MasterBlaster

joined 2 years ago
[–] MasterBlaster@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago

The problem with these tariffs, implemented in this way, is that the less wealthy has to shoulder the shock and most of the loss of wealth, while the most wealthy solidify their place in society on several levels. The social balance of power further shifts toward the billionaires.

Tarriffs are better applied for protecting existing small and mid-size businesses in danger of being wiped out by huge foreign operations, and protecting industries that have national security roles.

The key here is they would be applied before we lose the capacity - not decades after we already adjusted to the loss.

On this side of the curve it is more productive to subsidize operations that can (re)build the capacity we seek. Biden's work with TSMC was a prime example. This approach is less disruptive. Even then, targeted tarriffs can be productive.

We could have saved our solar industry. We decided to let China sell priduct at a loss until their competition went out of business or left because no profit could be achieved. This is where tariffs make sense.

[–] MasterBlaster@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

Are most people in "the west" worse off today than they were 150 years ago? Are there fewer well functioning democracies than there were then? Has no minority group seen any improvement in their freedom? Has there been no improvement in how people interact with each other? No improvement in poverty?

[–] MasterBlaster@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

Yes, of course. Capitalism is an economic framework. A good political framework is needed, just like i said for socialism. This is a failure of the U.S. political implementation not of capitalism as a system of commerce. I would never say capitalism is the answer to all social ills. Your statement feels like a way to say I am wrong, so if I misunderstood, sorry.

[–] MasterBlaster@lemmy.world 19 points 1 week ago

Man, i try so hard to clean up. I've used up, tossed out, donated so much stuff. I reorganize, repack bins, sift out useless stuff. I'm not buying new stuff, either.

And yet the place always looks cluttered. I always have trouble finding something i know i have...somewhere.

When i de-clutter i always struggle with "where should this thing live?"

The cognitive load is devistating.

[–] MasterBlaster@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

Profiteers foregoing the largest source of profit? Not likely.

[–] MasterBlaster@lemmy.world 13 points 2 weeks ago

Oh, like NAFTA!

[–] MasterBlaster@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

His subordinates, who else?

[–] MasterBlaster@lemmy.world 18 points 2 weeks ago (5 children)

It is authoritarian. Communist system devolve to authoritarianism because it is a natural progression (easy to do). Socialists can, but a good democratic political structure makes it harder.

[–] MasterBlaster@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

Well, there goes ProtonMail. Let's hope it is not enacted. I'll wait for other neutral reports since Tuta is a major competitor. Should be a quick search.

[–] MasterBlaster@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

He said Capitalism, not Corporate Capitalism. Pure, unfettered Capitalism leads to the same place facism, communism, and feudalism go.

The issue is "unfettered". Regulations enforced upon the operation of the markets, maintained by rule of law, enables achievement of greater agency and success upon much larger parts of society.

People understand they can prosper from creating real value, which pushes society toward greater advancements to quality of life and enable more individual freedom than any prior economic and political system.

Kill the illness, not the patient.

[–] MasterBlaster@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

Exactly. Just like they never tracked and stored our movements when we turned iff location history.

The class action suit they lost on that was fake news /s

[–] MasterBlaster@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

Racism is a powerful motivator, unfortunately.

 

It's been a few years since I've needed to install a version of Windows on a PC for personal use. I have a license for Windows 10 Pro, but today I found out it is no longer possible to get through the installation without first creating an account with Microsoft.

I don't want to do this. Does anybody have any way to get around it? The stuff I've read online basically ends up being create your account switch to a local account after installation and delete your account. I want a better solution. Would installing a much older version of Windows 10 work? The whole reason I got an msdn license back in the day is so I didn't have to do this.

Edit: 10/2/2023

I thank you all for giving me advice and ideas. Much I had already tried before posting my question here, and some suggestions and experiences led me to keep at it. Here's my experience for others who have a similar problem.

I downloaded the ISO from Microsoft - Win10_22H2_English_x64v1. I used Ventoy to launch the installer. The first time I went through, I connected to Wi-Fi. As soon as I did that, it sealed my fate. By this time in the process, it installed the boot partition on my HD and saved this information so every time I tried to restart the installer, it always went through language, keyboard, then "enter email address". All the suggestions for fake values simply triggered "This email is already used. Please choose another", and that was it.

I was getting ready to wipe the partition and try again, but decided to turn off Wi-Fi in the BIOS first to see if that worked. It did. This time it tried to convince me to set up the network and failed and I was able to create a local account.

The way this multi-version installer works is annoying. It installed Windows Home edition, so I had to "know" that I could go to settings and enter a key. Once I put in the key, it "upgraded" to Pro edition, and I was done.

Next time I have to do this, I'll see if Rufus works. It seems that will remove some annoyance. Either way, I will avoid configuring Wi-Fi until after install next time. I gotta say, I am not looking forward to the day when I must upgrade to Windows 11. So far I've been able to avoid actually buying a new copy due to my aging MSDN key. By the time I'm forced to "upgrade", I might have to cough up some cash for something I don't want, but am forced to own.

It should be illegal.

Anyway, now that I know I can still use my MSDN key to get an updated Win 10, I feel a bit more comfortable with re-imaging my Dell laptop from dual-boot to Linux only, then install Windows as a VM for these times I need to use it. Fortunately, that is increasingly rare.

2
submitted 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) by MasterBlaster@lemmy.world to c/privacy@lemmy.ml
 

I included a comment that is a prime example of how willfully blind people are concerning the value of privacy. This was part of a thread about a mews post of a person who had his Amazon Smart Home bricked because a delivery person thought he was racist.

It's a troubling read, because if most people really are this way, the fight for legally enforced privacy will fail.

What do you think of this?


Do you think they could have turned off the in the first place if they did not have personal details tied to those devices and full control of those devices?

Yes, assuming that we still need an input device of some sort. Because the input could make it give a different output, such as not running, even if it didn't know that you were the one it was blocking.

Maybe that couldn't cascade to all of your devices, but certainly the ones that received the input that caused them to brick themselves. But, then again in a mesh network they probably could send a brick signal to all co-networked devices.

What if someone decided to use something you did in the "privacy" of your own home to blackmail you? Embarass you? Would you feel safe?

I certainly wouldn't like that. Fortunately, those actions are illegal. The problem here isn't privacy, so much as it is blackmail.

It doesn't matter to me, if a passive recording picks up me doing something embarrassing. The thing that matters is using the data in the wrong way, or not having controls around the data.

What if something you do all the time suddenly becomes illegal and you could be prosecuted based on surveillance footage inside your home?

Well, I guess I'd better stop doing that thing or move. But, that is only marginally relevant to this case.

If you are a criminal, there will be evidence of the crime.

Do you think they cannot access the video and audio from those devices?

Sure they can, but passive access isn't a problem. The problem is using the data badly.

45
submitted 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) by MasterBlaster@lemmy.world to c/lemmyworld@lemmy.world
 

As lemmy grows organically, there will be continuous increases in duplicate communities. This poses a long-term problem because I don't think most people want to subscribe to half a dozen or more communities that are essentially the same.

Is there any chance that the thought leaders of Lemmy which probably includes the largest servers owners could come together and start proposing ideas?

I see a potential troubling issue with the idea in terms of combining the existing history of the duplicates communities.

Perhaps a new concept of community@global could be thought through.

view more: next ›