Tariffs can be good when applied in limited, researched and balanced ways. Trump’s “plan” is to just apply a 60% blanket tariff, which is what’s really really bad.

If my Apex client tells the server I got a perfect headshot, how would the server know I didn’t fake the data?

Any game that works like that is fundamentally flawed and AC is nothing but an attempt at a cheap bandaid at best.

The client should be doing nothing but rendering and sending player actions to the server and the server should be managing the game state as well as running its checks on those actions. And when one client sends actuons that are weird and doesn’t line up with it’s internal game state it should kick the client immediately always deferring to what ITS game state is telling it, not the client.

Wut? The major manufacturers I’ve paid attention to, who’ve made update support promises, have done “X years” not “X versions”

The day he said that “ReGULAr CAmErAs aRe ALl YoU NeEd” was the day I lost all trust in their implementation. And I’m someone who’s completely ready to turn over all my driving to an autopilot lol

Yea this was the last email I got…a promise for another email…5 days ago

Listen to me…I have an idea…

Fuck yo Zip Drives, all my homies use SyQuest

“The people of Ukraine didn’t choose that path, the oligarchs did.”

It’s true Ukraine has a history of oligarchic influence, but the 2014 Maidan protests were a massive, popular uprising. Ukrainians were fed up with Yanukovych’s corruption and his decision to abandon the EU agreement for closer ties with Russia. This wasn’t just oligarchs pulling strings; millions of Ukrainians demonstrated for a future that aligned with Europe, seeking more autonomy from Russia.

“Russia would be imperialist, but isn’t right now.”

I would argue that Russia is acting imperialistically. The annexation of Crimea, the war in Donbas, and now the invasion of Ukraine are clear examples of Russia asserting control over its neighbors. Even if it’s not globally imperialist like the U.S., these actions align with a regional imperialism that Marxists should still oppose.

Ultimately, this isn’t about picking sides between oligarchies, but supporting the principle of self-determination for Ukraine, including resisting imperialist aggression from any direction.

Yes, Ukraine has ties with the U.S., but sovereign nations have the right to choose their alliances. Ukraine’s Western integration stems from its desire for self-determination, not just U.S. influence. Russia’s aggression isn’t justified merely because Ukraine sought NATO’s support.

Bias exists everywhere, but dismissing “Western” sources wholesale, while elevating openly ideological ones, doesn’t strengthen the argument. Marxist critique should apply equally to all capitalist states, including Russia, which operates under an oligarchic system that exploits its own people. 1 2

While far-right elements in Ukraine are real, they’re a small part of the picture. Reducing Ukraine to these groups oversimplifies the conflict. Most Ukrainians are fighting for sovereignty, not fascism.

Russia’s actions are imperialist too, and as a Marxist, you should critique imperialism wherever it emerges, not just from the West.

1. NATO Expansion: The argument that NATO’s eastward expansion “provoked” Russia is often linked to Gorbachev’s 1990 talks with Western leaders. However, this promise was tied to Germany’s unification, not a blanket prohibition on expansion. And importantly eastern european countries sought NATO membership because of their historical (and justified) fears of Russian imperialism (a dynamic Marxists should understand as nations seeking sovereignty free from external dominance.)

2. Western Involvement in Ukraine: The U.S. supporting a regime change in Ukraine in 2014 is thought to be imperialism. But ignores the agency of Ukrainians, who led the Maidan protests because of already existing deep dissatisfaction with Yanukovych’s corrupt, oligarchic regime and his pivot to Russia. Supporting popular uprisings against oligarchs should align with Marxist values even if “the West” has its own interests

3. The Role of Fascism in Ukraine: Yes, Ukraine has issues with far-right groups like so many countries but exaggerating their influence as a justification for invasion serves to divert attention from Russia’s own reactionary politics. Far-right elements in Ukraine do not define the country’s political landscape, nor do they justify imperial aggression from another state. Russia has its own history of fostering right-wing authoritarianism.

4. Minsk Agreements: While the West" and Ukraine could be criticized for their handling of the Minsk agreements, Russia also violated these accords by continuing support for the separatists. Both sides share blame for the failure of Minsk, but it doesn’t make Russia’s invasion justified. Ukrainians didn’t provoke a full-scale invasion; they were defending their sovereignty.

5. NATO as a “Defensive” Alliance: Criticism of NATO’s imperialistic behavior is fair its actions in places like Libya show it isn’t 100% defensive. But in this case, NATO’s expansion was driven by countries seeking security from a historically imperialist power. Ukraine wasn’t “provoking” Russia by wanting self-determination; it was trying to secure its future.

You’re trying to push this “Actuall, but Ukraine DID provoke” narrative by mixing in unverified, ideologically biased material with references that are legitimate, but isolated incidents. Like linking far-right activity to justify the war conveniently ignores Russia’s (I should probably say everyone’s) own far-right issues. Marxists should reject imperialism in all its forms, including Russia’s actions in Ukraine.

“propaganda”? Oh. You mean like Russia started a full blown unprovoked war with a peaceful nation? That “propaganda”?

Sucks others got caught in the crosshairs, but that’s just what happens when your authoritarian government launches unprovoked wars and gets sanctioned.

Oh you’re not an idiot or “indecisive”, you’re just a Trumpet trying to LARP is a “leftie” on lemmy lol

Just vote, down ticket local races are also on your ballots and those votes DO matter, thousands and thousands of small towns and cities can have their shit decided on just a handful of votes.

Real third party candidates focus on these races and RCV to form a foundation to effect real change.

If the majority of people on the left actually turned out to vote for the left most candidate every time in the last 75 years this country would be SO much further left than it is now and we wouldn’t be in this mess now.

But that’s the past, it can still be corrected by GETTING OUT TO VOTE and voting for the most left candidate (s) with an actual chance of winning and not just presidential elections either. Turn out to vote for “off season”/local shit too, because local elections are where your vote has the most impact.

Who are you to dictate who needs what? I definitely “need” a smart fridge from my example because I always forget to make a list before I go to the grocery store. It would save me so much time and money.

You honestly sound like the old fucks of ancient times past who always bitched about new “tech”:

• Damn smartphones, ruining society
• Damn internet, ruining society
• Damn personal computers, ruining society
• Damn video games, ruining society
• Damn television, ruining society
• Damn comic books, ruining society
• Damn rock and roll music, ruining society
• Damn jazz music, ruining society
• Damn movies, ruining society
• Damn automobiles, ruining society
• Damn telephones, ruining society
• Damn electricity, ruining society
• Damn novels, ruining society
• Damn newspapers, ruining society
• Damn printing press, ruining society
• Damn written language, ruining society
• Damn iron tools, ruining society
• Damn bronze weapons, ruining society
• Damn agriculture, ruining society
• Damn fire, ruining society

Nothing is stopping you from running away into the mountains to life a tech free life

Are you mad about the technology or the underlying reasons it was born of? Honestly most people’s anger towards tech isn’t about the tech itself, but what it’s really used for

For example, the smart fridge, on paper most people would find it a fantastic idea. But then the user-hostile features set in. An internal camera could helpfully analyze everything in your fridge and put together an ez shopping list, but then in reality we kinda get that because it was designed around things like selling data collection and ADs and then designed to break in a year or 2 and take out half the fridge along with it because they want to make more money off you every 2 years

Now take the smart fridge in a world with strong privacy and consumer protection laws (and maybe even a capitalism free world) and it would be totally different, not only would you get cool things designed properly with heart and soul, but it’ll also last a long time. Modern tech doesn’t have to be as fragile as it is, NASAs space probes and rovers and satellites prove time and time again that “High Tech” can last with proper design and manufacturing. In the depths of space their shit is routinely lasting their original mission lengths. In space, in the top 10 most hostile places we know.

Am I missing something? I can’t even find anywhere to download apks lol

I’m feeling like this account is nothin but a lil troll

The phones weren’t designed to get you addicted to them back then.

Umm, yea, I was not a very social person and I was still on my phone for most of my classes lol and I was also still in school for “The Great Switch” when everyone just had smartphones after summer break (including myself)

Good news! You’re off the wait-list, a spider has been killed in your honor!

I’ve seen this again and again, but haven’t cell phones been banned in classrooms for as long as there have been (mainstream affordable) phones?

I have lots of memories of “blind texting” on a T9 because I had to hide it from the teacher lol.

Also, I generally support bans in the classroom, but just let them have their phones during lunch, there’s no instruction during lunch ffs