Cataphract

joined 1 year ago
[–] Cataphract@lemmy.ko4abp.com 3 points 1 year ago

You're conflating the meme's argument with a whole host of problems designed to segregate and let companies profiteer off of single-family housing.

[–] Cataphract@lemmy.ko4abp.com 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Anything from Mischief Theatre! They have their "Peter Pan Goes Wrong" for free on youtube atm.

[–] Cataphract@lemmy.ko4abp.com 1 points 1 year ago

I never stated I don't personally agree with the premise

caused some controversy from what I’ve seen

If you look up "Capitalism is good Sabine" on Youtube you'll see all the videos I was referring to. I was actually giving the original video the "benefit of the doubt" versus how many counter videos were out there.

[–] Cataphract@lemmy.ko4abp.com 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

While all of that is true, I don't feel like that's a stance I wish to take. How do you bridge that gap so that other's can come out of that space? Berating a child for their beliefs does little in the long run if they have an echo chamber they can retreat to. I completely understand if that's not your concern and you would rather not waste the time with science deniers, it can be dangerous and frustrating as you've stated.

[–] Cataphract@lemmy.ko4abp.com 9 points 1 year ago (14 children)

Very true, any recommendations that you enjoy? For the most part as I stated it's useful for certain topics that come up when someone's discussing some woowoo, it's hard for them to sit down and go through a whole course when the context of what they're discussing doesn't come up. There's also the problem of being slightly educated in a topic but then falling down a rabbit hole thinking it's all legit (quantum subject matter seems to be particularly susceptible).

[–] Cataphract@lemmy.ko4abp.com 0 points 1 year ago (4 children)

I've watched that channel in the past, been meaning to check out that latest "capitalism is good" video that's hit my feed and caused some controversy from what I've seen. I'm hoping there's just context that's being missed and the video is actually decent.

[–] Cataphract@lemmy.ko4abp.com 32 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I've been suspecting this is one of those "do 200% horrible damages but increases revenue (or at least make the company seem more profitable)" then have a "management change" that comes in as the savoir but they only roll back 10% of the changes to show they've fixed things.

 

Looking for resources that avoid berating people and just simply lay out the data with it's context from professionals in the field.

I don't know if I'm changing or the format of constantly pointing out how stupid someone is just gets more views, but it's getting to be hard to digest. I'm all for learning new things and possible deceptions on claims being made, just without all the sarcasm and personal attacks.

I used to enjoy Thunderf00t, and while his content is probably the same from the beginning I just can't do that condescending speech for 30mins anymore. My brain just starts to tune it out but I want the information. Professor Dave Explains, is probably borderline for me, Adam Something used to be less energetic with sarcasm in his past videos. Basically anyone that seems to have a personal vendetta with the people involved.

I believe I've ran across more positive debunking lately which might be why I want to shift my focus. Some notable mentions: Kyle Hill - Youtube's Science Scam Crisis (more humorous presentation), acollierastro - harvard & aliens & crackpots: a disambiguation of Avi Loeb (spends most of the time actually talking about history versus attacking Avi Loeb), Fraser Cain - A Big Problem with Modern Science Communication (just an all around kind presenter).

I'm open to any field or subject matter, just wanting creators that aren't raising their blood pressure while having to use an extremely incredulous negative tone to get their point across. I love to share the more positive videos with others when a conversation comes up and they've been sucked into a scam video that's twisted the narrative. I know if it's hard for me to watch, then they aren't going to get more than 2 minutes into a video with that type of approach.

Edit: Thank you everyone for all the awesome recommendations! I've added a lot of subscriptions and will make a master-list of all the sources to upload for anyone else looking.

[–] Cataphract@lemmy.ko4abp.com 1 points 1 year ago

It might be anecdotal but this honestly just seems like a Republican Establishment thing. I peruse conservative talking spheres both online and off because of my location and extended family, for the most part everyone just agrees that if someone committed a crime they should be punished regardless of the side of the aisle.

That being said, it doesn't invalidate any statements made here about the possible motivations for this newest publicity stunt. I think the majority of people are just tired of hearing about "this side bad" and just want the government to get their shit together and actually legislate to help the working class.

[–] Cataphract@lemmy.ko4abp.com 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Had to look it up for curiosity's sake.

In order to get fully set up, you will need to pay a $100.00 fee for each product you wish to distribute on Steam (the "Steam Direct Fee").... This fee is not refundable, but will be recoupable in the payment made after your product has at least $1,000.00 Adjusted Gross Revenue for Steam Store and in-app purchases. Steamworks Partner Program

While not free, seems to be no overhead for the length of stay on Steam that I can see. Another site includes some more description which might add to the cost though

The cost to put a game on Steam depends on the type of game, the development budget [1], and the business model. To get a game onto Steam, developers need to pay a one-time registration fee of $100. After that, they will need to pay a 30% royalty fee. Additionally, developers may need to pay for marketing and other costs associated with the release of their game. source

Regardless, it's just another unfortunate case of physical copies/backups>subscriptions or "licensing/rent" deals.

[–] Cataphract@lemmy.ko4abp.com 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That's, an interesting website. The name was a red flag for me, the article format is excellent though and I wish more websites would adopt this style of presenting information. I've gone through about 10 articles from what seems to be the main active author (David Demos), very neutral and non-descriptive language being used throughout. The premise of the site is using fertility and population reproductive stats coupled with policies to distinguish social-economical standings and impactful progressive legislature. It's definitely a niche view and I believe leaves out nuances that are important for determining "quality" of a society, but I agree that better child/elder care services, paid leave, eliminating gender pay gap, reproductive assistance, etc can be good indicators of economical advancements.

I just keep wondering though if there is a dog whistle I'm missing out on. They're very careful with not defining "family unit" (from what I've seen), as some conservatives and religious organizations don't recognize all the various types. If I'm not mistaken, a lot of the policies they're advocating as positive includes all family types including non-child ones (such as prolonging lifespan, elder care like mentioned before, etc). It would be fascinating to see an exit poll style survey from different demographics and what they personally interpret from the articles though. I guess "bravo"? would be in order for the site, these types of subject matter can boil down to polarization in a heart beat but they're walking the tight rope well.

As for the article itself, it's refreshing to see Michigan using policies from a fellow state that has proven and verified net positives they can correctly point towards when bad actors try to claim "whataboutism". If you haven't checked out the article I would highly suggest it as it's basically already a TL;DR and anything else I can say about it is probably more condensed in the actual writing than what I could spell out here.

[–] Cataphract@lemmy.ko4abp.com 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Could you provide me with some sources for context on the statements you have made?

the red wave didn’t happen because a bunch of Republicans died from COVID and youth voters mobilized in big numbers

Biden has made some moves to help progressive causes, and there has been a lot of success on local and state levels

the old guard is shuffling off slowly but surely

I am not disputing your claims, I purely wish to be able to absorb the information you have presented with fact checked sources to confirm the viewpoint so that I can better my stance on the current state of politics.

[–] Cataphract@lemmy.ko4abp.com 1 points 1 year ago
  1. those of us paying attention, and have a basic grasp on history, know
  2. incredibly ignorant and short-sighted
  3. isn’t a fucking game, and it’s not a joke
  4. throwing away votes on Cornell fucking West
  5. get with reality
  6. take responsibility for ushering in the end of our Republic

These are the types of conversations that are non-productive and show you have nothing meaningful to add without belittling or insulting others with opposing opinions (which I will not engage with for my own sanity if the same rhetoric is used in a reply). If you wish to converse about actual policies or facts with references/sources, then I'm here for that. I will address the only two points you made in your 150+ word reply from this point on.


What about Florida means I should remove my free will of choice to protect my free will of choice? Because a southern conservative state is passing conservative policies? What is the next presidential run of Biden going to do about the Florida microcosm in which you have evoked as reasoning? Here are some references in which I see the battle inside of Florida to continue at the state and local level,

I think we view the microcosm of Florida differently, one of fear and one of hopefulness.

"Republicans surpass Democrats in terms of their voter registration numbers recently for the first time in state history...Democrats sort of gave up on Florida this cycle and chose to spend their money elsewhere. And, you know, you can argue whether or not that was a correct strategy, but they did obviously have victories elsewhere. But their margins in Florida were just - the losses are so gigantic, in part because the Democratic candidates there received very little support from national donors and really faced a massive fundraising disadvantage. So they weren't really able to get their message out there." (npr-2022)

So a state that the democratic party purposefully didn't fight to support is now our fear to continue supporting the democratic party?

“Republicans focused on the ultimate goal,” said Fernand Amandi, a Miami-based Democratic pollster who helped former President Barack Obama win the state in 2008 and 2012. “They thought things out in 10-year cycles. They built a permanent campaign apparatus. They started recruiting candidates to run for local office and springboarding them into higher office. They registered voters and managed the margins.” (the hill)


Please explain to me how I'm suppose to "get" Ranked Choice Voting (RCV). Do you know of it's history and/or any legislation brought forth by the one party we are allowed to vote for? We're coming up on near 200 years after the civil war, how many states have RCV currently in main elections and how was that achieved? 2, only 2 states both with ballot initiatives from other sources and not introduced by the Democratic party. One from Alaska which was heavily funded by outside the state (source) and another in Maine which the Democratic Governor refused to sign,

On September 6, 2019, Governor Janet Mills allowed the bill to become law without her signature, which delayed it from taking effect until after the 2020 presidential primaries in March (source). A "people's veto" in 2018, approved by voters, rejected parts of the new law that sought to delay RCV's implementation until 2022. (source).

RCV has been pushed in spite of the democratic parties antics, but their the only way to achieve this option? Have you noticed that all of this discourse has nothing to do with Cornel West in which you've already used profanity with his name as a means to disenfranchise with no true reasoning? You're being strangled and are asking them to please continue while begging them to save you.

view more: next ›