cakeistheanswer

Additionally since you're getting a number of replications to each instance, consider them permanent. You can't guarantee another instance wasn't just set up to log.

Which thankfully means the future denizens of the Internet can have a full record of all the beans.

Does not help the movement most inclined to wrap themselves in a flag just stormed the capital.

I think the triggers are likely to die down as the CEOs gradually stop sawing at their own genitalia.

What you have here is a start, but the barriers like having to find all the niches through searching mechanics that send you to a website and back to a client are always going to be a sticking point. There's not much support on any client to just get a list of communities on the instance, much less a different one.

If they come down or the instances centralize enough that it doesn't matter we'll see some growth by enticing other users because it'll be functionally the same thing to them. But there are some definite hurdles in getting here, and there's no incentive to advertise (read $) other than grassroots.

I know this (and the rearranged my chain feeling) too well.

It's downhill since it's heydey, but reverb.com was decent for used and flipping pedals, and buying used. most of the circuits have indie or Chinese makers you can get cheap AF. You might be able to find a devi circuit doing the same thing for cheap, not sure where those are at in terms of popularity. I really dug a lot of those.

If you grab cheap pedals to pick which circuits hauk those on reverb, buy used good versions of those around I ended up making beer money out of it just as various things went out of production. I haven't followed the habit, so I don't know the musicians are swapping gear, but they are somewhere. trading is the way I got to see damn near everything.

Likewise,I went crazy with ts9s loved the pallisades for ts9s, but I don't even have one on my board now and I'd grab a modded ts9dx if I were to pick one up. Some sounds are better from 60$ pedals.

This can totally backfire by the way, I have a tonal recall for the same reasons.

George can have it back when he finishes winds of winter.

(and I recind this if the postumous publishing conspiracy is real, ain't wishing for no man's death)

Entirely acceptable! I don't take issue with the concept of money, it's all the weird hangups and abstractions of responsibility it brings.

I take issue with the idea that we can't meet the needs of literally everyone on the face of this earth, and then expand the minimum.

As far as grass fed, I feel obligated to point out even the grass fed portion could be a crop in that same field, but the yield to calorie count in that decision is the important part to me when it comes to production or pricing, along with not planting acres of stuff essentially inedible humans.

If you want more horror stories methane production from the combination of deforestation and cattle emissions was unreal to read about too, it made me genuinely queasy and I don't think it got enough attention.

But it's just one industry example of how what we need is going to have to inform our actions. Maybe we have to host all our data centers in Siberia, I don't know.

More importantly we have done this before (though nowhere near this scale). Under the banner of capitalism no less! You can have a prevailing socialist ethos to actually stop or change fundamental production of a thing, not extincting the species is a decent cause.

You don't have to go back to Jonas Saulk either, CFCs got obliterated from production lines when we spotted the problem, all of which went down during the Regan and Bush years if I remember right.

Sorry to get wordy, Cato in particular is a sore spot when it comes to watching reasonable arguments get twisted into the windmills they want to tilt at.

I mean this logic chain is good! But it makes me sad in all the wrong ways.

Even as someone whose not a vegetarian we devote a shit ton of land to things like feed corn, which I don't know if you've tried, but it's only barely edible. The amount of yield in terms of nourishment is way tipped towards a subsidized industry around making meat.

So factory meat farming gets reframed as essential, with all of those questionable ethics in our food supply.

My contention is that a honest argument should frame around the minimum acceptance to what we could deliver, not are delivering.

it's kinda like looking at some weird bizarro version of yourself finding your old handle.

If it's also a zombie I'm more creeped out.

You are conflating socialism's view of money, with food. A maximalist socialism would contend money is not for food, give away the food use the money for the stuff you don't NEED.

To some degree I agree with that. Any stance that socialism would do anything other than prioritize the well meaning of people over capital is either a compromise (and some of the Nordic models would be an example) or a deliberate straw man, just like the author is building here.

The idea that you can't 'afford' to feed the world and ideas just like it is the entire reason there's a socialism in the first place.

I figured I'd do the diligence since I have to put up with enough Cato for other projects. I didn't know the authors name, so I had a good laugh at the 3 lines on his linkedin.

Welcome to the part of the Internet with a soul.

Seriously if you're old enough to remember the Internet in terms of users weird passion projects you could do a lot worse than hanging off any part of activitypub.

There's a lot more people than the old days with technical backgrounds, so there's a lot more practical stuff.

"Who We Are

HumanProgress.org is a project of the Cato Institute""/

Sounds about right. You're quoting a right wing rag from a 20 year policy analyst with no practical experience.

You want to know what poor people can't afford? Extinction.