With all the reddit users coming over lately, I wanted to share something. This is what happened to Voat. by Alduin in propaganda

[–]Alduin[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I agree 100% with this comment. I don't care that there are racists or others that I disagree with. In fact I support their right to express their opinion. It's when there's nothing else because they've chased all the normal people away that it's a problem.

What do you miss most about being a child? by Jesus-Christ in AskSaidIt

[–]Alduin 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Having friends that you'd just go see without any real plans of what to do. Then you go find something to do together.

Actually come to think of it, being married is a little bit like that sometimes. Except she doesn't like all the same things I do.

r/ImGoingToHellForThis/ is back, with cat. by Enkidu in MeanwhileOnReddit

[–]Alduin 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I mean, I get the joke. It's just not funny. I remember when that sub was hilarious and made you feel bad for laughing at the same time. This is just some sad backhanded commentary about the inner politics of a website.

r/ImGoingToHellForThis/ is back, with cat. by Enkidu in MeanwhileOnReddit

[–]Alduin 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It's a shell of it's former self. Should be called r/slightlybutnottooedgy.

Ooh I take that back. Literally nothing but pictures of cats. Yikes! It's really starting to suck over there.

What is a sub you're hoping to see over here on Saidit? by Starlight_Fire in SaidIt

[–]Alduin 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I made /s/changemyview here, that was always one of my favorite subreddits. Some of the moderation I thought was pretty subjective and arbitrary though, like most subreddits.

Bernie's Senior Advisor Crushes Fox & Friends by Evilphd666 in WayOfTheBern

[–]Alduin 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I don't sit through right or left wing commentary. If I don't see the actual subject content in the first few seconds, I'm out. It's too patronizing to be told what to think about something before I see it.

Voat literally praises the mass murder, repeatedly calling him a hero. 90% of voat upvotes in agreement. by magnora7 in MeanwhileOnVoat

[–]Alduin 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

So if I just agree with you all the time, my content will be removed? How about if I'm just sharing news or memes or whatever and not engaging in debate at all?

I hope you can understand my point here. You're putting an awful lot of eggs in a basket of obscurity and limited use cases, in my opinion. This pyramid is only about debating. How that relates to extremist views still illudes me.

Voat literally praises the mass murder, repeatedly calling him a hero. 90% of voat upvotes in agreement. by magnora7 in MeanwhileOnVoat

[–]Alduin 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I'm not sure if I agree with the analysis of Voat as being a place taken over by Neo-Nazis

I don't think it was taken over by Nazis, but definitely made a safe harbor for Nazis by paid shills. There was no kindred spirit with these people back with the first wave of users flooded in with the banning of FPH and Niggers. Back then all they wanted was a place to speak freely. Then along came the shills, which were easy enough to spot - they made half the posts and called everyone who criticized them a shill. They simply flooded the site with Nazi content until the only users that stayed were Nazis. They also made clear to any new users that they were not welcome there. These are common intelligence/law enforcement tactics for creating a honeypot.

Voat literally praises the mass murder, repeatedly calling him a hero. 90% of voat upvotes in agreement. by magnora7 in MeanwhileOnVoat

[–]Alduin 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I've read this before I think from you, and I don't really understand what you mean. You are creating a space for non-extreme content, right? So first of all how do you define that? Secondly, with the content being user generated, what are you going to do if you have an extremist user or extremist sub?

Can you please go into more detail about specifically how you plan to make this site different?

Colbert Smears Tulsi Gabbard To Her Face While Telling Zero Jokes by EndlessSunflowers in conspiracy

[–]Alduin 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

All right, awesome! So if we can get her to win the primary, then I don't care who wins the general. Because neither one is "their guy", and that's the important thing to me.

If you're interested, here are some in-depth interviews with participants of the Ontario Basic Income Pilot by Orangutan in BasicIncome

[–]Alduin 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I sort of skipped ahead about a dozen times, just trying to get the gist of what they were saying. They all wanted more money, being poor sucks, etc. What I wanna know is this - how many of them improved their station in life? They got free money for a few years, so how many of them went to college or learned a trade or got a better job? Was this in the video?

Dr. Jill Stein: "Does Trump want #Venezuela to be another Syria? Civil war going on 8 years has killed 500K people & created over 5M refugees. US taxpayers paid 100s of millions for weapons that went to Al-Qaeda & ISIS. Few in US even know the atrocities we supported in Syria. #HandsOffVenezuela" by JasonCarswell in Venezuela

[–]Alduin 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I agree to stay out of Venezuela. But I also disagree with this false equivalency. The "Syrian rebels", as the media used to refer to them back when they were trying to get everyone to go along with this, were already REALLY bad guys. Same with Libya. There was a website, I think it got taken down, but it was like obamassyria.com or something that was up when this whole thing was first kicking off... It showed these guys on video doing horrific things, sawing off live people's heads with a knife, lots of executions, raping, etc.

In Venezuela, there are no significant terrorist groups (unless you count some pretty horrific acts by the government). Certainly there is crime, but that's done for money rather than bloodlust, and those people don't care who wins in any conflict that doesn't directly involve them.

But here's the thing, and this is why our involvement in Venezuela will not be like Syria. WE DO NOT ARM MODERATES. We will not be sending guns to people who aren't killers. We armed the Syrians BECAUSE of their violent proclivities, not despite them.

For Venezuela, the playbook would much more closely resemble Iraq (as in, invasion). But that's not going to happen under Trump I think. He seems to have a distaste for war, unlike his predecessors.

But no amount of aid or intervention is going to help the Venezuelans. To accept outside intervention is to surrender their fate to the will of their rescuers. What they need is a hard turn to capitalism through a sale of state assets and change of laws. And that's not going to happen until Maduro is gone, and Maduro is not leaving without intervention, so..... Assassination maybe? I don't know. It's really a sad situation.

Bill seeks to outlaw dwarf-tossing at Washington bars, strip clubs by dcjogger in politics

[–]Alduin 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It was an interesting read, but heavy on the virtue signalling opinions and light on facts. I don't know if it's true, but for example, I am reading from other sources that it's far less dangerous than football. Never in my wildest dreams would I think to ban football, even over completely legitimate safety concerns.

Here's my basic sentiment. It very well may be dangerous, humiliating, and distasteful. But I would rather be injured and humiliated than to have my own agency removed so that I'm not allowed to injure or humiliate myself. We should start looking at our own agency as a solution (don't go to the event) rather than looking to remove the agency of others, and especially for such a self-righteous and condescending reason as "for their own safety".

Bill seeks to outlaw dwarf-tossing at Washington bars, strip clubs by dcjogger in politics

[–]Alduin 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Ah, well as long as we're also taking away their agency to make health decisions for themselves then it's not as bad.

Bill seeks to outlaw dwarf-tossing at Washington bars, strip clubs by dcjogger in politics

[–]Alduin 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Can you imagine being a dwarf and being told by strangers that they're going to pass a law to ban you from an activity that they would consider embarrassing if they were in your shoes? To be told that you're so incapable of rational thought that you must be saved from the humiliation of your own poor decisions. And to have that process so far removed from you that it's going to pass or fail regardless of any input from you, simply because they're many and you're few, and the many need to pat themselves on the back for their self-righteous piety.

Sad thing is it happens all the time. Constantly, to one segment of the population at a time.

"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive." - CS Lewis (full quote inside) by Alduin in quotes

[–]Alduin[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You're just saying things that we think are wrong now but which others said at the time were for the good of the victims... Not that the good of the victims was the sole purpose, but it wasn't done with evil intent. It's shocking what your mind can believe is good for other people.

Just to take slavery as an example - read what slavers in America wrote. They weren't sadists. They believed there was a natural hierarchy of races, and god made the brown ones for servitude. In exchange they (the masters) did the more complex tasks of conducting business and managing finance, and provided food and shelter to those unfortunate primates who otherwise would surely starve.

It's easy to see things differently now that we're in the future. And in 500 years others will judge us now as being every bit as barbaric for entirely different practices. Morality is a social construct, and thus changes with the wind. The only moral course of action is to admit you don't know what's best and leave others alone.

Choose Wisely by useless_aether in DepopulationWatch

[–]Alduin 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

In doing some further research to define best for healthcare, I came across this from the World Health Organization, which is extremely dissappointing for defining quality of care. For example this:

People-centred. Providing care that takes into account the preferences and aspirations of individual service users and the culture of their community.

Really? That's on the same list as actual effectiveness? So if we had two communities - one where the people bathed in pig shit for good luck, and the healthcare tried to provide them the cleanest pig shit possible, that's the same quality of care as one where they tell people not to bathe in pig shit?

Choose Wisely by useless_aether in DepopulationWatch

[–]Alduin 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It's going to look like "Socialism obviously works well with roads and healthcare and the water and sewage lines, so let's do that for those. Capitalism obviously works best with food supply and consumer goods, so let's do that for those."

So with the exception of healthcare, you think socialism, where the workers control the means of production, works best when production is permanent (infrastructure), and capitalism works best when production needs to be continuous (food). Is that correct?

Also, are there any other exceptions besides healthcare? Maybe schooling? Banking?

Here's what I would do. Decide what's best. For example with healthcare we can look at what people want. Availability (higher is better), quality of care (higher is better), and expense (lower is better). Then we can start comparing countries and decide which does it best. If we can do that, I expect maybe both of us will learn something.

Choose Wisely by useless_aether in DepopulationWatch

[–]Alduin 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Alright. You seem genuine enough. Let's find the truth of this.

The obvious good solution is a mixture of capitalism and socialism, like almost every country in the world does in practice.

If every country in the world does it, then it's not obvious that it's best then is it?

To decide if it's best, we have to compare economic statistics of countries with more and less socialism and roughly the same amount of capitalism, as well as vise versa (more capitalism, same socialism). Would you say that's true?

And, if it is not true, what other solution do you propose that would help us decide if it's best or not?

Something you dont hear in the news by useless_aether in WorldNews

[–]Alduin 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Do you have a link to the article or a date? When did this happen?

Human beats IBM's AI in debate competition by Vigte in technology

[–]Alduin 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That's cool. Here's the actual debate in case anyone is interested:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m3u-1yttrVw

Choose Wisely by useless_aether in DepopulationWatch

[–]Alduin 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Nope, we absolutely do not need the two "in balance". They are opposites. One is freedom and prosperity, the other is poverty and oppression. You can't say "oh we need a little bit of poverty and oppression to make the freedom and prosperity work". No. The freedom and prosperity works despite the evil machinations of people who want to control others, because it's a powerful idea that very apparently lifts everyone out of poverty, rich and poor alike. Everyone in the world can see that capitalism feeds the masses, socialism doesn't.

And to the extent they are mixed, socialism is the parasite. Not some complimentary tool in the kit. "Oh we just need a little socialism", is what stupid people who believe their enemies say. It inhibits everything it's supposed to help and more.

Now, I'm not saying there's no role for government. Build infrastructure, settle disputes, etc. But distributing largess from the public treasury and forcing people to pay for it down the road should not be part of their duties.