2962
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

My dude, your argument boils down to "this is the way we've always done it so this is the way it must be".

But we haven’t done this always. As humans we have tried different attempts. Socialism, communism, monarchy, feudalism, democracy, capitalism, social capitalism, anarchism,…

And here we are now. After all those experiments.

Have you considered the possibility that if innovation were to slow, and companies DIDN'T insist on quarter-after-quarter growth, the world might just continue to turn?

But we humans are not made to chill. We need to advance as fast as possible. My parents and their generation did so. We now have AI becoming increasingly popular. And sooner or later I will hopefully have children. So I have to do my part, that the lives my kin will be better than mine. Better medical tech, better education, better transport, better tech,… Of course the world would continue to turn.

That while the richest individuals may be slightly less rich, the vast majority of people would continue their lives with no negative consequences?

I don’t understand why you always believe that if the rich were less rich, that anything would change. It would not.

[-] Void_Reader@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago

Have you considered that this too might be an 'experiment'?

Defenders of monarchy and the divine right of kings used to argue the exact same thing - that we tried democracy before and it failed in the Roman Republic and Ancient Greece - so clearly feudal monarchy is the best, right?

Yet here we are, experimenting again.

Why is this joke of a system the ideal? It doesn't produce innovation - most of the stuff that led to the internet and modern computing came out of DARPA and various govt funded universities. All of our space advancements were from state-run NASA and the Soviet space programme. The wealthy CEO types only start 'innovating' after taxpayers fund most of the R&D. Same with medical advancements, material science, physics - almost every single positive innovation has come from state-run, taxpayer-funded, or non-profit institutions.

Maybe try reading a little bit more about all this innovation you seem so fond of:

https://academic.oup.com/ser/article/7/3/459/1693191

https://demos.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/files/Entrepreneurial_State_-_web.pdf

https://yewtu.be/watch?v=oLLxpAZzy0s

Have you considered that this too might be an 'experiment'?

Yes. It very well might be. But todays world is so strongly interwoven. Tons of conflicts are constantly challenging the system. And it has yet to break. The final test will be the sudden termination of economic growth. This will be the point, where it will be shows how resilient capitalism rly is.

Defenders of monarchy and the divine right of kings used to argue the exact same thing - that we tried democracy before and it failed in the Roman Republic and Ancient Greece - so clearly feudal monarchy is the best, right?

Tell me which system to try next. But pls don’t suggest to repeat another one again.

Yet here we are, experimenting again.

And that’s a good thing.

Why is this joke of a system the ideal? It doesn't produce innovation - most of the stuff that led to the internet and modern computing came out of DARPA and various govt funded universities.

That was maybe the start. But big companies managed to elevate the importance to another level. The complexity of everything was reinforced and elevated drastically, driven by private companies. Just take a look at AI at this point. AI is innovation, mainly driven by private companies.

All of our space advancements were from state-run NASA and the Soviet space programme.

Because most of it was useless. What kind of innovation did. space exploration bring to humans?

The wealthy CEO types only start 'innovating' after taxpayers fund most of the R&D.

As I already stated, this is not the case. Especially pharma, medical and IT is heavily driven by big corporations. Basic research on the other hand, there you are right. As it usually does not feature real world appliances, means that it’s mostly founded by tax payers and the government.

Same with medical advancements,

Especially medical innovation is heavily driven from the private sector. Pharmaceuticals as well. There is not much involvement of any government or tax payer.

material science, physics - almost every single positive innovation has come from state-run, taxpayer-funded, or non-profit institutions.

But as I said, mostly for the basic research. Without much interest in application.

Maybe try reading a little bit more about all this innovation you seem so fond of: https://academic.oup.com/ser/article/7/3/459/1693191 https://demos.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/files/Entrepreneurial_State_-_web.pdf https://yewtu.be/watch?v=oLLxpAZzy0s

I have a good understanding of sciences. Especially in chemistry and physics. Thanks.

[-] Void_Reader@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

None of those links are about Chemistry or Physics. The demos link is Economics, The Entrepreneurial State. The youtube link is about the history of the internet. Maybe try learning something that isn't STEM. Might broaden your way of thinking.

I'll respond to the rest of your comment later, although I'm not sure I want to anymore since you clearly have no interest in taking into account new information.

Also how the fuck can you be interested in technology and say something like this:

Because most of it was useless. What kind of innovation did. space exploration bring to humans?

If you know anything about any science you should know how stupid of a point this is

None of those links are about Chemistry or Physics. The demos link is Economics, The Entrepreneurial State. The youtube link is about the history of the internet. Maybe try learning something that isn't STEM. Might broaden your way of thinking.

Sure it would. But it probably wouldn’t change my standpoint.

I'll respond to the rest of your comment later, although I'm not sure I want to anymore since you clearly have no interest in taking into account new information.

Yes, unfortunately I am extremely stubborn. Sorry.

Also how the fuck can you be interested in technology and say something like this:

Because most of it was useless. What kind of innovation did. space exploration bring to humans?

Because rockets are boring. Bubble and stuff is just extraordinary craftsmanship and black matter will take some time. And I overall hate relativity theory. I am hoping for gravitons. Wave functions rock.

If you know anything about any science you should know how stupid of a point this is

Not stupid. Some sciences simply are idiotic. Do you have any idea how much I hate biologists. Entitled brats. Some of them have an extreme superiority complex. And don’t get my talking about physicists. Buch of weirdos. You should see physicists interact with biologists. It like two different species encountering each other. But communication attempts are futile.

[-] Void_Reader@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

Yes, unfortunately I am extremely stubborn. Sorry.

Fair, you do you mate

Because rockets are boring. Bubble and stuff is just extraordinary craftsmanship and black matter will take some time. And I overall hate relativity theory. I am hoping for gravitons. Wave functions rock.

Well, have fun with that, I will stop arguing.

Not stupid. Some sciences simply are idiotic. Do you have any idea how much I hate biologists. Entitled brats. Some of them have an extreme superiority complex. And don’t get my talking about physicists. Buch of weirdos. You should see physicists interact with biologists. It like two different species encountering each other. But communication attempts are futile.

llmaooo you should do science-themed standup

I only know three biologists and they are lovely people. Never seen them interact with physicists though so you may be right.

[-] TSG_Asmodeus@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

And sooner or later I will hopefully have children.

And when the average summer day is 60c and crops fail every single year, and Nestle has taken half our drinking water, and the smoke in the air from wildfires is giving everyone asthma, and deadly storms happen year round, and the coasts erode, and wars break out for the remaining water/etc, what will you tell them? Will you tell them to look at the brilliant 'innovator' CEO's who intentionally shut down electric cars? The CEO's who found out climate change was happening sixty years ago and intentionally hid it to keep themselves rich, what do you tell your kids about that?

What innovation is worth your children dying early?

I don’t believe that those scenarios are that plausible.

Here is south Germany, the climate change has led to mediterran plants growing here. The plant life for the climate already exist. And they are spreading (olives don’t make it through the winter yet).

Change is happening, but adapting to it is possible. And solutions for adaptation do not have to be invented, because they already exist.

[-] xts@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I don’t believe that those scenarios are that plausible.

lol i think they said the same thing about the Titanic sinking. also the submarine guy said the same thing about it imploding.

Hmm 🤔

also all evidence that’s not conservative propaganda points to us hitting the worst possible outcomes when it comes to climate change. Read the IPCC reports and the worst case scenarios listed within. That’s what’s going to happen over the next ~40 years

I have been reading about the worst case scenario. But even then the oceans would heat up, Oxygen saturation would diminish, big fish would die, algae would thrive on higher CO2 levels and buffer climate change at some point. Humanity and most animals on land should be capable to survive to this buffer point.

[-] TSG_Asmodeus@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

I don’t believe that those scenarios are that plausible.

Climate scientists disagree with you.

[-] wanderingmagus@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

You know, as a member of the SSBN force, occasionally during thermonuclear launch exercises I take a moment to regret the death of humanity and the biosphere. People like you, on the other hand, are what steels my resolve to flip the switch with gusto. I hope you know that I'll be thinking of you, should I receive the order to commence procedures to launch.

You sound like a fragile personality. You might be in the wrong occupation.

Or you might be talking bullshit. Because I doubt that you would have internet on a submarine.

[-] wanderingmagus@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

Shipmate, I am a Navigation Electronic Technician First Class Petty Officer, fully qualified in both submarines and in my rating. I have been on five strategic alert deterrent patrols over the last three years. I've been through fires, flooding, and steam line ruptures. When we set condition 1SQ for Strategic Launch during WSRT, I was the one at the consoles conducting the procedures to do so. I've been a helmsman, planesman, Strategic Navigation Technician, and Quartermaster of the Watch.

Of course I wouldn't have internet while submerged or at sea. Have you ever heard of in-port periods?

Fragile personality or not, I'm the sailor at the switch. What have you done with your life, shipmate?

[-] prole@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 year ago

Don't let the troll get to you... I've had someone on here a week or so ago tell me I was lying about my expertise. It's almost like they're all taking lessons from the same people.

[-] wanderingmagus@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Thanks. And yeah, they're probably just trying the tried and true War Thunder and Discord method. Or they're not taking lessons from the same people, they are the same people. Who knows?

I still think you are lying. Or you are incredibly stupid. Because your identity and your job should be kept secret. My grandparents were military engineers in the Soviet Union. Do you think anyone knew that? Of course not, because they were instructed to not talk about it. As should you, in case you are the real deal. I myself have followed the path of my father, currently studying to become a chemist in Munich. One ore year to go.

[-] wanderingmagus@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Shipmate, if you look in my post history I literally did an AMA about my profession about a month ago, and a Machinists Mate Chief even jumped in to contribute. I haven't disclosed any ships movement, naval nuclear propulsion information or even controlled unclassified information. I keep my personal electronic devices physically far, far away from any work device, and we never cross the streams, as the saying goes.

It’s still something that I wouldn’t tell people on the internet.

Especially if you have family. The Chinese, the Russians, the Israelis,… you just elevated the chances that they know about you. And now they also know that you are the sharing kind. A little bit bragging.

Don’t make yourself a target. Not the smartest thing to do.

[-] wanderingmagus@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Sister's in the marine corps and so is her husband. They can take care of themselves.

I'll take your advice into consideration. Still, you have again reminded me why I don't feel the burden of my duty too much. The existence of such organizations only hardens my resolve to flip the switch when the time comes.

Sister's in the marine corps and so is her husband. They can take care of themselves.

Against Russian agents with Nowitschock or North Koreans using poison as well? I doubt that.

I'll take your advice into consideration. Still, you have again reminded me why I don't feel the burden of my duty too much. The existence of such organizations only hardens my resolve to flip the switch when the time comes.

You are a troll. Cannot take you and your persona serious anymore. There is not a single soldier this irrational on this world.

[-] wanderingmagus@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

A troll? Interesting. I'll let my chief and division know. I'd invite you to visit NSB Kings Bay sometime, but you'd get denied at the front gate, let alone the marines at Checkpoint Charlie and the waterfront gate. And I'm a sailor, not a soldier. Soldiers are Army only.

You are stating the most patriotic and naive shit here. I get the impression that you are impersonating US military personnel to paint them in a bad light.

And now this useless statement that I should visit some Kings Bay, but I’d probably not be let in - I do not understand what you are trying to tell me here? Here in Germany you wouldn’t get into some classes at university. Let alone the building. It’s usual practice that in some organisations, entry is restricted.

[-] wanderingmagus@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Naval Submarine Base, Kings Bay, Georgia, USA. Look it up on Wikipedia if you don't know what that is.

[-] wanderingmagus@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

And for the record, best of luck in your studies. I hold no personal animosity, and a great deal of professional respect, for my counterparts in other militaries. We all have a job to do. If that means one of us has to shoot torpedoes at the other, we'll cross that bridge when the time comes. I do think, however, that you should never underestimate the willingness of the US to go to great lengths to do what it thinks is necessary.

And for the record, best of luck in your studies. I hold no personal animosity, and a great deal of professional respect, for my counterparts in other militaries.

I do not hold any grudge towards you as well.

We all have a job to do. If that means one of us has to shoot torpedoes at the other, we'll cross that bridge when the time comes. I do think, however, that you should never underestimate the willingness of the US to go to great lengths to do what it thinks is necessary.

Wars are fought in many levels. And the Ukraine war has already been lost. A financial Desaster to the west. No military power will change that.

Current surveys indicate republicans to be in power next year. And in Europe we also see a shifting in opinion in Schweden, France and Germany towards parties that roan further right and are against weapon deliveries into Ukraine. Quite contrary, they are pro Russia in many ways.

And I don’t judge. But if this development further continues, then all the money wasted on military support is gone. And Russia wins. In a world filled with intercontinental missiles, a war is won politically and economically.

So no matter how wiling and ready the US is, military power cannot rival with economical and political strategies.

[-] wanderingmagus@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Financial? Perhaps. Demographically, however, I believe Russia and Europe have entered a terminal demographic decline, only accelerated in Russia's case by the war. America, on the other hand, has not lost any soldiers or any significant resources and has increased the industrial capacity of the military-industrial complex. Strategically, from a cold, hard, pragmatic point of view, that counts as a win for my superiors, in the long term. Financial ups and downs are temporary and manageable. Demographic collapses are not.

Financial? Perhaps. Demographically, however, I believe Russia and Europe have entered a terminal demographic decline, only accelerated in Russia's case by the war.

Due to immense migration, demographic change is a thing of the past now. France, Germany and other western European countries no longer face this problem. On the other side it comes with new problems, as failed integration has become a huge problem.

And considering Russia, the country has one big ass infantry. And in the Ukraine war, Russia has yet to call for total mobilisation. And the west, even with the help of the US did not yet manage to deliver enough ammunition and weaponry to push back the Russian forces. For me that’s an indicator that Russia is more capable of actual war than the West.

Especially the US had many military missions in the past decades and most of them failed. Afghanistan is just one of the many failed attempts of military control. The US military has shown not to be capable to win wars, but only maintain them.

America, on the other hand, has not lost any soldiers or any significant resources and has increased the industrial capacity of the military-industrial complex.

Well and so did the Russians. The west has more specialised and modern weapons, it these have now proven to be too complicate to be produced in sufficient masses. Russia using old tech with easier produced weaponry has shown to be much more resilient than expected. Making use of the oldschool Propeller for bombs instead of high tech laser measured ignition timers, has proven to be just as effective. The US military has been scammed in many ways by weapon manufacturers into buying over complicated tech for simple applications.

Strategically, from a cold, hard, pragmatic point of view, that counts as a win for my superiors, in the long term.

If your superiors were involved in the last decades military operations of the US, then their word shouldn’t be taken too serious. Afghanistan is just the latest failure of along series of failures. And currently it seems, like the US will fail in Ukraine as well, even before sending troops.

Financial ups and downs are temporary and manageable.

Financial ups and downs can cripple a country’s economy so immensely, that they change a country’s direction for years later.

There is no military without tax payers. And in a broken economy, there are not many willing tax payers.

Demographic collapses are not.

It can be corrected with migration, even though migration poses its own new problems.

[-] wanderingmagus@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

In Afghanistan, Korea, Vietnam and Iraq, we crippled ourselves trying to protect civilians and establish a local government while fighting an "insurgency". With Russia, per instruction, we will emphatically not be doing so. A war with Russia will be a concerted effort to fundamentally destroy and erase the current power structure and completely demilitarize the country, as we did in WWII. With thermonuclear weapons, if necessary. The unclassified nuclear doctrine is available for your perusal online.

In Afghanistan, Korea, Vietnam and Iraq, we crippled ourselves trying to protect civilians and establish a local government while fighting an "insurgency".

What the hell are you talking about? Protecting civilians? Is this some joke? The US never much cared for protecting civilians.  Let’s think about Vietnam and the massacring of thousands. Or let’s remember some “accidental” strikes against “terrorists” that turned out to be civilians.

With Russia, per instruction, we will emphatically not be doing so. A war with Russia will be a concerted effort to fundamentally destroy and erase the current power structure and completely demilitarize the country, as we did in WWII. With thermonuclear weapons, if necessary. The unclassified nuclear doctrine is available for your perusal online.

Yea. Extremely plausible that the US manages to destroy the Russian power structures. Structures that have rivalled the US structures and military for decades in many foreign conflicts. You cannot rly act in a stalemate situation. And that is rly what that is. Just look how Russia can play war in Ukraine and the US and other western countries are only willing the send weapons. This just screams of powerlessness. And it indeed makes sense with the past failures of the US Military. And all that restraint, when Russia is conquering the Worlds Granary. If they succeed, then all of Africa will be under their control. Especially with climate change and less African soil being fertile.

Africa is so gaddamn important, that the Chinese already attempt in multiple African states to take control.

If China and Russia take control over Africa, than they take control over Resources that the US depends on.

And even the idea to demilitarise Russia is ponderous. Maybe if worked with Germany after WW2, because many Germans understand English and German is rather similar to English. So taking influence on the Germans was not too hard. Russian on the other hand is a goddamn nightmare for Roman languages. And the country is so damn big, that influence and control is a matter of unfeasibility.

[-] wanderingmagus@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

You'll never have the clearance to do so, but if you ever happen to on the off chance, look up Global Campaign Plan, and on your free time, you can review the unclassified National Security Strategy. Specifically, the updated revisions.

On the unclassified side, take a look at the analysis of Peter Zeihan sometime on global demographic and resource trends.

The US strategy has always been the same and it always failed in history.

What makes you believe that anything would change and that current analysis would be any more correct than the ones of the past?

this post was submitted on 18 Jul 2023
2962 points (100.0% liked)

World News

39401 readers
1898 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS