It’s not inconceivable but I will insist on the point that technology is the right tool to solve such issues.
It was inconceivable a few decades ago - even a couple of years ago! - several medical advances that are today used routinely.
It is a fun theoretical discussion to entertain but we would reach no real conclusion.
I honestly hope so. Until that day, we do not know. Hopefully, you will set the example
This reads to me like you’re assuming I’d be a class traitor until proven otherwise, and I don’t like that.
I so deeply despise the use of “class” as if it as any meaning or use besides forcibly dividing people into societal boxes.
Until proven otherwise, you will strictly adhere to your principles and ideals. Like or not, is up to you. I don’t exist to gain your unwavering approval.
Shit. I am? Why?
Sorry, it sounded like you were defending billionaires as if they actually earned their wealth. I’m glad to be wrong, but you do continue to sound like a liberal
I risk we do not share the same understanding of what being liberal entails. I consider myself a liberal individual. But being politically liberal seems to be a charged connotation nowadays.
It’s easy to just shout out loud, when everyone else already is as well
Why do you assume I didnt start until it became trendy? I quit Facebook and Amazon a decade ago, and have been consistently putting my freedom and safety on the line in furtherance of my leftist values for just as long.
Quit FB I don’t even remember when and I have a serious distrust towards Amazon.
I can’t disagree on that.
So you’re not arguing that the upper class isn’t evil, you were just under the assumption that I’m an all-talk idealist or something?
I can’t disagree that multi-million/billion/trillion fortunes should be dissipated and returned fully into the economic and social fabric. You still may be. I don’t know you.
Even Marx was a man of his time: his daughters were educated to play the piano, draw and sing, like any middle class girl of the time. While at the same time, his work heavily criticized society and social norms has it stood.
It’s a tall price to pay to truly embody an ideal.
Unfortunately, at the moment, very far from being attainable
I’m gonna keep doing praxis anyway.
Keep on that trail.
Let’s say you have a big success tomorrow and you manage to amass a great fortune. Are you going to give it away? Are you going to do something with your newly found wealth to truly change something for better?
Yes??? Of course I would?
I honestly hope so. Until that day, we do not know. Hopefully, you will set the example.
The top three wealth holders in the planet are there because people allowed it. Facebook was just so groudbreaking, so innovative, so useful to connect to people. Amazon is just so convenient, so easy to use. And electric cars never existed before.
Ohhhh, you’re a capitalist
Shit. I am? Why?
They were enabled and still are by the same people that cry today against them. If the notion of true equality really existed, the moment those individuals started becoming too big, people would remove trust and start demanding them to do good, tangible good, for others.
That’s literally what myself and many others are doing? Except in my opinion they are evil until they intentionally drop their net worth to the single digit millions and transfer their companies to the workers who actually made them what they are today
I can’t disagree on that.
What you are doing, by taking that position, is just subscribing to the current social model. That’s not even a criticism; it’s joining the band wagon.
Lmao, I’m an anarchist, not a liberal on a band wagon
It’s easy to just shout out loud, when everyone else already is as well.
I personally like the anarchist proposal: a flat society, without classes. Unfortunately, at the moment, very far from being attainable.
That depends. Although massive deforestation throughout the planet, tree farms are a thing. So…
But haul wood over who knows what expanses of space? It would be cheaper to build greenhouses on barren planets and moons. The biggest challenge would probably be to prevent the oxygen in those enclosed habitats to eat away the building materials.
I remember following the advances on an experiment, during the 90’s, where a team of scientists designed and built a fully self contained habitat, with only plants inside. I think the objective was to measure if the plants could/would survive in very limited resources conditions. Well, the plants survived. After an initial shock, the plants self regulated and the habitat stabilized into a fully enclosed ecosystem. Things became weird when the oxygen levels rose to a point where the ciment of the walls started to come apart. They had to hastily coat the walls with very thick rubber paint to prevent more damage.
But they do eventually manage, don’t they?
Usually, at this point, I would say even a broken clock is right twice a day, but I’m trying to get accostumed to receive a compliment, so I’ll instead say thank you for those kind words. And that we agree.
We’re just exchanging ideas here and you brought up a very good point.
But it made think that by contrast, in Africa, several ethnic groups coexist and language was not that big of a concern for conflict.
I’ll grant that waffer thin idea as a good attempt of putting something akin to good sci-fi into an otherwise solely for visuals work, although I disagree with the notion of deifying something that is tangible, as in the setting put forward in the movie.
And I mentioned Dune because of the immortality mention. The spice is also irreplaceable and unique, produced only in a single planet, through a rather complex organic process, harvested at great risk and cost, then to be synthesized by the tons.
That was good sci-fi, with sound social and religious criticism in it.
We can save mental effort and just go for the Dune series at this point. What is the point in that? In considering the advances in modern chemistry, there are ever few organic compounds that can not be synthesized.
I fall back to my original thought: is well thought sci-fi so hard to achieve nowadays? If seems there is a fixation about misery and destruction nowadays.
Nice to cross paths with you again!
I’ll grant that but what use for crystalized urea is there? Urea I know a few. And if we already know how to cultivate diamonds and other artificial gems, why bother mining for that?
There are exactly zero minerals available inside planets that are unavailable on asteroids.
Sci-fi will be sci-fi but can we go back to the time it was at least well thought? Can’t hurt. If the objective of the movie was to make social criticism, it didn’t need to go to such lenghts.
And it was a boring movie; failed to captivate me.
You realized I just opted for having a divergent view on the subject, right?
So… We manage to master space travel. We manage to master interstellar travel. We eventually find a planet with suitable for sustaining our species. And we just overlook it.
Can someone explain me the reasoning behind this?
Sci-fi to the side, there are more minerals available - readily - on asteroids and barren planets than anywhere else. Why go hopping around looking for habitable planets, to the reason of 1 out of who knows how many, to then strip mine it?
Having more developers natively release for Linux implies removing influence from Windows and making more people realize it is a viable option for daily computer use.
It’s not just about gaming at this point, it’s about changing an entire paradigm and erode monopolies.
Can you imagine a Linux “monopoly” on personal computers? The dumb discussions about using Arch, Fedora, Debian or Suse? It would only be hot air escaping mouths because under the hood every development on one side is feeding improvement into the entire ecosystem.
What you are doing, by taking that position, is just subscribing to the current social model. That’s not even a criticism; it’s joining the band wagon.
Let’s say you have a big success tomorrow and you manage to amass a great fortune. Are you going to give it away? Are you going to do something with your newly found wealth to truly change something for better?
The top three wealth holders in the planet are there because people allowed it. Facebook was just so groudbreaking, so innovative, so usefull to connect to people. Amazon is just so convinient, so easy to use. And electric cars never existed before.
They were enabled and still are by the same people that cry today against them. If the notion of true equality really existed, the moment those individuals started becoming too big, people would remove trust and start demanding a them to do good, tangible good, for others.
I’m not directly conected with english speaking countries so that example always evades me but you’re right.
The scottish also had it bad with the english as well. And some time back I read a news report on how a man had been insulted in a train for not speaking english, in London. He was speaking welsh…
Racism picks on any small thing to rise divergence, usually something the target of it can’t change. But anything works.
It wildly depends on who you ask, so don’t waste your praise on me.
None.
Racism, as we all (should) know is skin shallow. That is enough. Not being of the “right” color establishes that an individual has no rights, no freedoms, and in extremes cases, not even humanity.
Classism is just a reviewed version of the cast system. Where you are born on the social pyramid dictates your fate. Born poor, die poor.
None are tolerable. All human beings are born equal.
I agree.