Notices by Mace Dindu :verified: (macedindu@freespeechextremist.com)
-
@p @dave my main point is that technological advancement has the tendency to require more government and more management of the population, while at the same time creating more effective tools to implement that management. It both requires and ensures the masses be managed like cattle. There's little sense in talking about freedom under the current paradigm, because the requirements of that paradigm are incompatible with individual freedom.
Hence: you'll own nothing, have no privacy, and be happier than ever.
I'm more than a bit skeptical on that last bit, but that's what an optimist has to tell himself, because I'm real bullish on first two bits.
-
@p @dave technocracy pretty much ensures authoritarian order. Extensive government is the price we pay for technology, and freedom is the price we pay for extensive government. Any way you slice it, we're all going to eventually lose all of our freedom, short of full technological collapse.
-
@p @dave yeah, but technology in general requires that infrastructure. On the bright side, its inherent complexity makes it vunlerable to cascading collapse. Things like water treatment plants and the electrical grids are prerequisites for 20 century technology, not to even mention current technology.
-
@p @dave and at the same time, the technology itself tends to shape society more than the other way around. It changes what's possible, and once invented, tends to be implemented. The ability to do mass surveilance, for example, is effectively a guarnatee of its implementation.
-
@PonyPanda @Graf @TheLocoBandito @josh @meticore @yonjyugo Correct. Pete will get burned. Mark these words. In several decades of operating in highly political spaces, maybe the most enduring failure I've noticed is tolerating bad actors who are immediately useful. Daniel Stevens of Ontario, Canada is a legit psychopath, and though he clearly has some useful skills, anyone who deals with him in the long term is gonna get pain.
-
@TheLocoBandito @PonyPanda @Graf @josh @yonjyugo @meticore facts
-
@PonyPanda @Graf @TheLocoBandito @josh @meticore @yonjyugo "hohoho, you think I'm amenable to facts? I'm actually a dumb faggot that doesn't have any point but to be an annoying faggot online."
-You
-
@PonyPanda @Graf @TheLocoBandito @josh @meticore @yonjyugo another clever reply. Like all faggots, it doesn't take much questioning to find out it's all poppers and poopers.
-
@PonyPanda @Graf @TheLocoBandito @josh @meticore @yonjyugo clever. I'm sure Daniel Stevens of Ontario, Canada takes no heat from the Canadian government because.. um.. because something. Surely it's not that he's such a fucking retard that he's inadvertantly a useful tool.
-
@PonyPanda @Graf @TheLocoBandito @josh @meticore @yonjyugo Yes I am. You're just stupid. You're talking about someone that mods an instance. I'm talking about someone that founded and totally controls an instance in arbitrary fashion with an iron fist. Worse, the instance you're defending has a founder that literally called it the most racist social media platform. He specifcally operates in such a way that Hitler-praising and nigger-saying are a-ok, but crossing him in the slightest fashion gets a ban; that is to say, there's not even the slightest fig-leaf of being pro free speech. On top of all that, Daniel Stevens of Ontario, Canada is a known figure, whereas as far as I know, Crunk isn't. So your comparison isn't exactly germane.
People associating with Graf are going to get what they fucking deserve, and probably soon. And I will laugh with considerable mirth when that happens.
-
@PonyPanda @Graf @TheLocoBandito @josh @meticore @yonjyugo lul. That faggot is operating the "most rascist social media platform" in *fucking Canada.* And somehow that just goes without notice? Not a chance. Canada's faggot regime knows an asset when they see one.
-
@PonyPanda @Graf @TheLocoBandito @josh @meticore @yonjyugo Crunk is a mod, not the site's founder. Fucking lol.
-
@ArdainianRight @victor @NEETzsche @book @n3f_X Right. That's my point. A lot of people seem to think that RNG is somehow the way out of determinism. But how does that that rescue "free will?" Imagine I said to you that "if the universe had rolled different, mabye you wouldn't have done "X." Does that rescue free will? I don't see how. Fundamentally, I don't see how the entire concept makes any sense. I once got into an argument with some dumb bitch about whether one could choose what he believes. I still hold that one can't. I can't choose to believe this or that. I believe what I believe; there's complicated reasons for that, which may or may not hinge on quantum physics, but what sense does it make to say I "choose" to believe what I do?
Statistics
- User ID
- 16661
- Member since
- 26 Feb 2023
- Notices
- 13
- Daily average
- 0
Mace Dindu :verified:
All ０７６萌ＳＮＳ content and data are available under the