gcheliotis

joined 1 year ago
[–] gcheliotis@lemmy.world 1 points 22 hours ago

Thank you for the exchange, however I can see that you are mostly interested in educating me and I am not interested in such an imbalanced exchange. I have been through all this before, when the USSR and its fall were still very relevant topics. Also, as already discussed, I am not as passionate about this as you are. I guess we will both see where China is headed. I agree that markets do not cease under socialism, in fact I do not think they will ever cease to exist completely, people will continue to trade and barter at some scale and I think that is ok.

[–] gcheliotis@lemmy.world 0 points 23 hours ago (2 children)

Hey thanks for making the effort. You are clearly more passionate about this than I am. And you clearly consider today’s China a case of “existing socialism”. I do not. And I’m surprised that a number of people still do. Indeed the Trotskyist left and other related currents in the West have always had to deal with the paradox of advocating communism while at the same time opposing most if not all regimes that claimed to be communist. On the other hand more traditional communists - some would call them Stalinists if we’re using labels - who would advocate for regimes that many considered oppressive and were happy to see fall (including everyone who considered such regimes to be a degeneration of the original revolutionary potential). Personally I don’t feel I have a big stake in this. I am more and more thinking that these are experiments that largely failed no matter how you look at it, and hope to see new movements that will update their repertoire, learn from the failings, and succeed better. I am not sure what form or shape such movements will take. But am also not betting on capitalism not leading to the destruction of the world sooner or later. When I sometimes appear to defend China it is because I do not think that western-style capitalism and liberal democracy are the only ways that capitalism can function.

[–] gcheliotis@lemmy.world -1 points 1 day ago (4 children)

These are people I know personally. So no, not online people. And some are organized, some were, it varies. They are at best ambivalent on China. The idea that if you identify as a communist, talk like a communist, or are member of a communist organization, you should automatically support China would be frankly absurd in my circles. A strong minority of communists were at best ambivalent on the USSR even back in the day, so this is not new. And yes there are also those who will identify with and feel the need to support any regime that is in name or in some of its practices “communist”. Whereas others will take a more critical stance. I am in Europe by the way, this may matter, I find that the way words are used across the pond sometimes varies. Even within Europe, in much of Eastern Europe I understand that “communist” and “Russophile ” are thought to go hand in hand. Not so in my country, not necessarily. Anyway, it’s complicated.

[–] gcheliotis@lemmy.world -5 points 1 day ago (6 children)

Oh I know quite a few communists who would absolutely not support the PRC. They wouldn’t shill for the US either. Nor for Russia nor the USSR for that matter.

[–] gcheliotis@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Unfortunately unless you are a tiny niche community that isn’t ever targeted by spam or idiots (and how common is that really), moderators are a necessary evil. You probably don’t hate moderators. You probably hate bad/aggressive/biased/etc moderators. Or maybe sometimes you are the problem, I don’t know. It is not a problem with an easy solution. Usually large forums with no moderation become quickly unbearable to most people. And then moderators become in turn unbearable to some people.

Maybe a trusted AI can do a better job at this - like give it the community rules and ask it to enforce them objectively, transparently, and dispassionately, unless a certain number of participants complain, in which case it can reverse its decision and learn from that.

[–] gcheliotis@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Hey thanks, both AW1 and Control are games I might pick up again. Didn’t hate them, they just didn’t really hook me.

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

I found the pacing of the first few chapters in the first Alan Wake sublime, in terms of storytelling. The gameplay frustrated me on the other hand, became quickly monotonous and tedious for me. So I only played like a third of the game, much as I liked the story and was curious to see where it went. Then Control I was left completely unmoved by. So I’ve been hesitating to take up the second Alan Wake, basically because I didn’t much like the first iteration, or Control, which I’ve heard is somehow connected. Maybe I’m missing out. Or maybe these games appeal only to a certain audience.

[–] gcheliotis@lemmy.world -3 points 3 weeks ago

Never used this. Never cared for it 🤷🏻‍♂️

[–] gcheliotis@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Do you use the integrated AI in new versions of Excel or do you ask ChatGPT or some other AI to write it out for you?

[–] gcheliotis@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

BG3 vibes anyone?

[–] gcheliotis@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Hmm I am not sure I understand what you’re saying or that you understood anything I said. Maybe we are talking past each other. Nevermind, let’s forget about incels. Main point is whatever your preferences, framing them positively helps.

[–] gcheliotis@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

Preferences are fine. It still matters how you express them. In the current zeitgeist, with inceldom being a thing, the way these preferences were expressed smacked of that. The fact that you want to defend this specific trifecta of otherwise completely unrelated preferences, claiming they lead to a better life, makes me think you might be an incel yourself, or maybe just a conservative who’s consumed a few too many such videos promoting “family values” and purporting that these are threatened by a woman’s weight, or her having to raise a child on her own, or her seeking love and attention on dating apps. Truth is these are pretty much unrelated to whether one values family and to each other. It’s just a collection of caricatures, stereotypes, and cautionary tales circulating in conservative circles. If all one can think of when asked for their preferences regarding a partner are these known talking points, it is a little suspect. FWIW, I do not think we should marginalize conservatives. But I do think we should marginalize misogyny.

view more: next ›