throwanem

Nick Land has called himself a lot of things. But more interesting to me is this question: in what way may China since Deng be regarded as meaningfully Marxist? (Are they still nominally Marxist over there? Were they really ever? Maoism was its own "deviation.")

From the most unserious source imaginable, yes. Do you know of a company called "Chaotic Good?" Do you think they were the first to come up with the model?

But even if the 2013 post was as organic as you assume, I would think it worth finding a way to "warn" about the issue that doesn't make you look like a weird fringey incel lacking the social competence to read the kind of normal room which this website has emphatically never been nor even wished to be.

I realize you don't have access to it, but all I'm actually doing is summarizing Mr. Kingsbury's own explanation for the geoblock your incompetent legislators made necessary. As his fellow American citizen, I have to say I found his argument compelling. Your opinion of it moves me rather less.

If you choose to regard that as "self-censorship," then frankly I can see even more clearly what drove him to the decision than I could before. I'll have to bookmark his instructions for how to configure such a block in nginx, in case I decide to publish anything online again in future.

In any case I don't really see where you're likely to have anything useful further to say to me, and I would like you please to stop trying. I don't come to this website just to be harassed by the ignorant, after all.

(Before you risk real legal trouble, you should know that I am myself homosexual and thus, as I understand it, actually protected, at least against some forms of maltreatment by UK subjects, under some of your rather bloodthirsty laws against defamation, harassment, et cetera. You should be careful what you say, perhaps. It would be a shame to see you arrested or ASBO'd or something of that unpleasant sort, merely over an earnest - if overenthusiastic and ill-considered - effort to speak your honest mind.)

Yes, mostly because no one actually cares much what anyone patents until a material invention eventuates, and partly so that they would be able to sue anyone who did actually invent it - which you will note they themselves of course did not proceed to do.

I don't claim this failed to occur because Sony is more decent than average, but because the idea is self-evidently very stupid. The thing is, when you get to have a "Patents" section in your CV, no one cares very much that they are stupid patents as long as you were working for a serious company when you got them. There is a point past which that's just a perquisite, like how the company subsidizes your au pair.

I've never needed an au pair! And I hold no patents of which I'm aware. But it is not 2009, or even 2013, any more.

Well, that's okay; you're young. There are better and more topical jokes in your future, and it will serve you well in making them to have encountered this particular, extremely stale and suspiciously stained, cookie. Just be careful you don't take too big a bite!

You are most welcome! - especially at such long last.

I wouldn't say no one cares about it, and I am not at all sure it will fail - nor that it should; there are better futures available from here, also.

Honestly, if I'd cottoned on quicker to the guy's real problem, I would've treated him more gently sooner. It's not quite true that an addict can't help himself, and in the place where that's false is the hope of recovery. But to blame people for getting hooked on the shit Silicon Valley is pushing, would be like blaming people for getting an opioid habit when the hardest imaginable versions of that drug were handed out like candy for decades.

Exactly like, in fact. Some people on this forum have BOP numbers waiting for them. You know who you are. In time, so will everyone.

Well, you know. Every med student goes through this "I Am An Earthly God" phase. Usually it passes. But the guy isn't obviously in favor of the concept for which his account is named, so there isn't the contradiction here that appears to exist on the face of it. (Speaking of usernames, hello, Grima! How on Middle-earth did you survive that fall?)

Whatever our other differences, I am forced both by honesty and by decency to grant that you are absolutely correct on this score.

Well, there's magic and then there's magic, you know? If you want to perform an incantation that really works, the only formula or ritual you will ever need is: "Be the change you wish to see in the world."

It is a ritual, though. That means it only works as long as you do it every day.

I said "menial." I did not say "low wage." And given the utter footlessness of your own situation as you yourself continue to show it, you are bold indeed in presuming to advise anyone else on their finances.

But you continue to astonish me with your assumptions! Is it a gambling debt? Get a little too happy on Robinhood or Polymarket, maybe? Were you really really counting on a crypto tax holiday? To keep from having to tell the wife, maybe?

On a side note, the mods here aren't great fans of either my opinions or my stubborn insistence on their accurate expression (1) but apparently that distaste extends not quite so far that they see fit to ban me. (Or not at the time of this writing, anyway.) No blame, of course; even if the place is looking sort of shabby and down at the mouth these days, at least when not seen through eyes of nostalgia for the high times of the 2010s, this is still their house.

Don't worry, though! Once the rate limiter is satisfied, I'll be right back here and we can talk about how you keep deceitfully attributing to me a statement you yourself made up. But I hope instead to find by then (assuming you are in the US as your usage leads me to do) that you have called the National Gambling Addiction Hotline, which is open 24/7 at (844) 779-2637, or failing that the SAMHSA helpline at 988. Help is available, but you do have to take the first step.

(1) I appreciate this is my own view of the matter, and that others will reasonably describe the thing in different terms. Nevertheless.

Then it should be easy for you to dispose of me, shouldn't it? If you can see right through me, I mean, the way you say you can. And yet. And yet.

Yes, it's a stupid 4chan meme from 2013. I can only surmise those who quote it either don't know its origin, or they must be wholeheartedly 'embracing the cringe.'

I have at no point been less than direct, straightforward, and clear. You have radically misunderstood my argument because you are motivated to do so.

Mr. Kingsbury, author of the article under discussion, has considerably better sense than I, and so far as I know never comments here. You've radically misunderstood his argument too, though, for what little that knowledge may aid.

It's remarkable to me that you should be so concerned with my perspective, if you believe me insane as you now claim. (What will it be next? That I have too much time on my hands? That's often next from here.)

Evidently you are concerned with my perspective, considering the effort you keep going to to continue to gain its benefit. I've explained why I think that is, and I'm not likely to change my mind at this point. You should really think about why it means so much to you to keep trying to negotiate otherwise.

I understand why you would rather "get into anecdotes" than answer my point. I don't understand why you keep posting, save perhaps that "the guilty flee where no man pursueth." The account you're using is without history or reputation. All you have to do to make this end is stop.

That's rich out of somebody who obviously has no concept of signaling theory. Not to mention, of course, that "systems thinking" makes no comment on human ethics or morality. Unlike some, the people working in the field seem generally to know their limits.

But you're right that clarity is important. In that spirit, it was your cowardly effort to excuse your behavior, and your obviously motivated effort to ameliorate its moral odium which you feel, that I criticized. This was and is in the course of helping you fully grasp that whatever is driving you, here, feels unconscionable to you because it is unconscionable and you know it, just as you understand in your heart that there is no excuse. Else you would not strive so here, in the hope someone else may supply what you failed to achieve alone.

I don't know just what it is that you're feeling so exercised with guilt over. Nor do I care. You know. For the rest of us, I confide, it will eventually become part of the public record, and I'm happy to wait that day without further unprompted comment here.

I know lots of families who feed their kids just fine on something less than a quarter million US a year. Just about all the families I know with kids, these days.

If you keep telling yourself that, do you think it will eventually help you sleep at night?

Yes. I made no claim your legislators are competent. (Congratulations on the summary dismissal of the hereditary peers!)

And people wonder why I'm doing all I can to ensure that world will never, ever again even pretend to try to find a place for me.

He's gay, and being gay online contravenes the UK Online Safety Act. Complain to your legislators.

> Emacs TRAMP was super slow to work with. With help of Claude, I figured out [...]

Out of curiosity, did it advise you to configure auto-save and backup such that they write their files under ~/.emacs.d, rather than in the same directory alongside the (with Tramp, potentially remote) file they're about? Especially with vanilla Emacs, that's always the first place you want to look when you see freezes doing file operations on a remote host over a slow or flaky link.

I believe I first added that change to my .emacs in 2010 or 2011, and as far as I can recall, it was the only change I ever needed to make to address Tramp being slow sometimes.

Go look in a mirror, not at me. That's where the argument is waiting that you're feeling urged toward.

No. I'm doing it because I care more whether I can live with myself than whether I impress people with the name of who I work for. Hence much of my recent comment history here, for example. I don't want any of these people getting the idea they should want me to work with them, either. I do want my name on every industry blacklist I can possibly get it on. Those will eventually be revealed - remember Franklin's dictum, fellas! That shit always comes out in the end - and I look forward to that day with pleased and eager anticipation.

At the moment I'm more looking at menial work for one of the local universities. Money is money, and my needs are small; the work is honest, I still should have a decade or so of physical labor left in me, and it carries the perk of free tuition for the degree I never had time for. I would have the time and energy to write, perhaps, even! And, however badly the people in charge are running things lately, the world will always need someone good at cleaning a toilet. (And I am already pretty good at cleaning a toilet!)

You're calling yourself a Marxist via those guys? Excuse me. Please carry on.

> when you say humanity all I see are objects

> I don't care for "humanity," I care about power

Yes, I know. I suppose at least you've read your Alinsky.

Are you prepared to demonstrate a superior result with models newer than those available when the research was done? Can you suggest a candidate experiment design to test your hypothesis?