It’s not just weird, it’s materially impossible.

I was mainly talking about the people being weirdos. Every monarchist I’ve ever run into have been extreme oddballs.

Technically you can be an anticapitalist and still not a leftist. You could be one of those weirdo turbo conservative monarchists.

No worries, my main criticism was mostly cuisine based. But seriously, if you ever want to impress someone with a home cooked meal, risotto is a really easy but flashy meal. I honestly think it’s one of the easiest ways to cook rice.

Lol, risotto takes like 30 min to make. The hardest part about putting a PC together isn’t the assembly, it’s picking out what parts you want and then buying them all.

For me it’s dealing with my indecision of balancing cost and performance and then the obsessive need to find the best deal for every part I picked.

But yeah my main point was I think you’re overestimating how long risotto takes to cook.

we don’t like corn syrup right?

Yeah, we need corn syrup…please do not be insensitive to our addiction.

There is no stopping the impulsive need to add corn into everything. Corn for the fuel, corn for sugar, corn for the livestock, corn for the hole. If you can cram corn in it, we’ve done it.

Why? The government has better purchasing power than any private corporation and most things, but especially infrastructure become more economic at a greater scale.

Another point is that utilities are natural monopolies, and that the government building and controlling the infrastructure would cut out the profit motive that is currently driving up the cost.

Trotsky’s plan of Permanent Revolution rested on the idea that the peasantry would erode socialism, because he thought they could not be truly aligned with the proletariat.

Isn’t that just in the case of later developing capitalist countries? My understanding was that he believed later developed capitalist countries would be unable to build the industrialized economy that creates a large proletariat class. So in these countries the existing proletariat would have to seize control and then later form an alliance with the peasantry down the road.

However, I don’t think that means he only wanted to develop socialism with western nations. I mean Stalin and him had a major rift develop over Trotsky wanting to support the Chinese communist and Stalin siding with the kmt. One of the things I kinda agree with when it comes to Trotsky was his opposition to the socialism in one country policy.

This is kinda dependent on what year it is of course, Trotsky was kinda all over the place once he fell from grace.

This is kind of the elephant in the room that every large scale political/economic model like to ignore.

While I don’t agree with a lot of what he writes about, Murray Bookchin makes some pretty persuasive arguments about how hierarchical structures themselves are an issue no matter what system theyre found.

people who actually want to spend $ hunt down that liquidity it will stay locked down on someones imaginary goldpile

Can’t do that… That would ruin everything. Just take out a loan against your imaginary goldpile.

Something tells me you’re not nuanced in the use of sarcasm…

Great rebuttal…really proves you know what you’re trying to talk about!

No it is proof that it is true because a system that does not have the data to create an experience cannot create the experience.

You claimed that dreams were unconstrained by sensory input… A limitation caused by the lack of sensory input is a natural constraint.

am 100% saying the body is a computer with sensory attachments I have no idea where you go the things about peripheral and central nervous system from.

Cognitive science? The brain and peripheral nervous system develop and act together. You cannot have one without the other, and if you damage one you damage the other. There is no natural or logical delineation from sensory input organs and the brain. A lot of the processing, especially from reactive functions don’t even require the brain, and are handled by just the spinal cord.

The idea that the body is a computer with sensory attachments is outdated. Our metal and physical development is a reaction of us engaging with our environment on a physical level.

reality is something we aren’t capable of understanding because it exists outside of our set of sensory input unless we can use tools to collapse information to within our range of sensory input.

I would say that reality consisist of what we can engage with in either a physical or metaphysical way. If it’s simply something that we can’t either mentally or physically interact with, then it is definitionally unimportant.

Tibetan buddhists are suggesting which is the non dual reality of experiencing things through the lens of perception.

While I accept a dualistic version of reality, I propose that perception alone is not what determines reality. I think embodied cognition gives us a much more accurate depiction of reality we engage with.

For example, without a body what is a bicycle? Through just pure observation alone, it is nothing but a chunk of odly shaped metal and plastic. It is our physical interaction with the bicycle that gives it its true meaning.

Reality is not just what we observe, it is what we interact with on a physical level.

It might be in the sense that the algorithm recognizes that it’s a new bubble to dump money into for a quick return. But that’s just what the stock market is nowadays. Corporations have cornered the rest of the markets through conglomeration or monopolistic exploitation, and have cut cost as much as possible. There’s not really a lot of ways to keep line going up other than throwing it into a new bubble and hoping you can get out before it pops.

Investment companies are just running out of places to keep their investments, which is why basically all tech corporations are massively over valued.

People blind at birth dream of perceiving hearing unconstrained by sensory input so yes it is true still even for people blind from birth. I have a friend who is this case actually.

Right, but your original claim was that it was unconstrained by sensory input. The fact that they lack the ability to dream up sensory information they have no previous sensory input for is proof this claim is not true.

My point is that you are making an unfounded delineation between sensory input and the brain. That the peripheral nervous system and the central nervous system should be viewed as a whole system reliant on each other, rather than a computer with sensory attachments.

There is nothing narcissistic about it because it only proves that we are individuals with individual experience, something that everyone has been aware of for a long time, we still all operate on the substrate that is outside of our body with its brain and sensory organs.

People having “individual experience” does not preclude people having shared experiences, and shared experiences do not preclude individuality. Your claim is only supported by an underdeveloped preconceived notion of perception and it’s effects on cognition.

What you are arguing is similar to Solipsism, which basically boils down to “I can only prove to myself that I process consciousness, and everyone else’s experiences are just subjective observations”. Which means if all observations are subjective in nature, then a person can only really prove that they themselves posses “real” consciousness.

Now that might not have been your original point, but it is the natural conclusion of the argument. And others have thought it out and argued against it for a long time. It’s known as the The Problem With Other Minds.

Dreaming is perception unconstrained by sensory input

That’s not really true… Dreaming is a cognitive function that is still limited by how we engage with our surroundings normally. Congeniality Blind people do not see in their dreams, and deaf people do not hear.

Reality is dreaming constrained by sensory input

Imo that is a bit of a narcissistic way to view reality. Reality is shared, and not defined by an individual person’s sensory input. There are natural laws that persist even if there is no way for a person to perceive them.

What I’m saying is that for example, dreams are not real, and yet they can and often are indistinguishable from reality, many even have dreams where they are aware they are dreaming and can control them the same way we can control what we do while awake.

I think to adopt that argument you have to be operating on some preconceived assumptions.

Dreams are “real”, in the sense that they are propagated by measurable physical phenomena. Just because some people can experience an amount of choice in their dreams, does not mean they are interacting with “reality”.

This is only possible because we have bodily systems for producing experiences

Again… Experiences needs to be defined. There are a lot of theories about how we engage with the world around us in both a physical and metaphysical way.

Our brains do in fact create our experiences with no contact to the world outside our bodies, its our sensory organs that give data to the brain to create our perception of experiencing things.

Ehhh… The claim that there’s a clear delineation between the central and peripheral nervous system is generally just a byproduct of how we teach anatomy. The more we understand about cognitive science and anatomy in general, the further we get away from the old understanding of the cns when it was treated almost like a computer that runs a machine.

I think it kinda depends on how you define an experience, but you’re kinda edging into an old debate known as the mind body problem in cognitive science and philosophy.

For cardboard and especially aluminum/copper there’s actually a pretty compelling profit insensitive for recycling them. For glass, it kinda depends on your locality.

Most trash that is “recycled” is put into a landfill with no processing.

I wouldn’t say most trash, just most plastics. Glass and especially cardboard and aluminum are able to be recycled almost endlessly and are more efficient to recycle than their original production cost.

Yeah, luckily we don’t get large scorpions here. It was just a little guy, still hurt a bunch and made my finger swell to an alarming size.