and they are not. Plus, Owens probably still has some backing from the capitalist class.
kkj
joined 1 week ago
Anarchism tends to be significantly more vulnerable to CIA-backed death squads than tankie regimes, unfortunately.
It's already better than most autocomplete features (including for programming) and excellent at making placeholder text. That's two more uses than NFTs ever had.
Will it replace us all? Not soon. But it at least does something other than use energy.
"Please don't try to start a conversation with me, please don't try to start a conversation with me, please don't try to start a conversation with me" (said under breath with fists clenched)
You might be thinking of lobsters.
Now there's one agency I'm OK with Elmo burning to the ground. Maybe we can get him into the DoD and DHS next.
But the best approach to try to in capitalism would be to provide equal opportunities to everyone and promoting a society where this concept is considered a virtue,
The point is that you can't do that. If you don't intentionally try to correct for past (and current) societal discrimination, you're effectively reducing or outright eliminating opportunities for people with certain kinds of marginalization.
- Prefer degrees from prestigious schools? Legacy admissions mean that people with rich families are heavily favored.
- Credit for internships? Rich kids can afford to take unpaid internships, while poor kids cannot, so they get an advantage regardless of their actual skill.
- A degree in general? A poor kid might be able to make ends meet with scholarships and grants, but they'll likely have to work full time just to cover housing and textbooks. That's 40 hours a week they can't study or relax. And if they can't complete the degree in 5 years or less under those circumstances, the grants dry up and they might not get another chance. And that's if they can afford to go to school at all and don't have to help support their family
- Work experience? Easier to get if you count low-prestige jobs, but most employers for careers don't.
- No criminal record? Potentially easier said than done if you're very poor. Poor neighborhoods tend to be heavily policed, and stealing food is much more illegal than, say, dumping toxic waste in a river.
- Even something as simple as not having a wheelchair ramp eliminates some people, which is why many institutions refer to DEIA initiatives for diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility.
By the way, this isn't a discussion about compensation and overcompensation anymore. While compensation can be compared to E. o. Opportunity under those aspects, overcompensation can not be compared to E. o. Outcome in the same manner. The topic moved into a way more economic territitory than my initial statement intended to cover.
The whole reason for there to be any compensation (regardless of whether you think it's too much) is economic. If not for the economics, sure, it would be a lot less important to actively combat these disadvantages rather than letting them work themselves out over time, but capitalism ensures that they not only won't solve themselves, they'll self-propagate and become worse with time.
Edit: Btw, appreciate talking to you :)
Likewise. I had a mindset very similar to the one you seem to at one point, so it's been interesting trying to articulate the thoughts that changed my mind.
capitalism, besides every other form of economy, is more of a challenge to some individuals than to others.
And you have no desire to change that?
The camera crew walked out over gun safety. I'm not seeing anything about the armorer yet, so I may have misremembered.
All for a stance that amounts to "we should waggle our fingers disapprovingly at Israel while selling them unlimited weapons to do a genocide."
Too late for that, I suspect.
Probably trying to stop OP from typing
llin a distro where it doesn't exist and getting even more entrenched in their belief that Linux is hard.