US assets in Syria (completely illegal by the way) continue taking a beating
Attack on US military base in Syria
It was reported that Iranian-backed groups attempted to attack a base where the US military is stationed with rockets in the Deir ez-Zor province of | The Eastern HeraldArab Desk (The Eastern Herald)
like this
Oofnik and NoneOfUrBusiness like this.
(Some) challenges facing Claudia Sheinbaum (People's Dispatch)
October 1, 2024 was a historic day for Mexico. Claudia Sheinbaum became the first female president in the history of Mexico, a country politically dominated by men who have historically tried to display an archetypal image of rugged masculinity. But Sheinbaum’s election invites us to think about a series of factors that are not solely circumscribed to her gender.
First of all, we must consider that MORENA (“National Regeneration Movement”), just over a decade since it was founded, has managed to become a political party that demonstrates a great capacity to remain in power despite the great political wear and tear that a six-year term implies (in Mexico, presidential terms last six years). While this seems to be a common occurrence in the Mesoamerican country, if we take into account that the PRI governed for more than 70 consecutive years (albeit committing electoral fraud on several occasions) and PAN managed to win two consecutive elections with Vicente Fox and Felipe Calderón, MORENA’s reelection is significant if we consider the enormous campaign deployed by mainstream media against the progressive government of Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO). Fear campaigns predicted a national catastrophe that never happened, and somehow the majority of Mexicans opted instead to disregard the media machine and trust their reality on the ground. Sheinbaum’s cultivation of a strong public political communication strategy will be crucial to maintain this trend.
Indeed, it was already historic for a progressive or center-left candidate to have won the presidential elections in Mexico. But for this party to repeat the victory six years later is even more extraordinary. This shows the enormous popularity not only of AMLO but also of the political project he leads. Since his militancy in the PRD, AMLO has managed to unite a series of aspirations and desires of the most impoverished sectors of the country around his figure, but he has also managed to transcend his individual figure in favor of a political process that has been called “the Fourth Transformation” (4T). Even as president, Sheinbaum will have to continue demonstrating that she is the most capable heir in this path of collective institutional transformation.
Claudia Sheinbaum managed to establish herself as a political figure that was able to galvanize the support and trust of the majority of the Mexican people, as seen in the electoral results. There was indeed a large vote of confidence in favor of MORENA, and it is obvious that those who voted for Sheinbaum expect continuity in terms of the works and legal reforms undertaken by AMLO. But the current president has also demonstrated in her position as Head of Government of Mexico City, an enormous capacity for public management and administration of the institutions under her charge.
Great expectations
For now, beyond the speculations of some political commentators, it remains to be seen if Sheinbaum will remain as the protégé of AMLO or if she will manage to become a more relevant political figure than her predecessor. What we can say is that expectations about her administration can be considered even higher than those that appeared at the beginning of AMLO’s administration. She will have to demonstrate, contrary to the opinions of the ideologues of the Mexican and Latin American right wing, if it is possible to sustain a social democratic project in the medium term in a developing country, and even more if such a project is beneficial for the great majorities, as well as for public finances.
As she stated in her address, one of the biggest unresolved debts that the Mexican state has with the people is with the victims of state crimes and paramilitary crimes, especially Ayotzinapa. The security situation and countering the power of narco trafficking groups in the country remains a huge challenge and one that is difficult to tackle and dangerous to ignore.
In addition, Sheinbaum will have to face an opposition that has learned better how to confront progressive administrations and their political communication mechanisms, as well as external enemies that will actively seek to make her government fail. To a large extent, this will be important to know which countries she approaches and which she distances herself from, as well as the capacity or inability of her government to dissociate itself from the great international powers that hegemonize international politics today.
It will also be seen if she will seek to radicalize the public policies of her predecessor, if she maintains the same tone, or if her government acquires a more demure and conciliatory drift with the large Mexican economic groups.
In any case, it will also depend on this whether MORENA’s second administration tilts a tinge closer to a progressivism that seeks to become part of the political establishment or whether it opts for breaking (to the extent of its possibilities) certain historical social relations that have allowed for the greatest inequality between rich and poor in Mexico’s history, the systematic oppression of Indigenous peoples, among other unfavorable socioeconomic indicators.
As always happens in politics, there is no crystal ball, and the future remains to be seen. Although in this first week, from the presidential office in Mexico, Sheinbaum has surely been wondering what to do first, with whom to negotiate, what forces she will have to face, and what may be her first obstacles. Yet, probably most importantly, how to plan, geopolitically speaking, a government in a world that is rapidly moving towards war, and in which Mexico, because of its economic and geopolitical importance, has much to say, especially because of the historical, migratory, economic and cultural relationship it has with the giant that is stirring to the north: the United States.
(Some) challenges facing Claudia Sheinbaum : Peoples Dispatch
The first female president of Mexico has high levels of support but still faces key challenges to maintain stability and implement her political program.Pablo Meriguet (Peoples Dispatch)
like this
Oofnik likes this.
US believes it can use Hezbollah's disarray to elect new president
US officials believe they can exploit the killing of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah and Hezbollah's disarray to push for the election of a president in Lebanon, according to Axios.
The report echoes the belief among some Lebanese opposition leaders who spoke to Middle East Eye that there is an opportunity to push for the election of a president after the post has been vacant since October 2022.
Under Lebanon's de facto confessional system, the president of Lebanon must be a Christian.
Russia and China barely affect US elections. Israel controls all of America and you're complaining about Russia and China.
The comparison is also wrong. The US directly tries to appoint a puppet president to Lebanon which they control. Russia and China try to influence people's opinions to vote differently in the US.
This Lebanon intervention is more comparable to what Russia is doing in Africa or Belarus where they actually install puppets.
Reporter: [REDACTED]
Reason: Misinformation
Amazing that some people still think these BlueAnon attempts at censorship will get them anywhere.
- IT Pro: Cambridge Analytica models were exaggerated and ineffective, [UK Information Commissioner’s Office] claims
- Wall Street Journal: Mueller Doesn’t Find Trump Campaign Conspired With Russia
- Jacobin: Democrats and Mainstream Media Were the Real Kremlin Assets
- Washington Post: FEC fines DNC, Clinton for violating rules in funding Steele dossier
- Washington Post: Russian trolls on Twitter had little influence on 2016 voters
- Jacobin: It Turns Out Hillary Clinton, Not Russian Bots, Lost the 2016 Election
- Matt Taibbi: Move Over, Jayson Blair: Meet Hamilton 68, the New King of Media Fraud The Twitter Files reveal that one of the most common news sources of the Trump era was a scam, making ordinary American political conversations look like Russian spywork
- Jacobin: Why the Twitter Files Are in Fact a Big Deal On the Left, there’s been a temptation to dismiss the revelations about Twitter’s internal censorship system that have emerged from the so-called Twitter Files project. But that would be a mistake: the news is important and the details are alarming.
- Jeff Gerth at Columbia Journalism Review on Russiagate: Editor's Note | Part one | Part two | Part three | Part four
- Matt Taibbi: WMD, Part II: CIA "Cooked The Intelligence" To Hide That Russia Favored Clinton, Not Trump In 2016
- Chris Hedges: Why Russiagate Won’t Go Away
I think they are kind of bemused by US politics, whereas Turkey and Saudi Arabia and Israel have a much more direct involvement as they wish to get a better deal out of their masters.
Putin talks about how he prefers Harris now, the Chinese joke online that Trump's trade war would help them. It's counterintuitive, but none of it fits the election interference claims of Dems or GOP.
If anyone were serious about fixing the rigging of our elections they wouldn't be talking about malign influence on public opinion at all. It has zero effect on policy statistically.
to what Russia is doing in Africa or Belarus where they actually install puppets.
Belarus under Lukashenko was at first opposed to Yeltsin's Russia, then tried to become neutral until USA and their Polish and Baltic puppets organised coup there which finally forced Belarus to side with Russia, but all that time Russia didn't installed anything there, it's the same government there.
And did you just suggest that the antiimperialist coups in Sahel countries are just Russia's doing? I mean it would be great if Russia was such an antiimperialist activist, but no such luck there.
Ah yes because the last ten times they did this it totally didn't backfire and they had everyone else's future in mind while selflessly giving up a lot of their own.
Oh wait...
New Report: Israel Systematically Attacked Aid Workers
cross-posted from: lemmy.ml/post/21040103
Schuyler Mitchell
Sep 30, 2024
New Report: Israel Systematically Attacked Aid Workers
And an update on detained Gaza surgeon Khaled AlserSchuyler Mitchell (Drop Site News)
like this
aramis87, NoneOfUrBusiness and Lasslinthar like this.
like this
NoneOfUrBusiness likes this.
urbo.com/content/secret-way-to…
The Secret Way To Win Monopoly (And Infuriate Your Friends) Every Time
The Elfer Technique exploits a simple rule of Monopoly.
This method, by the way, is named after Reddit user, Elfer, who leaked the strategy for everyone to see. A full, intact Monopoly set has 32 houses and 12 hotels, no more, no less. If all 32 houses are built, no one can build houses, unless they’re sold or converted to hotels. It’s simple supply and demand.
Before you protest, no, it is not legal to use bits of paper or pennies or anything else to represent houses. There are 32 houses in the game, and that’s that.
So, Elfer suggests, if you can buy up all the houses, you can prevent your opponents from gaining any real power. Elfer explains how to use this rule to achieve guaranteed victory in eight easy steps:
Step 1: Start buying any property you can get your hands on.
Most Monopoly players wait until they’re on high-dollar properties to start buying. The Elfer Technique encourages just the opposite. The value of the properties doesn’t matter; you just want to be sure to get the first monopoly.
Remember another traditional rule of Monopoly that people tend not to incorporate, if they even know about it: When a player lands on a property and chooses not to buy it, the other players start a bidding war for that square.
This rule ensures the game doesn’t go on for 150 years, so be sure to follow it.
This little-known “bidding war” rule is just one example of how many of us have been playing the “Landlord’s Game” wrong our whole lives.
It turns out that a lot of Monopoly rules we think are rules are, in fact, not actually rules.
For instance, have you heard that landing directly on “Go” pays double? Or that you have to go all the way around the board once before you can start buying properties? These are not rules, folks, and they could interfere with the Elfer Technique—so the real first step might be to read the official rules to everyone at the table.
Step 2: Use trades to get the game’s first monopoly.
Players will probably line up to trade with you, because you can offer anything they want to get your monopoly started. Let the trade give you both a monopoly.
Pay an exorbitant price. It doesn’t matter; you’ll still win in the end. Just remember to go for the three-property groups—three places to build are better than two.
Paradoxically, cheaper properties are actually better for the Elfer Technique, because it costs less to build houses on them. This strategy is all about houses. It’s all houses, all the time. Remember that and you will always win.
Step 3: Start building houses.
The sooner you can build three houses per property, the better. Your rent income should fund all this construction. If you still come up short, don’t hesitate to mortgage other properties to build at least three houses per eligible square.
Resist the temptation to upgrade your houses to hotels, even if you can afford it. The whole goal of the Elfer Technique is to cause a housing shortage. Hotels are counter-productive.
Step 4: Go for another monopoly.
More monopolies means more space for building houses. Trade or buy to get your second monopoly by the time mid-game starts.
Meanwhile, go ahead and build more houses on your existing monopoly. Four houses are better than three.
Step 5: Houses, houses, houses.
Once you have two monopolies, the goal will be to build three houses on each of property. After that, make sure every square gets four houses. Once again, do not build hotels. Never, ever build a hotel. Hotels are your enemies.
Think about it like this: If you have six spaces to build, with four houses each, you’ve got 24 of the 32 available houses in the game. That should starve the market enough that your opponents will be unable to develop their lands. Now, all you have to do is ride the game out and see if your friends are worth keeping or if your relationship was a charade this entire time.
Step 6: Protect your assets.
In the game of Monopoly, as in life itself, the secret to security is a giant stack of cash. Build your nest egg until you can pay any opponent’s rent. After all, you’ll still be traveling around the board, and you’ll probably land on someone else’s space at some point.
If you end up in jail, celebrate. You can sit there and avoid rents while everyone else lands on your properties, weeping, gnashing their teeth, and possibly throwing stuff.
Step 7: Only accept cash for rent.
Earlier in the game, it might have been helpful to take a property in lieu of cash when an opponent lands on your developed square. That time is over.
When you insist on cash payments, you’ll get to watch the other players sell their houses and mortgage their lands to pay you, the monopoly holder. This thing is very nearly in the bag.
Step 8: Build more monopolies until everyone else gives up.
To speed up the inevitable end of this game, go for another monopoly. Then another. Eventually, you’ll have the bulk of the entire world’s resources. (The world of the game, that is.)
Just like that, you’ve won. But just remember: Winning at Monopoly is a double-edged sword. A Monopoly win could mean the loss of a friendship, so play carefully. And if this is all too stressful for something that’s supposed to be fun, you could always opt for a game of Ticket to Ride, instead.
Remember the Hales Strategy if you sit down for a game of railroad-building, though.
“By the end of the game, if you haven’t completed all your train line cards, you take negative points for each of those lines,” Hales says, still outlining his method for 100 percent success at the newer board game. “By blocking choke points, you can fully control the map and cause your opponents to be stuck with multiple high-value negative-point train-line cards in their hand at the end of the game.”
So how effective is the Hales Technique at Ticket to Ride, anyway?
“This strategy has worked perfectly every time I’ve used it,” he says. “But be warned! Your friends and family might get a little upset!”
That seems to be the common theme running from an established classic like Monopoly to a newer upstart like Ticket to Ride. Crack the game and ensure victory. Ensure victory and get ready to be a target.
Maybe it’d be worth it to throw a game or two every now and then, just to keep your friends and family coming back. You can always win again when you get the urge. Now, shhh! Don’t tell anyone these board-game-winning secrets.
You are very likely to win actually. Me and another buddy in highschool learned this trick, and somehow we always had 2 other suckers for friends who would join us.
The only "Luck" involved was if it was gonna be me who won, or if my buddy won. The others stood no chance if they didn't know of this strategy.
Most games I've seen, nobody ever horse trades for color groups.
Complex deals and negotiations, land swaps, leveraged buyouts, and free rent passes, are all supposed to be part of the game. Getting a color group solely by landing on the spaces first and buying them for list price is indeed rare, by design.
This leads to my other pet peeve... You're not supposed to have enough money to go around the board the first time and buy every space you land on at the list price. You're supposed to be forced to make strategic decisions from the beginning of the game about what you go for, and what you bid in the auctions.
Most of the made up "house rules" are really about circulating more money into the game than is supposed to be there.
Yes that is what the point of Monopoly was.
Yes it is ironic that it was bought out by one of the largest toy companies in the world.
I still love the game. IDK why it feels like an abusive relationship.
realistic
Has anyone personally known to you become randomly wealthy?
Keeping in mind Monopoly dollars are big enough to buy streets, utilities, houses and hotels
Oh I see your playing the legacy monopoly where house prices sort of match the money paid out by the bank....you need to index property and utilities to inflation but you don't adjust any of the money paid out by the bank to the players.
Aka Millennial monopoly.
The game is over much faster, unless you introduce a gig economy payment system. Then it really drags on.
Wait what's this rule about someone going past you in jail? I thought you had to roll doubles to get out?
Also jail is the best place to be late game.
It sucks when playing by the rules too.
Last game of monopoly we played strictly by the rules with four players. So I'm coming around the board and can know the the most likely outcome is that I'm going to land on a property with a hotel and go bankrupt. According to the rules I'd have to hand over all of my properties to that person that person just won the game even though there would still be three players. There's nearly zero probability that someone with a big pile of cash that owns half the properties with hotels on a bunch of them already will ever lose.
So before rolling the dice, I sold all of my houses. Band made a couple of deals with the youngest family member in the game. First deal, I bought the electric company for all the money I had. Second deal, I sold all of my property (including the electric company) for $1 to that same player. Rolled the dice and as expected, landed on a property with a hotel. Handed over the $1 I had and I was out. This is all fine to do within the rules.
It actually made for an interesting game after that because the players left were evenly matched. But not everyone saw it that way so we never played again.
Really the properties should go back to the bank if someone goes bankrupt, otherwise a game with more than two people is effectively over as soon as the the first person goes bankrupt. Still nothing you can do about someone just setting up someone else to win by making a bad deal (whether intentionally or not).
It's just kinda a shit game no matter what you do.
Terrorism from Zionist air force continues with bombing on the outskirts of Beirut
Israel Launches Massive Air Raid on Beirut’s Suburb
TEHRAN (Tasnim) - Dozens of loud explosions were heard in the Mrayjeh area in the southern suburb of Beirut, just past midnight on Friday, due to an Israeli air raid.Tasnim News Agency
Not that I in any way support Israel’s campaign of violence, but I’m not sure these kinds of posts from and questionable news sources are doing anyone any favors. For those of us who already oppose the Israeli campaign, there’s nothing new here. For those who do, these kinds of sensationalist posts just push them farther back into their views.
The best case scenario is to open peoples’ eyes to the harm Israel is doing and convince them to change their opinion, which a more neutral has a better chance of doing.
If you want the posts to fit an editorial framework you agree with, I would be more than happy to direct you to an RSS feed application so that you can subscribe to what you like without being burdened with my posts. Just let me know what your platform is. I know Reddit has severely damaged your mind and I'm glad to help.
You did know you can go find the news yourself instead of critiquing other people's posting like a Piss Sommelier?
You have nothing of value to contribute to the discussion other than saying "gee I wish that I was still on Reddit where I wouldn't see Iranian or Russian news". Even by the rules of "Reddit style" imageboards like this you should be ashamed of begging me to pretend I'm on reddit.
Guess what buddy I already knew you would grumble seeing my posts and I don't care what you think because there are millions of utterly worthless replacements for you.
You are on a link aggregator website begging for more of the same Associated Press/AFP news sources, opeds from Zionist newspapers like The Atlantic and The New York Times. Even on its face, you're a very bland and uninteresting person with no thoughts which aren't interchangeable with every other mopey tech worker on reddit. But demanding more government censored sources on a free platform is downright insidious and you should be ashamed of yourself.
Wow. You'll totally win hearts and minds talking like that.
Southern Boy. Hmm. Where in the South?
Using "hearts and minds" here is just too good. You do realize my OP post demonstrates the actual hearts and minds strategy of the US military? Terrorism combined with corrupt anthropology. Look up what happened to the "Human Terrain Project" researchers - I hope it happens to you!
Redditors just pathologically spout idioms even when it just deepens their appearance of idiocy.
I'm not here to cater to your editorial tastes or tut tut about online etiquette. You're wasting your time just like you always do online.
So, you're not catching irony. You also say, "You're wasting your time just like you always do online."
That last part, "... like you always do ..." Is not a normal US speech pattern. Yet your uname is Southern Boy.
Also, that whole Zionist thing. That's a big tell, I can't stand Israel and their actions, but when you start talking Zionism, it gets close to antisemitism. Where you from again?
"you're not catching irony" is not a normal US speech pattern. Are you perhaps an agent of the Saudi government? They are quite influential.
Zionism is terrorism, you are just too cowardly to openly state your belief in terrorism. You wish for a kindlier, gentler terrorism.
That last part, “… like you always do …” Is not a normal US speech pattern.
What the hell are you talking about? Of course it is. It's not just a valid construction, it's idiomatic!
Yet your uname is Southern Boy.
The Geography Understander has logged on. There are souths other than the Southern US.
It's pathetic how you immediately jump to trying to insinuate that the other user is a foreigner pretending to be American so they can do dezinformatsiya when it is neither clear where they come from nor where they claim to come from.
but when you start talking Zionism, it gets close to antisemitism
Conflating anti-zionism and antisemitism is antisemitism, straight up, and it's a form that zionists love using to silence opposition. Israel should not exist, and there is nothing antisemitic about that statement.
And the Nazis had a point or two as well didn't they? Let's break down the pros and cons of genocide, let's not be so hasty to judge.
Unlike you, I don't need to wait for historians to reach a consensus on the evils of my time.
Of course it's terrorism. But there is a difference between an all powerful state committing terrorism on people it doesn't have to, and a people committing terrorism on their occupiers and genocides after having literally every other option of fighting back being removed.
You'll nod your head to JFKs quote "those who make peaceful revolution impossible make violent revolution inevitable" and then sit on the fence when the inevitable happens. Acting like both sides are in the wrong when one side, the one with power in the situation committed to actions that everyone always knew would lead to this. I blame Israel for the death of its civilians due to palastinian terrorism.
Same as I do with the polish Warsaw ghetto uprising.
Same as I do with the IRA.
Same as I do with native American uprisings.
History is filled with noble causes resulting to terrorism due to the complete lack of any other options. It's not great. It's not cool. It fuckin sucks. But at the end of the day, it is ALWAYS the fault of the oppressor. Every time. Always.
I blame Israel for the death of its civilians due to palastinian terrorism.
I return to my original statement, and we have now completed the circle and neither of us has changed. Much like the violence and depravity of religious wars in the Middle East.
One of us has a morally defensible position backed with historical examples of similar events and the other doesn't know how to even recognize a genocide is happening before his very eyes. That's really the crux of the whole thing. You simply don't see the wholesale slaughter of brown people as a genocide. My argument relies entirely on the moral backbone that opposing genocide is righteous. Your argument is to refuse your own eyes.
If that was your family, born behind a wall and then bombed to hell, I bet you would have a different tune. Sadly for people like you with no moral philosophy whatsoever, having no empathy for people experiencing things you don't is pretty normal. It's why Nazi Germany was able to do what it did. It's why south Africa got away with what it did. It's why the native Americans were genocided as they were. And it's why right at this moment you fence sit a slaughter.
Russia urges its citizens to leave Israel immediately
Russia has urged its citizens to leave Israel immediately, following the escalating military tensions with both Hezbollah and Iran.
Yesterday, Anatoly Viktorov, Moscow’s ambassador to Tel Aviv, recommended that Russian nationals depart Israel without delay.
“We advise our citizens currently in Israel to seriously consider leaving the area,” Viktorov added.
Russia urges its citizens to leave Israel immediately
Russia has urged its citizens to leave Israel immediately, following the escalating military tensions with both Hezbollah and Iran. Yesterday, Anatoly Viktorov, Moscow’s ambassador to Tel Aviv, recommended that Russian...Middle East Monitor
One of these days
Germany urges its citizens to leave israel immediately
...
"Israel" is now completely empty
.. cuz if you think about it in the end if he strategically wins in Ukraine it legitimize this is worldview and it is real get surprised by Iran... Perhaps with Russia's help we might get an uh-oh... The big kind
What the heck is this trash shipping with firefox? about:compat
Visit about:compat in your firefox. I find it insane that these exist.
Edit: I've learned that this is part of the webcompat system addon developed by Mozilla and other contributors. I see why this is beneficial default behavior, since FF has no chance of getting enough market share to matter more if things are broken.
However, this behavior is too intrusive for my taste. For example this injection: hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central… is basically just to silence annoying user reports.
Also, Every site FF pretends to be a different UA on is artificially reducing FF market share data.
they're trying to ensure an acceptable UX with their browser.
I suppose the root of the issue is developers specifically targeting and testing on chrome.
I don't understand how this would make Firefox look bad unless you're pointing at the dire browser share situation.
Lol, you do realise that chrome does many more. They were recently discovered to allow extra access to google meet over competitors. So not just creepy, but anticompetitive.
I think a more aggressive approach would be better for sites that dont offer compatibility with Firefox.
Do a pop up that asks the user to help make chsnge. First few users to encounter the site could be asked to see if they could find the contact details to let the site know about the problem. Once that is correct, following users could be asked to message them to let them know its a problem.
Keep upping the volume with bad publicity about their website not following standards and bekgn deficient and they will change.
I like the thought, but I can't imagine that most people will enjoy getting even more popups when they load up a site, especially when they come from the browser itself.
Just take a look at OP here. If they responds this way to settings that are there for their actual benefit - just imagine how much they'll like those popups.
Yes but thats the point. You could offer the option.
This site is trying to block open standards. We can apply a fix to correct it. Would you like to
Tell site to fix it/Apply fix/Leave unsafe site
Then you have all options.
Yep, but with consent. I'm already happy they don't his. OP is not. FOSS should aim for ideal behaviour to show non Foss software how its done right.
This shoudlnt come at the expense of user experience, so its always a balance.
Like, the vast majority of browser users don't even know what an extension is, let alone install one.
Looks like compatibility hacks for various websites.
Interventions - are deeper modifications to make sites compatible. Firefox may modify certain code used on these sites to enforce compatibility. Each compatibility modification links to the bug on Bugzilla@Mozilla; click on the link to look up information about the underlying issue.User Agent Override - change the user agent of Firefox when connections to certain sites are made.
Just imagine slipping in a new compatibility fix for a banking website... Or maybe a crypto custodian...
No sneaky backdoor required, just change some data.
Any project can insert any code they want, that's how software works. The thing about open source projects like Firefox, is if they were to do such a thing, anyone could see it. You're complaining about Firefox when they haven't really done anything, and yet browsers like Brave have actually been caught inserting redirects into their links, which is harder to spot because Brave is not open source.
If you really agree this distrusting of Firefox, just don't use it, or build it yourself.
Pretty sure it’s always been like this.
The web is a mess. If you do anything on it on any combination of software and hardware and expect security or functionality you’re barking up the wrong tree.
Those are special measures to not be blocked by those sites etc..
While I agree it sucks, because it doesn't fix the problem at the source (the site causing it) and therefore reduces motivation to even do so, it makes the web more accessible for FF users, quickly.
You're right, for a browser meant for the masses it is probably a net benefit. I posted because I was surprised by this hidden behavior that seems better suited for a browser extension. Sneaky behavior like this is what I'm paranoid about in closed software like windows.
To your point, Linux itself is probably the #1 example of hacky patches to work around other people's problems.
I don’t think that Sneaky or Secret are good descriptions for this. A better word might be “plumbing”.
When you realize that your house use full of hidden pipes and wires, it would be a strange take indeed to conclude that anybody is being “sneaky” about these “secret” features.
... Uh... This doesn't seem that objectionable. It's a bunch of targeted fixes to websites, I imagine every browser does it in some form. Firefox at least allows you to turn it off if for some reason you wanted to.
BTW, I think Proton (for playing games) does this as well.
Also, Every site FF pretends to be a different UA on is artificially reducing FF market share data.
Ehhh... I think a bigger effect on FF market share statistics is probably all those privacy addons and settings everyone is using.
- Why is this trash? It's making websites that are hostile work properly?
- The example you linked literally doesn't reduce FFs marketshare. It's a fix for a website that's hostile towards macOS and Linux users, by pretending to be FF on Windows...
- I believe including specific site fixes in the main browser release is a bad idea. It seems like many disagree with that belief, and that's fine.
- For that example I take issue with the justification in the comment above the code that the problem solved is a high volume of reported issues. That injection solves a problem for webcompat, not Firefox.
What I mean by market share is for each individual site that Firefox pretends to be another browser on, that site's statistics will show very few or no Firefox users. Sites that are already broken probably don't care, but they may see that as justification to disregard Firefox users i
During future changes.
If they are having to add compat, it is because it is a popular site that is already ignoring Firefox. I am sure they have communicated the problems. The website operators don’t care.
What hurts Firefox market share is when regular users have problems on the sites they frequent. The lower Firefox market share, the fewer sites care about it ( as you seem to understand ). Firefox has to make these kinds of fixes.
K, teachable moment maybe.
How complicated do you think a web browser is? Out of the box there is support for 30 years of web and file systems, support for socket types that will never be commissioned again and a pipeline to every native media format.
It's complicated, it's essentially an OS. with perfect backward compatability. (Mostly)
I have an increasing amount of bile for the Mozilla Corp, but if you're on Lemmy you probably noticed corporations don't make the best decisions for you... My question is how many of the options do you see in about:config do you think chrome and safari don't show you?
Mostly to their benefit I'd add, except if they set them maliciously you'll never know.
Agreed. To expand on your OS comment, SerenityOS is an operating system that was largely written by one guy. Then he started a web browser for it ( Ladybird ).
Despite having a lot more help on the browser, he expects it to take longer. It is very clear that a modern web browser is a much bigger undertaking than the OS.
A browser engine is such a significant investment that even Microsoft sees it as too much effort. They dropped their internal engine to switch to Blink ( Chromium ).
Claudia Sheinbaum inaugurated, dedicates first press conference to victims of 1968 massacre, a new turn for Mexico's left
Mexico: a New Turn for the Left (Resumen)
By Atilio Boron on October 2024
The powerful could not with AMLO, who took away many of their privileges and began to put an end to the plunder they had exercised for more than a century. Nor will they be able to with Claudia Sheinbaum.
Claudia Sheinbaum begins today [by Tuesday] a new six-year term within the framework of the Fourth Transformation initiated with the presidency of Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO) on December 1, 2018. Sheinbaum arrives at Mexico’s highest office on the shoulders of a sweeping electoral victory: 59.76 percent against the meager 27.45 percent of her most immediate pursuer, right-wing candidate Xóchitl Gálvez.
And also being the beneficiary of the positive legacy bequeathed by her predecessor, who is retiring from the presidency -and from politics, as he has said- with an impressive 74 percent popular approval rating that reaches 77 percent in other polls. Among women, AMLO’s approval rises to 78 percent; but the sharpest jump occurs with those over 65 (87 percent) and the younger electorate, under 34, where his approval fluctuates around 80 percent.
There are objective reasons for this popular support. López Obrador’s government implemented a series of social programs that benefited the elderly, once left to their own devices, with pensions. He also launched a massive scholarship program for young high school and university students. In addition, during his administration, 145 universities or university institutes were created within the framework of the “Universities for Benito Juárez Welfare” program, conceived to extend free public higher education -attention Casa Rosada!- in rural areas and marginalized districts of the country, where popular access to university was very difficult.
This proposal is inspired by the experience of the American “community colleges”, offering programs that normally last two years in specialized fields with immediate employment opportunities such as agronomy, nursing, automotive mechanics, among others, and that either enable students to be trained to respond to the needs of their community or serve as a gateway to careers offered by traditional universities.
Among the peasant population, support for the Morena government and its allied parties, mainly the Labor Party and the Green Party, is also in the majority, as a result of numerous initiatives within the framework of the “Sembrando Vida” program (economic support to reforest and revitalize agricultural soils); guarantee prices for corn, beans, wheat, rice and milk; microcredits “a la palabra”, direct subsidies to producers as well as numerous infrastructure works that improved living conditions and the possibilities of developing economic activities and guaranteeing adequate transportation of what is produced. The new president has indicated her firm decision to maintain AMLO’s achievements.
She counts on a qualified majority in both houses of congress and the governorships of 23 of the 32 states that make up the republic. To maintain the social advances but also to broaden its social agenda and intensify the fight against poverty, which although it was reduced during the last six-year term, still hovers around thirty-five percent of the population as a consequence of the increase caused by the Covid-19 pandemic.
There is nothing in the current and future governing cast that could be mistaken for naïve conformism. Satisfied with what has been achieved, however, there prevails a lucid conviction that there is still much to be done and that the nefarious legacy of long decades of neoliberal orthodoxy cannot be dismantled in a six-year term. Proof of this was the difficulty to advance in a fiscal reform, in cutting the independence of the Bank of Mexico or modifying the neoliberal components of the T-MEC, the new treaty between Mexico, the US and Canada, which replaced the one signed in 1994, which limits the margin of action of the Mexican government.
Domestically, Sheinbaum will have to deal with several burning issues, the main one being insecurity. Violence and drug trafficking, especially in the northern states of the country, with a focus on Sinaloa and its cartel war, results in an average of 80 homicides per day, and on some days, up to 100 homicides per day. In the year 2023 the homicide rate was 23.3 per 100,000 inhabitants, slightly higher than that of Brazil, 22.3, not to mention Argentina, where it was 4.4 per 100,000 inhabitants.
But the issue of insecurity in Mexico or Brazil does not even remotely reach the spectacular and yellowish nature of the Argentinean case, especially when progressive forces are in power, and where the media scoundrels bombard the collective imaginary with apocalyptic images of uncontrolled violence.
Related to the issue of violence, the implementation of the Judicial Reform, already with constitutional rank, will be one of the biggest challenges Sheinbaum’s administration will face. All of Latin America looks with hope at this advance that the government of the Fourth Transformation has achieved to break the resistance of one of the most backward and conservative centers of our countries.
The new president begins her administration with an economy that rests on solid foundations. The peso was significantly revalued against the dollar; the international reserves of the Bank of Mexico reached a historical level of 225,427 million dollars in the last months, while exports reached 600 billion dollars in 2023 (almost equal to Argentina’s GDP in that same year). Add to the above a growing commercial and technological link with China, which has now become the second largest trading partner after the US. In addition to these favorable conditions, the country has received 63 billion dollars in remittances from Mexicans living abroad and more than 12 billion dollars from tourism, all of which make up an economic picture that is not free of challenges but which allows us to look to the future with cautious optimism.
Contrary to Argentina’s official credo, the left in government, far from impoverishing and underdeveloping countries, does the opposite, as the Mexican case amply demonstrates. I wish Milei would take note of this lesson, although I see it unlikely, blinded as he is by his ideological fanaticism.
On the external flank, Sheinbaum will have to deal with a convulsed international scenario. The closest: the tensions within the T-MEC. It is well known that for Washington Mexico is the most important country in the world, although its bureaucrats and experts say otherwise with the intention of weakening the negotiating capacity of the Aztec country. Such importance goes hand in hand with an uncontainable tendency to interfere in Mexico’s internal affairs. Examples: the militant opposition to the energy reform and, just now, to the Judicial Reform.
There is also the complex issue of migration, given that Mexico is an obligatory passage for the huge caravans of victims of neoliberal policies from Central American and Caribbean countries seeking to enter the U.S., which provokes racist and very aggressive responses from the U.S. leadership, such as those of Trump and just a little less from Harris.
The growing commercial and political gravity of China will be another issue that will strain the always complicated relationship with Washington. It is not just a matter of trade but a geopolitical issue of vast scope. AMLO’s “Mayan Train” will not only favor the economic and social development of the Mexican Southeast, but it is also a key piece to turn the Isthmus of Tehuantepec into a new bioceanic passage between the Atlantic, via the Caribbean Sea, and the Pacific. At just two hundred kilometers wide, it is the most attractive alternative to facilitate the traffic of goods between East and West, which would relegate the Panama Canal, in fact controlled by Washington, to an unbearable obsolescence. There is a huge Chinese interest in promoting this initiative and this inevitably leads to a collision course with the US government.
There would also be other issues on Mexico’s external agenda, such as its deep respect for national self-determination, its support for multilateralism and, of course, the multipolarism that is here to stay in the international system. For now, there is no talk of Mexico’s eventual entry into BRICS, which would be little less than a declaration of war for Washington, but the question floats in the air.
In sum, Sheinbaum will have to face challenges of all kinds both domestically and internationally. But she is a very intelligent person, with a solid political background, and a long career in the management of public affairs. And, above all, she is a woman of strong convictions who will not be intimidated by the powers that be: the Mexican plutocracy and its American masters. They could not stand AMLO, who took away many of their privileges and began to put an end to the plunder they had exercised for more than a century. They will not be able to defeat Claudia Sheinbaum either, and this is great news for Mexico and all of Latin America. There is a reason why the big media in the US, Latin America and Spain are attacking her.
Mexico: a New Turn for the Left
By Atilio Boron on October 2024 The powerful could not with AMLO, who took away many of their privileges and began to put an end to the plunder they had exercised for more than a century. Nor will …Resumen LatinoAmericano English
If war ends I’ll restore relations with Russia, Slovakia’s Fico says
If war ends I’ll restore relations with Russia, Slovakia’s Fico says
Pro-Moscow prime minister wants to continue buying Russian gas and oil and to maintain existing transit routes through Ukraine.Ketrin Jochecová (POLITICO)
LPS likes this.
US leaves Hurricane Helene survivors behind while funding Israel’s genocidal war. As the death toll from the storm climbs to 204, Congress has made no efforts to secure more disaster relief funding.
US leaves Hurricane Helene survivors behind while funding Israel’s genocidal war : Peoples Dispatch
As the death toll from the storm climbs to 204, Congress has made no efforts to secure more disaster relief fundingPeoples Dispatch
LPS reshared this.
Just 20 years ago a similar hurricane by the name of Katrina rocked the nation and was part of the 24 he news cycle for months. Katrina was (and rightfully so) a huge deal in America, and recognized as a mega traumatizing event.
It’s amazing to me how jaded the American public and media have become in that time, to where this disaster hardly even makes the news and is forgotten before it’s even joever.
I’m honestly not quite sure what to think of it. Have we become so calloused to the idea of climate change that this isn’t newsworthy? Is this more reflective of the corporate capture of media, and insurers not wanting to pay out for destroyed homes and lives? Or is this just secondary to the overriding effort to further a new war in the Middle East?
LPS likes this.
like this
MyTurtleSwimsUpsideDown, echomap, Drusas, aramis87, frustrated_phagocytosis and falseprophet like this.
don't like this
henchman2019 doesn't like this.
Zrythm Digital Audio Workstation Abandoning GTK For Qt6
reshared this
Tech Cyborg reshared this.
Switching the UI framework sounds like a massive refactor.
Qt is by far the better framework. This could also be a chance to implement a super UI/UX, it could also be a complexity hell. I will have a look at the project, let's see if the outcome wil be a better product.
Qt is by far the better framework
Not on Sway, every Qt app i've used feels like it tries to put in every option and dialogs always look too busy, GTK is quite abstractive and opinionated but i'll deal with that
Apps looking odd or not is the job of the main drawing framework.
Qt themes are able to draw GTK but GTK can not draw Qt actually proves my point.
They are C++ already. If they deigned the application well, a UI toolkit change should not be too bad. Not trivial but manageable.
I always hate to see apps move off GTK but their first point is about cross-platform and there is just no denying that Qt has a vastly better cross-platform story than GTK does.
Mozilla doubling down on ads in Firefox
Improving online advertising through product and infrastructure
Mozilla is developing privacy-focused digital advertising solutions, aiming to reshape the industry while respecting users' rights.Laura Chambers (The Mozilla Blog)
I thought saying
contribute however they can up to their own capabilities
was actually very clear but seems I wasn't clear enough so that means... literally doing ANYTHING except only criticizing. That can mean being an open-source developer, yes, but that can also means translation, giving literally 1 cent, etc. It means doing anything at all that would not ONLY be saying "this is good, but it's not good enough" without doing actually a single thing to change, especially while actually using another free of charge browser that is funded by advertisement. Honestly if that's not clear enough I'm not sure what would be ... but please, do ask again I will genuinely try to be clearer.
You can donate to Mozilla.
Perhaps they should've put that more front and center. But if they add a prominent donate button the people on here would probably lose their shit too.
What on earth would that do? The poisonous leadership would not use it to improve the browser nor would they start working for donors instead of Google.
My point is that there is a funding model that they could have pursued when they still had goodwill and trust. And my hope is if the government finally puts the boot in with Google, then this current version of mozilla will collapse, the rats will leave the ship and hopefully a good browser will emerge the way firefox emerged from netscape.
But you just said
Mozilla could have focused on being user-supported through fundraising like Wikipedia.
It is an option.
Clearly it isn't working well enough for them.
I'm not interested in my computer striking a balance between my needs and the needs of people seeking to manipulate me into buying things.
I paid for my computer, it serves my needs. Yes I do run Linux, how did you guess?
You haven't heard about the Brave ads that let you slowly accumulate tokens that you can then use to tip creators or websites? I'm not saying it was a good plan, or an ethical plan, but it was... You know, something.
Unlike what Mozilla did, Brave didn't enable this by default, but they heavily marketed it as a feature.
If Mozilla implemented some kind of tipping system, that could be interesting. Apparently, such a system already could exist under GNU Taler too.
brave also used it to scam people by taking tips for creators who weren't on the platform. if the creator never signed up, they kept that money.
and they had an adblocker that replaced ads with their own, making the browser money instead of the site.
they have actively contributed to making the web worse. saying "at least they're doing something" is like praising the hard work and entrepreneurial spirit of a mugger.
You're 100% right about Brave being scummy.
And I hope my point didn't come across as a defensd of Brave, but rather, "how is it that Mozilla is doing this thing in a worse way than a company that is infamously disreputable?"
Brave can make micro payments to content creators based on the number of views to the site, directly supporting content creators without ads or the need to join the patreon for each creator. It's a fully optional system, off by default but prompted upon opening the browser for the first time. It's a cool idea but they kind of spoiled it by making it be a crypto wallet with ads to earn the crypto.
Also, Brave doesn't have a subscription...?
Whatever compromise anyone tries to come up with will be ignored and exploited as hard as advertisers possibly can.
A compromise that actually works would depend on advertisers actually complying. The advertisers that do will be vastly outnumbered by the advertisers that don't.
So we're getting the arms race either way.
I'm so glad that Libre Wolf fork exists, that doesn't change a fact of Mozilla foundation goes in a really wrong direction :/
Edit: typo
we maintain the same goal – to build digital advertising solutions that respect individuals’ rights
Does it include the right to be able to choose not to be advertised to?
Yes, advertising enables free access to most of what the internet provides
What does this even mean?
I don't read their blog posts but seems like they have fully embraced startup lingo.
At the end of the day web sites cost money. There needs to be a way to fund them.
People 100% aren't going to pay to access every random website they want to visit. So what you'd end up with in a world without ads is only the big corporations being able to run a website.
Back in my day (lol) ads were based on the website not the user. When you set up ads you selected keywords for your website and those were used to select ads.
Like you'd visit a programming blog and get ads for computer games and porn. Made total sense. You're still targeting your target audience just not the individual.
Targeted ads are obviously way more effective and therefore generate more money. But it's not the only way.
The alternative is to set up some system where you pay a monthly fee and it's divided amongst the websites you use. But that seems like an equally bad privacy nightmare.
People 100% aren’t going to pay to access every random website they want to visit. So what you’d end up with in a world without ads is only the big corporations being able to run a website.
I'm not so convinced. I run a website with zero ads or tracking and I'm not a big corporation.
We know that not everyone in our community will embrace our entrance into this market. But taking on controversial topics because we believe they make the internet better for all of us is a key feature of Mozilla’s history. And that willingness to take on the hard things, even when not universally accepted, is exactly what the internet needs today.
Out of touch with reality...
Been called an idiot for saying that I wouldn't trust Firefox as far as I can throw it like 2 months ago after they made telemetry opt out.
I can't believe that someone who is privacy conscientious would just stick to their guns rather than watching out for their privacy.
I just hope someone else picks up the shards and runs with it and then we can all just focus on making them better instead of getting riled up over a god damn browser lol.
I did, and I disagree with their decisions.
I can condense their article down to "we need money, and we can get it through ads, so we built our own ad network to preserve privacy".
But I don't like that. This decision does not exist in a vacuum. This comes after a number of other decisions leading me to believe they are shifting priority to making a profit. Telemetry being opt-out, pocket, selling ads on home screen, ...
This is the icing on a shit cake and I'm sorry, Mozilla destroyed their value proposition about half way into their chain of bad decisions.
If you still wanna use Firefox, fine. I don't care about that. I don't understand why, but that's ok, it's your god damn decision. But I wanna alert everyone else that Mozilla is not who they used to be and it's time to reevaluate why you use the browser you do.
Saying this is an ignorant take is invalidating all the experiences I've had configuring Firefox back to being privacy friendly, and I don't appreciate you calling me ignorant for that. If you disagree, that's fair, but you can do it without attacking my credibility. And doing so by giving actual reasons would definitely help your case.
I need to send an email to Mozilla soon. The fact that I'm highly convinced that these three Linux youtubers would do a better job than the current management should tell you a lot about what's happening at Mozilla (yes, it's that bad).
Link:
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ likes this.
That's catchy, but not entirely true.
China heavily subsidizes EV manufacturers (and production in general), plus they have cheaper environmental and labour standards... it's not like there's a fair market EU companies can compete in without some sort of handicap.
PS: Yes, "western" countries have been playing along with China's deliberate long term strategy with full awareness of where it would lead, but that's another story that is both much older and has a much broader scope than the EV industry.
Western manufacturing tends to be much more automation heavy. Chinese manufactures don't bother with buying a $100k machine that can make a car part when they can just hire 10 guys at $10k/yr to make that same part with a $50 drill press and some hand files.
It's not that it all strictly balances out, but if we actually gave a shit we could potentially be cost competitive for a lot of price brackets, especially given the costs to move whole ass cars across the Pacific.
Bear in mind these sub $10k Chinese EVs are not something US consumers would really be interested in buying, they are basically tiny car shaped golf carts with extremely minimalist feature sets. Think 'no audio system at' all type interiors.
This is the market place, brah.
...
Free market capitalism
then talk about subsidies or non capitalist country controlling the currency, markets, VCs, etc.
What does that even mean?
like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ likes this.
they can subsidize EV manufacturing to the same degree
Meaning that we would either have to increase tax rates or borrow more money? Wow, what a great solution.
If the US or EU want to keep up, they can sunbsidize EV manufacturing to the same degree
You can't allow dumping-inducing subsidies without also allowing defensive tariffs, otherwise the richer and more authoritarian countries, which have greater capacity for subsidies and greater ability to concentrate them in specific sectors, will easily kill foreign competition and establish monopolies.
The marketplace brah is a place where, without regulations that maintain a degree of fairness, the rich kills the poor, competition dies off, and consumers are drained to their last cent.
Just think of it: competition is when different actors fight it off and it ends the moment one of the contenders wins.
If you want the fight to go on forever, you don't want an unregulated market.
If nothing else, they help get their brands into the world.
There's loads of chinese EVs driving around where I live now, so based on anecdotal evidence, it's working.
China heavily subsidizes EV manufacturers (and production in general)
And that's a bad thing? Any sensible government is going to subsidise renewable energy and electric vehicles. It makes both economic and environmental sense. Anyone not doing this is an idiot and a climate terrorist.
Subsidizing sales of EVs (ie. I pay for my neighbor's new EV because I want cleaner air) does make environmental sense.
Subsidizing production does not have the same positive environmental impact, mainly because factories in China pollute more than factories, say, in the EU (due to different environmental laws), but also because moving finished products from China to the "west" obviously pollutes more than moving just those components that would need to be sourced from China anyways (eg. batteries).
As for the "makes economic sense" part... IDK: I guess that mainly depend on your political stance.
Personally, I don't like that both sales and production subsidies have the effect of moving money from the poor to the rich, but other people may focus on different effects (eg. more production = more jobs) and support subsides.
In case you wonder: my take is that, instead of incentivizing adoption and production of EVs, one should disincentivize internal combustion vehicles by adding taxes to them (which, in a sense, aren't really taxes but just charging for the very real environmental costs society as a whole will have to pay for your shiny SUV).
Anyone not doing this is an idiot and a climate terrorist.
You should really think twice before spewing judgements... and also avoid misusing words like "terrorist" because, when misused this way, it only conveys that you don't like someone, dulling your message instead of strengthening it.
Subsidizing production does not … from China anyways (eg. batteries).
I'm asking why the EU isn't subsudising their domestic EV industry and starting a competition in electric propulsion technology. That would benefit everyone, except maybe the oil lobby.
one should disincentivize internal combustion vehicles by adding taxes to them
Why not both? And preferrably better subsidies for public transport / cycles / footpaths, etc.
avoid misusing words like "terrorist" because, when misused this way
If killing a handful of people is terrorism, what would you call trying to kill the entire human race (along with thousands of random other species)? 'Terrorist' is, if anything, too mild a word to describe such filth.
China heavily subsidizes EV manufacturers (and production in general), plus they have cheaper environmental and labour standards… it’s not like there’s a fair market EU companies can compete in without some sort of handicap.
Hah. Volkswagen is in trouble right now because they fucked up the transition to electric cars completly. What do you think will happen now? That's right, we the (German) people will have to save them now, with our money. Basically the same shit as a subsidy, just later in the process. Kinda like what the Chinese do, just the really stupid way.
Oh, and of course, it will be everybody's fault but their own.
Is your argument pro market regulation or against market regulation or just there to stir up shit?
The EU is a heavily regulated market economy. Broadly that creates better outcomes and higher levels of happiness for its citizens.
A) rely on Chinese people exploitation on low pay and no work rights
B) no environment protection in China
C) generally lower quality
D) killing jobs in Europe
E) making Europe depend on China
When capitalism is distorted, then the state must intervene
don't like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ doesn't like this.
They tend to be more efficient. However central planning in China which ramped up production yet has reduced demand, means an excess supply.
So, selling to Europe or USA makes sense to offload that supply. In a capitalist, closed system, they would have ramped down production, but also wouldn't have had the capital to ramp up production so quickly.
If they weren't seen as a strategic asset, then Europe and USA wouldn't care that China is subsidizing cheaper products. They dont want their car industries dead as then they are dependent on China.
They tend to be more efficient. However central planning in China which ramped up production yet has reduced demand, means an excess supply.
That doesn't really follow. You'd have to explain how you think ramping up production led to reduced demand exactly. Meanwhile, it's not excess supply if you have customers around the world who want your product.
In a capitalist, closed system, they would have ramped down production, but also wouldn’t have had the capital to ramp up production so quickly.
That sentence doesn't make sense. Companies don't voluntarily ramp down production under capitalism.
If they weren’t seen as a strategic asset, then Europe and USA wouldn’t care that China is subsidizing cheaper products. They dont want their car industries dead as then they are dependent on China.
I think you missed my point here. It's fine for the US and Europe to want to keep their industries alive. However, what we're seeing is that they are not able to compete with state driven planning using capitalist markets. So now they're starting to engage in non market behavior of putting tariffs on Chinese goods because capitalism is not proving to be competitive.
Ramping up production didn't reduce demand. Demand reduced due to a softening Chinese economy, mainly due to debt and housing.
I agree, it's not excess supply when you can sell it overseas. However, its also not central planning when you wanted to Ramp up supply for domestic consumption but end up using capitalism to keep efficiencies.
Companies ramp down production all the time. What do you think redundancies and factory closures are for? They react to market conditions or seek new markets (as happened in this case).
I thinknyouve got it backwards. Central planning can efficiently produce anything. As in, it can make as much of a product at the cheapest price as possible. The problem is central planning is less efficient at deciding how much is needed. It will often over or undershoot. Thats what happened here. Tonsaybthey can still sell overseas, so its still central planning being efficient is incorrect. Central planning didn't work to produce the needed amount so trade through capitalism is being used to improve efficiency of the capital used.
Ramping up production didn’t reduce demand. Demand reduced due to a softening Chinese economy, mainly due to debt and housing.
There's not much indication that the Chinese economy is actually softening. Also, not sure what debt from housing you're talking about. 90% of families in China own their home. What’s more is that 80% of these homes are owned outright, without mortgages or any other leans. forbes.com/sites/wadeshepard/2…
Pretty much the only people losing money on housing are investors, many of whom are foreign.
I agree, it’s not excess supply when you can sell it overseas. However, its also not central planning when you wanted to Ramp up supply for domestic consumption but end up using capitalism to keep efficiencies.
It absolutely is central planning when the state decides on the overall direction of the economy. The state doesn't need to micromanage the details of the economy any more than your brain needs to consciously micromanage every muscle movement when you try to walk. The state wanted to create a lot of housing for people to live in, and that was accomplished. Now, the state is directing the economy to wind down real estate and transition to high tech which is happening.
Companies ramp down production all the time. What do you think redundancies and factory closures are for? They react to market conditions or seek new markets (as happened in this case).
Companies don't do that voluntarily, they do it when they're in a financial trouble. Meanwhile, thanks to brilliance of capitalism there are very few redundancies left. Everything is just in time economy, that's why a single ship getting stuck in Suez Canal can bring the world economy down.
The problem is central planning is less efficient at deciding how much is needed. It will often over or undershoot. Thats what happened here.
Except it's not what happened here because as you yourself admit there is global demand for the goods that China produces. Overshooting would be producing goods that nobody wants.
Central planning didn’t work to produce the needed amount so trade through capitalism is being used to improve efficiency of the capital used.
It's just regular trade between countries, it has nothing to do with capitalism and predates it by a wide margin.
oh yeah, the land of "free market" ...
PS: Stolen land
because they sell cars to China
For how much longer? Can German cars even still compete with the Chinese, or has that ship sailed already? Come, buy the best engineering of yesteryear! Yay!
We did not blow up nordstream.
If we had 1/10th of those balls the world wouldn't be in this shape, I wish to God we had.
Germany is in for 2 lost decades, shutting down nuclear was a mistake, but energy isn't the only issue, Germany needs more workers or they need to fully commit to automation, which they haven't quite yet.
China is now crippled with Russia as an ally. That's about the best strategic success you can expect in IR, take the win.
Russian gas was a cheap way for Germany to produce. The short term economic effects were more important to Merkels electability than any long term plans.
When it comes to gas, Russia never shut off the tap. Instead it was America who blew up the Nordstream energy supply to garner support for a wider war. But now China is producing on cheap Russian gas
At least Germany appears to heavily invest in green energy since Norstream blew up. Bless the sun for shining everywhere.
The propaganda went really hard for a few years. But everything now points to the CIA.
ft.com/content/d60ae893-c251-4…
And more recenly
Your second link agrees with me, it was Ukraine. The mad fuckers pulled it off, we might have helped but even that is more than I'd imagine, our administration is timid AF when it comes to Ukraine and any kind of direct or even covert action.
I get why you'd be furious, but they were defending their homeland, and let's be honest, yours too, if Ukraine had fallen Putin and Xi would have felt they could ask for a lot and we know how that road goes.
I fully support Ukrainian independence but it is being used as a proxy war between the US and Russia right now. They went from a Russian dictator in 2014 to Zelensky now.
America vetoeing the 2022 peace talks to send more Ukrainians into the meat grinder tells it all. At some point a diplomatic solution must be reached. Support is already fading and the only thing this prolonged war has achieved is the death of more Ukrainians and Russians (and profits for Raytheon)
Yeah, that was my bad, I'm not used to checking the user instance.
Merkel made a catastrophic mistake in treating Russia like an rational actor, they're not, they're basically wh40k orks who see weakness and work themselves up into a grievance rage about how the west and everyone else is conspiring to keep Russia from its destined role as world leaders, until they finally reach a threshold and go on a Wauggh.
Like orks, they don't stop until their bloodlust is beaten by their fear.
As an American, we need to give them all our weapons, free of charge, the thought of my taxes going to their rightful purpose of butchering Russians by the hundreds of thousands warms my heart.
We need give them f35s, Ai drone swarms, everything, we need to help them exterminate every vatnik in ukrainian borders within a month.
Alternatively, we admit we will not satisfy the Budapest memorandum and leave Ukraine to their fate.
I'm fine with either path honestly.
For the second path, we would be honor bound to restore the nuclear weapons Ukraine surrendered, or equivalent, I suppose a single Ohio ssbn fully loaded with tridents should suffice.
At that point Ukraine and Russia could begin negotiations for peace.
Personally I don't think any of this will end until 10-20m Russians have died, it's the only language they understand, and they're slow there as well.
Russia started this war to look strong to their partner China, they look far weaker than imaginable, the end game is to partition Russia, the west goes to the European sphere, the east goes to China giving them the resources and land they are so desperate for, and both sides get 50-100 years of peace.
We need give them f35s, Ai drone swarms, everything, we need to help them exterminate every vatnik in ukrainian borders within a month.
That would make Ukraine win the conventional war and promptly get them nuked. The American goal is not to have Ukraine win the war.
Unless Ukraine gets nukes (which America took from them in exchange for a false security guarantee) there is no way Ukraine can win. Not to mention Russia can nuke the rest of Europe.
Your argument is: "America isn't giving Ukraine enough weapons to win the war", "Wait, American can't give them real weapons because then they'd win the war!"
We should give Ukraine back their nukes, but if we aren't we should give Ukraine so many drones the lifetime of vatniks is measured in milliseconds.
The only way to end a war with Russia is to pull an inverse Branigan: Keep encouraging them to throw waves and waves of their men against your rampaging killbots till they run out of men.
As I said, 10 million sounds like a good start.
Russia won't nuke unless they start losing serious Russian territory, remember Priggy made it really far and they only fled in their private jets.
Keep drawing their kids in to their deaths, make sure it's drones killing them while Ukrainians themselves are safe behind the lines, eventually they'll run out of their r-word strength.
RangerJosie
in reply to Southern Boy • • •Good.
Carry on.
NaibofTabr
in reply to Southern Boy • • •Edit 20241008: You know, it's really telling that my or8ginal comment was simply erased with no notification or warning, a comment which contained only factual information with references and no offensive language.
The fact that this was done without discussion and with no path for recourse demonstrates exactly what this server is and who the moderators are.
like this
NoneOfUrBusiness likes this.
ShimmeringKoi [comrade/them]
in reply to NaibofTabr • • •emergencyfood
in reply to NaibofTabr • • •So like the Russian military units that are present at the express request of the Donetsk and Lugansk militias, which is formed by the people who actually live there [and] who got sick and tired of the oppression of the Ukrainian state?
technocrit
in reply to emergencyfood • • •Southern Boy
in reply to NaibofTabr • • •It's 2024 and you're cheering on US backed "moderate rebels" which are as much of a plague on the Syrian population as Turkey and ISIS. Grow up. The OPCW melted down over the inability to prove that Assad gassed his own civilians just because he hates them so much (a likely story). The symptoms in the footage don't even match sarin, the mouth foaming is more characteristic of chlorine. The smear mirrors numerous other US attempts to fabricate cassus belli against a peripheral country in West Asia or Africa.
Your sweet little based Kurdish militias' permission won't factor into the removal of US bases from that territory. That is currently being conducted by the Axis of Resistance.
To return to the remarkably simply question which preceded your gibbering recitation of the Washington-approved narrative, I define illegal as in flagrant violation of international law, not what is legal in the minds of Redditors who like to fantasize about going and LARPing as a war criminal before getting interviewed by Rolling Stone.
NoneOfUrBusiness
in reply to Southern Boy • • •Southern Boy
in reply to NoneOfUrBusiness • • •Standpoint epistemology is not an argument, babe.
Out of curiosity, Turkey, Jordan, Egypt? Saudi Arabia, even? Do go on.
NoneOfUrBusiness
in reply to Southern Boy • • •Egypt, why do you ask?
The existence of 5 million Syrian refugees worldwide (as opposed to 23 million living in the country) says everything that needs to be said about your point that Assad isn't actually that bad. If he wasn't people would go to his territory instead of going to fuckin Lebanon.
Southern Boy
in reply to NoneOfUrBusiness • • •Southern Boy
in reply to NoneOfUrBusiness • • •One of my best online friends is Egyptian, by the way. He talks about Israel's geopolitical role keeping Arab countries deindustrialized.
He talks about what worms many Egyptians are about Israel. He talks about those who aren't often change their tune after being tortured. I talk to him almost every day. So don't feel written off because you're Egyptian. Just because they've really done a number on Egypt. Samir Amin talks a lot about how its emergence was stymied by imperialists. You live in a comprador state half beaten to death, and you gloat over how many refugees there are from Syria, a country illegally occupied by US coalition. Pig. Pig!
NoneOfUrBusiness
in reply to Southern Boy • • •Don't put words in my mouth. I never gloated about anything.
Huh? How does that even make sense? Syria is in a civil war that's being abused by foreign powers on all side. Nobody is occupying anything. I have literally never heard a Syrian say anything about an occupation; all of them are running from the war. I know US presence in Syria is also fucked up stares at ISIS, but that doesn't make Assad any less horrible.
Again, as an Egyptian I know as common sense that Assad is one of the worst tyrants of the 21st century (so far; we still have 75 years to go). I'd link sources, but if you believed them we'd never be having this conversation. Goodbye.
Southern Boy
in reply to NoneOfUrBusiness • • •lemmy.ml/comment/14118090
Have a nice day and feel free to continue our conversation if you return. As you can tell I enjoy arguing. It's a good brain teaser for us.
NaibofTabr
in reply to NaibofTabr • • •You know, it's really telling that my comment was erased with no notification or warning or justification - a comment which contained only factual information with references and no offensive language of any kind.
The fact that this was done summarily and without discussion demonstrates exactly what this community is, and who its moderators are.
Explicitly: this is a manufactured echo chamber that suppresses voices which disagree with the intended narrative, enforced by people with a political agenda. Trust nothing that you read here.