|
goddamnedtwisto posted:Constitutional Monarch does sound like a character class from a particularly obscure rule set. Open Building (1/day) Address Nation (at will) Dismiss Government (1 use)
|
#
¿
Jan 1, 2022 14:32
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 11, 2024 16:49 |
|
|
OzyMandrill posted:. It's almost like a Dr. Who level convoluted method of getting the world to consume itself for revenge against the Slitheen or something. The Techbross were a 3rd Doctor villain, iirc. To reverse the polarity, I wonder if you could replace ‘proof of stake’ with ‘proof of tax’? Every time a new block is needed, the system gives it out randomly, with odds proportionate to how much tax they paid in the corresponding 30 seconds.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 3, 2022 14:12
|
|
|
forkboy84 posted:But the point that we're making is that it's no more of a fantasy than Labour being in anyway redeemable at this point. Any project of left-wing revival is powered on hope & optimism & a smattering of self-delusion because if you don't have these things you'd give in to despair. My take is that this discussion is lacking some required grounding on what words like ‘left wing’ and ‘socialism’ actually mean in context Take someone who’s aspiration for Labour is government competence and 3-4 successful reforms, on the level of renationalisation of the railways. Things that help a little now, and pave the way for an actually better society in 20-30 years time. They would probably consider themself leftist, and if ‘better’ means socialist then that too. But obviously what that means is, even in the best case, another half century of the UK being a neoliberal capitalist society. Another person who uses the exact same words to describe their views might be talking about a much more radical transformation of the state and economy. One where academics would no longer consider the UK an example of neoliberalism on the timescale of say leaving the EU. The first person almost certainly won’t get that from Starmer, but plausibly could from someone else sometime over the next decade or so. The electoral numbers mean that any Labour Party that wants to win has to credibly promise good things for low income groups. And you can’t win a faction struggle unless you can present a plausible plan to win. The number of people prepared to admit to themselves they are happy raking in a salary to be a stooge is small. The second person is certainly very unlikely to get what they want from Labour. And probably always have been. A third person who might demand the latter, while thinking it impossible, or even undesirable. I guess they will get whatever the first group gets, but not be happy about it?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2022 15:23
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I mean, I feel like "either there is a big conspiracy about how gravity, satellites, space photography, air travel, and timezones work, or the earth is just actually round" is a pretty simple proof? Except that, if you are the wrong type of smart, you can invent complicated systems that explain that faster than anyone can ever understand and analyze them to spot the exact contradiction with everyday regular experience. If, at any point while playing their game, you happen to reference some experience that goes beyond the everyday, like asking ‘what about someone on the ISS looking down?’, you have changed the topic to ‘should you trust elites?’. And so are functionally indistinguishable from Prince Andrew’s defense lawyer..
|
|
#
¿
Jan 13, 2022 13:34
|
|
|
Gyro Zeppeli posted:It's a loving good play from the Tories because now nobody likes the BBC, so they're going to make Keith not only defend something so widely hated from both sides, but now has to pledge to make people pay more money to keep it. Replace the license fee with the option of a nationally-shared subscription to every streaming service in existence. Price negotiation with the companies in question would be on the basis that accepting the deal is the only legal way for them to operate in the U.K.; take it or leave it.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 16, 2022 15:39
|
|
|
ThomasPaine posted:It's hardly a tax if you can just choose not to bother paying it. If you think being easy to evade makes something not a tax, I know a couple of billionaires who who be interested in sponsoring you to write a dictionary.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 17, 2022 15:22
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I think a better explanation is that if you want a "big tent" party at the moment you just join labour, and then the lovely people in charge of it use you to get their lovely mates elected and do nothing to help you while a bunch of other people tell you that you have to stay in because there cannot ever be anything better. Labour is bankrupt, swiftly losing members, and led by charisma-free obvious idiots. Ones who will always be returning fewer MPs to parliament, and so supporting a smaller of career staff posts, than any alternative. This would seem to me to make changing course absolutely politics on easy mode, something that will naturally happen unless some unpredictable event prevents it. In contrast, the consensus here seems to be the task of taking on and defeating those evident losers is impossible. I guess there was some post that explained all that in incontrovertible detail that I missed?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 17, 2022 19:11
|
|
|
Danger - Octopus! posted:Fixed that for you Do you expect me to take the job? No, Mr Bond, I expect you to die. Most Tory internal faction politics is about that question. Is imposed poverty: Reverse-Marxist: functionally useful for making money Blofeld: enjoyable (for the one doing the imposing) Cenobite: improving. So we won’t know which version will happen until Boris’s successor ‘emerges’.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 27, 2022 11:40
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 11, 2024 16:49 |
|
|
Unkempt posted:I think there was a study in India that showed people who'd had a course of Ivermectin did slighty better with Covid response, but it turned out that it was because they were the ones who didn't have gut worms because the Ivermectin had cured that. If you don't have the worms in the first place then the Ivermectin does nothing (of any use). There were quite a lot of studies from the ‘third world’ that posted impressive results for invermectim as a.covid treatment. One current theory is that those that were not actually fraudulent were based off it actually working as intended; as a people dewormer. Covid alone is a lot easier for the body to deal with than covid + parasites. Full appreciation of the irony of the situation is only reached when you realise that for these purposes, major parts of the USA count as 3rd world countries: So going to the vet to get some horse dewormer comes worryingly close to being an entirely rationally-justified move. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK62495/
|
|
#
¿
Jan 30, 2022 22:08
|
|