I don’t understand that point of view? Why would they pay their CEOs less than any other company? If they did, then they would either not be able to hire CEOs, have the shittiest CEOs or have CEOs that wouldn’t give a crap. People don’t live on welfare, especially highly connected, highly educated people like CEOs.

I mean, I love ska. But a whole eternity of it? It’s just way too much.

Now you’d technically be a professional runner.

Goddamn, this is fucking wholesome.

Yes, by Argentinian standards. That is not much, taking into account the left bias that Argentinian politics have at the moment. By most standards, Juntos por el Cambio are a social-democrat solution. That is pretty much left in most countries.

See? That’s where I get confused and I end up with the “that can’t happen” attitude in my head.

If you abolish private property, then who has that property? Someone will always have some of that, at least. Let’s imagine that it’s seized, by whom? How? And why wouldn’t that be thievery in the eyes of those who don’t want it? Because if I want it to happen, then it would be relinquishing, but if I don’t it would be coercive, because I cannot pay anything to that person, otherwise it would become a “haver” against all of those “havenotters” that gave their property for nothing but good will.

And then there’s the redistribution fact, of how to do that? Equitable? By some principle? Depending on who you are and are not, you get X o Y amount of “property”? And then it’s the issue of how do you measure that “property”? Because two cups of sugar can be of similar value, but not two houses. It’s not the same to live in downtown Manhattan than in the middle of Saskatchewan.

Finally, who does that? We? And who is “we”? Who organises “we”? How is “we” not anarchist? And if it’s anarchist, how do we ensure it’s just?

“Planned by the libs”, as if the “libs” were a single entity that have a homogeneous plan. Let’s stop giving entity to stuff that never existed and realise that there is a structural problem that occurred because of bad management of our economy and policies. Because we had mediocre actors and in some cases actors with bad faith.

I don’t hate the human race. But I cannot stop pointing to our flaws. Not understanding our flaws, will lead to keep having them and the problems they carry.

On the other hand, what you are saying will be valid in any system. How do you propose to have a completely egalitarian society? It’s nearly impossible, there will always be people wanting more than they have and won’t care about the consequences of it.

Don’t blame capitalism for something that’s at the core of any political system: Greed destroys it. Greed and humans are intertwined. It’s not capitalism’s fault. The same happened across history even when and where capitalism didn’t exist: the Egyptian empire, the Roman Empire, the Soviet block and even in China now. Greedy people that can be bought will exist everywhere. The wish for power is not inherent of capitalism, is inherent of human nature. Failing to see that will lead to the same issue over and over again, in democratic or autocratic regimes.

Yes, of course we do. We just need politicians willing to do that. I thinks that’s the most difficult part.

Yes and no. Capitalism without regulations may bring this kind of issues. But capitalism with regulations shouldn’t. The issue is that the required regulations are not being applied or do not exist.

We should not blame or put the weight of the issue in capitalism, when we clearly know we don’t live in a perfect capitalistic world, and very few markets are like that. The issue is with politicians.

No, that’s an effect of collusion and cartelization of the economy. It’s because you have very few actors supplying the product and the barriers of creating a similar product are too high, so new competitors cannot access the market. Then the current suppliers can sit on the product and wait for it to be at the right price, as long as it doesn’t go to waste.

As you can see, all of this screens about real estate:

• Cartelization/collusion: The aren’t that many companies that have properties on sale
• High cost to enter: Building is pricey, and it depends on the location of the property more than anything. So a building in one neighborhood is not a direct replacement of a building in another neighborhood.
• Real estate does not go to waste. Unless bad luck or poor choices, your building should work fine for a couple of generations. And worst case scenario, the land already has a price.

This is the time when governments should intervene and come up with a proposal to solve the cartelization.

What about the respect given to an individual because of its status in society? There are certain people that have a base level of respect because of their seniority, job or role during a period of time.

Those people may or may not show the same amount of respect towards others as is shown to them in general. And I dare say, there will be people willing to defend them even if they are not up to expectations, just because they have that seniority/job/role.

Take for instance:

• Some politicians
• Some celebrities
• Some senior members of an organisation, like CEOs, CTOs, senior managers, etc.

I was actually just trolling and with low effort. But I appreciate the wall of text. It means I’ve done it well.

Thanks for the compliments, have a pleasant evening.

Because, in case you didn’t realise, we don’t think that waging wars, hoarding nukes and “exporting freedom and democracy” is a good international policy nor a wise use of tax payers’ money.

But what do I know, right? I just have low crime rates, an affordable university system and don’t have to sell my kidney for a ride in an ambulance. All the while having 1 month paid vacation and a minimum salary that allows me to not live in the streets.

Sorry, I’m out of line.

Sorry, I cannot hear you over the sound of my state funded healthcare system and minimum wage over the poverty line.

You are not putting luck in the equation. There’s still a chance that it can hit something before the truck rolls over or is blown by any projectile.

Risotto. I make one with panceta and mushrooms that can’t be easier to make. And the principle is to just stir for 20’ or so.

Ingredients (serves for 2)

• Risotto type rice (Arborio, Carnerolli or similar) 150 gr
• Chicken broth (homemade, if store bought then liquid, never in cubes) 1 lt
• Onion 1 medium
• Panceta 200 gr
• Mushrooms (fresh) 200 gr
• Olive oil
• White wine
• Parmesan cheese (grated or in very small chunks) 50gr
• Butter 20 gr

Prep

1. In a pot, put the broth to heat. It’s not required for it to boil just to be hot.
2. Chop the onion in very small cubes, as small as the rice grain if possible (so when you are eating it, you don’t feel it)
3. Chop the panceta in cubes (no bigger than your thumb)
4. In a big pot, at mid heat, put the panceta to brown and defat
5. Once the panceta is brown and you have a good fat source at the bottom, remove and reserve the panceta
6. Put the onion in the pot and use the same fat from the panceta to sauté it. If you need more, you can use olive oil.
7. Once the onion is almost translucent, put the rice and pearl the rice. From now on, you should always be mixing the rice with a big wooden spoon or similar. Never stop stirring. This will make the rice to let all the starch go, which will make your risotto creamy.
8. Once the rice is pearled, pour some wine to deglase and keep stirring.
9. Once the wine has evaporated and you hear the crackling, pour some broth until the rice is submerged, keep stirring.
10. Once your broth is evaporated and you start hearing the crackling again, put the panceta, the mushrooms and pour some more broth. Keep stirring.
11. When you see that you are low on broth and hear that the rice is crackling, check on the rice for the cooking point. It should be al dente, meaning that you should be able to bite it and feel some resistance, but it should be very edible. If you still feel it too hard, pour more broth and keep stirring.
12. When your rice is done, take the pot away from the fire, and put the parmesan cheese with the butter. Stir and mix until it’s uniform and creamy.
13. Serve hot in small bowls or similar plates
14. Decorate with olive oil, fresh grinded pepper and parsley.

This is actually something that I’ve been thinking about Lemmy too. Now Lemmy.World is a good instance, but if I ever need to move, I’ll lose a lot, and that’s not what Lemmy and the Fediverse as a whole should stand for. We need to allow users to migrate to another instance as a whole. Not just the name, but the messages, posts, replies, everything should be repointed to the new user.

Of course, this brings new and interesting attack vectors on instances for DSoS and for users data. Identity theft would be a real bitch.

Let’s agree to disagree. It’s true that these companies are vulnerable and lovely honeypots for hackers. And because they know that, they’ll try to harden as much as possible. Besides, not everyone is willing to create passwords out of algorithms seeded with mnemonics. Most of the people will reuse the same password over and over in different places. And that’s the worst situation, because most of those sites are hundreds of times more hackable than commercial password managers.

Are there better options than commercial password managers? Yes, of course. How many are willing to use them? Maybe less than 30% of the population. And that’s bad, because it makes the internet less safe for everyone.

And by the way, the method you use is one of the earliest ways to create passwords and is hackable by brute force in seconds. If I have two or more passwords, or two or more seeds, the algorithm is done unless you have some random generator in it.