gotta address the oligarch technofascist problem first. kind of hard to force companies to break up when the companies owns the people who make the laws

pretend that he is in sync

no need. M$ and pretty much every other big tech behemoth has been forcing unwanted bullshit on the customers for decades, and guess what–people still buy their shit

thanks for the reminder to dump my nvidia while i’m still green on it

coffee. pretty much every local roaster within 50 miles of me has a better dark roast than 99% of the grocery store crap, which is also usually already stale when they stock it on the shelf

hilarious they chose this dumb twat as a foil to give voice to maga women who don’t care for pedophiles.

scares the shit out of me

this is by design. by funneling all your moneys further and further up the food chain, they both ensure you’ll never take their place and keep you obedient and compliant. lest “something” happens, and you end up in an even worse situation

you and i don’t exist to “thrive.” we’re here to generate more wealth for our owners, and to be hoodwinked into thinking this is the way it’s supposed to be

obligatory

they use their AI and data harvesting from myriad security camera footage/social media posts to attach every face at every protest to a name and physical address

can’t do that if you’re wearing a mask and left your phone at home

that’s great. again: do what you want, but don’t think you’re closing this tab having spread the idea that voting 3rd party isn’t dumb, futile, and just plain morally wrong

and yet you’re already saying no to whomever the DNC picks to replace a literal fascist rapist convicted felon con-man…

i’m skeptical, but it doesn’t matter. my point stands. there are TWO possible outcomes, like it or not, and 3rd party is NOT one of them

did you vote for harris?

LOL it hasn’t even been a year and the “iM vOtInG fOr JiLL sTeIn” morons are back in full force as if nothing even happened

do what you want comrade. but don’t expect to not get shat on and ridiculed for your wrong decision

there are plenty of things going on in the world that science can’t explain. but it happens, without a “plausible pathway by which it could be done”

anyway, nice talking. i reject the “it’s impossible” claim

if there is no evidence suggesting it as a possibility

100 years ago there was no evidence that you (and everyone) would have not just a phone, but an actual computer in their pocket. “balderdash!” they would have said if you suggested it. “preposterous! impossible!”

again i’m not saying we ARE in a simulation, nor am i telling you what to believe, but i’m still skeptical of the “it’s impossible, proven by my math” claim, seeing as how so many “certainties” throughout history have had to be adjusted–or discarded–due to new developments

The point being that this kind of math is not capable of simulating a universe. If it did something else, it wouldn’t be a computer. It would be something else.

the “something else” is the thing-- saying that it’s impossible for the universe to be a simulation is going ahead and claiming that there will never ever be a “something else” that could do the computation, or, have the “non-algorithmic understanding” they’re talking about.

which to my mind is on an equal plane as “we don’t know why X happened, therefore god exists”

edit: interestingly, speaking of “god,” hermeticists believe the universe itself is a mental projection “all is mind,” the principle of mentalism. from that point of view, our universe isn’t a “simulation” per se, but more like a dream. or nightmare. more nightmare than dream at this point

https://www.mindbodygreen.com/articles/7-hermetic-principles

“Drawing on mathematical theorems related to incompleteness and indefinability, we demonstrate that a fully consistent and complete description of reality cannot be achieved through computation alone,” Dr. Faizal explains. “It requires non-algorithmic understanding, which by definition is beyond algorithmic computation and therefore cannot be simulated. Hence, this universe cannot be a simulation.”

aren’t they basing this conclusion on their current “understanding” of what computers are capable of, and assuming that their current limitations will remain limitations forever? not saying the universe is definitely a simulation, but you don’t have to go too far back in time for the tech we have today to seem like impossible “magic” even to the smartest most imaginative scientists

maybe GOP will get firsthand experience of what 42 million people who have very little to lose are capable of when actual starvation kicks in

“wHy ArEnT pEOpLe HaViNg MoRe KiDs?!!??”

“ok, i had a bunch of kids. can i get some help feeding, clothing, educating them, and keeping them safe from school shootings?”

“LOL go fuck yourself you shouldn’t have had kids if you can’t afford it and don’t have guns”

genuine question: when someone says “i eat healthy,” do you always inject your own meaning of “i don’t use drugs or smoke cigarettes or drink alcohol or do anything else ‘unhealthy’” ?

in other words, to you “i eat healthy” = “i don’t do anything unhealthy”?

because that’s what you just did

also if you want to be sciencey and technically correct, there are 3 daughters in the photo